This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Awards, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of awards and prizes on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AwardsWikipedia:WikiProject AwardsTemplate:WikiProject Awardsawards articles
the incident should be mentioned but unless this was a notable person before, we should not give extra attention to his nonsense. Masem (t) 14:10, 9 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well, as long as his past doesn't get fully described and even all the controversies that he had previously done for. I don't like to convert this event as a political statement. VernardoLau (talk) 06:46, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Since someone is constantly changing everything Elden Ring to Bill Clinton, I think this page needs to be protected. But that's just me. Nightbear 23:07, 12 December 2022 (EST)
Looks like the IP user has been blocked for the time being, but I definitely agree about needed page protection while this is on the front page. —Gestrid (talk) 04:25, 13 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Best to keep this till after The Game Awards 2023, so everyone can finally ignored that Bill Clinton nonsense with another topic appeared on that edition of TGA. VernardoLau (talk) 05:24, 26 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]
It is 100% fair to describe the event, but I think in considering BLP (BLPCRIME specifically) that going into so much detail about the person's background, even if given by RSs, may be overkill. Really, we shouldn't give that that much weight given at from what I can see. Masem (t) 01:42, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I don't think WP:BLPCRIME really applies, since there's no indication nor accusation they have committed a crime. Regardless, I don't think the background is excessive at all; it's two or three sentences giving context of their previous public appearances, just as the RSs do. Besides their age, the article shares no personal information at all. – Rhain☔ (he/him) 02:06, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Well also keep in mind WP:MINORS which applies here to a 15 yr old. The text we have is effectively accusing him of being a conspiracy theoriest, which is a BLP problem. Masem (t) 03:20, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
To be clear, I'm well aware of WP:MINORS; I added it in a hidden note to prevent excessive identification, and I've consistently let it direct each of my edits about the topic. I disagree with your second sentence, though; I don't think the text accuses him of being anything besides a prankster (and perhaps an activist)—but "conspiracy theorist" isn't even implied let alone accused, and I've removed the only mention of the term to be safe (and because it was unsourced anyway). – Rhain☔ (he/him) 03:48, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Commentary related to absence of Xbox-exclusive/key titles[edit]
Didn't think this discourse would evolve to the point of discussion, but Xbox's response makes it seem worthy of a mention at least. Added. – Rhain☔ (he/him) 14:45, 10 December 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Disagree with this being on the in the news section[edit]
The section already mentions the media attention; I don't think we need to get more specific than that, at least without a variety of reliable reporting. – Rhain☔ (he/him) 01:48, 22 January 2023 (UTC)[reply]