WikiProject iconVideo games Template‑class
WikiProject iconThis template 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.
TemplateThis template does not require a rating on the project's quality scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Issues[edit]

I'm seeing a number of issues with this grouping but don't have time to comment right now other than to ask why "blogs" are separated from "websites". I see no reason why those set few were excluded—they should be combined. czar  13:31, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Also why "critics" instead of "journalism" (would be spurious since many more outlets are vg "critics" than vg "journalists")? And news websites should be italicized per WP:ITALICS: "Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized". Is there a precedent for such a list of "active" publications? Isn't "active" assumed, else they become defunct? Groupings shouldn't be in title case. czar  13:35, 8 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
I've fixed most problems. It should be fine now I guess. AdrianGamer (talk) 10:02, 9 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GameRankings Removal?[edit]

GameRankings shut down on December 9 and started redirecting all of its traffic to Metacritic. Can we remove them from this template? — Preceding unsigned comment added by MomentHeart (talkcontribs) 18:16, 20 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Are we lacking a basic definition?[edit]

I worry that this template may be unworkably vague. If we look at List of video game magazines and Category:Video game journalism we can see potentially a hundred or more entries that might be described as "Video game journalism". How do we decide which ones belong in the "Video game journalism" template? If this template is to persist I think it needs a basic definition to be spelled out. Is this a list of historically significant publications? Or the most reliable/prominent publications? Is this an international listing? Does it cover only currently published journals and websites? Who determines prominence, reliability, historicity, etc. and is there any cut-off?

WP:NAVBOX suggests that the template should define a "small, well-defined group" with "a single, coherent subject". Guideline #5 asks: "If not for the navigation template, [would] an editor would be inclined to link many of these articles in the See also sections of the articles"? and suggests in Guideline #3 that "The articles should refer to each other". Do any of these entries refer to each other? And I echo Czar's question above: Is there a precedent for such a list of "active" publications? -Thibbs (talk) 14:56, 21 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

imo, this navbox fails NAVBOX#3, as you've cited (not watching, please ((ping))) czar 02:00, 24 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]