Talk:The Game Awards 2024

Caption citations

Citations used in both prose and image captions seems a little excessive to me and could be considered redundant per the WP:CONSECUTIVECITE guideline below. I've always interpreted captions as using the spirit of WP:CITELEAD (summarized information that is cited in prose) and unless this has begun to be enforced more recently, I can't think of a time where I've seen the practice used in a FA class article. ~ Dissident93 ^(talk) 01:27, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

WP:CONSECUTIVECITE appears to refer to the same citation being repeated within a single sentence or paragraph, which to me seems very different than a citation being used both in prose and a caption. WP:WHYCITE says that captions "should be referenced as appropriate just like any other part of the article", which is not to say that it should be strictly enforced, but I can't think of a valid reason to exclude them. In the spirit of WP:V, personally I see no benefit to intentionally removing citations wherever information is presented (outside of the lead and infobox). – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:37, 10 December 2024 (UTC)

Black Myth: Wukong response

@Cold Season: What "bias" are you referring to here? What information do you feel I removed in my edits? – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:04, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

The fact that you removed the characterization that foreign media is misunderstanding the tone and meaning of the original text through translation. And then leave the wording so that implies that it is not. While I simply worded it with in-text attribution. --Cold Season (talk) 01:09, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cold Season: That's exactly what my version said: that the tone of the original text may have been lost through translation. My phrasing implied nothing; it stated it as the sources do. Your edit also removed several reliable sources, and your addition of foreign media "misunderstanding ... the actual meaning" cites one single source (of questionable reliability). I would still appreciate an explanation of your accusation of my "bias" too. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:18, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I have a ready said why " but may have been misconstrued" --Cold Season (talk) 01:23, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cold Season: What's wrong with that phrasing? That's exactly what the sources say, including those that you added: that his original tone may have been misconstrued. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:25, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

Can I apply your same manner of copyedit to the content about Swen Vincke? Then, you will see real quick what the issue is. --Cold Season (talk) 01:27, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

@Cold Season: They're basically already written the same way anyway: some people interpreted their statements as criticism, but both may be attributable to mistranslations. I would appreciate if you could be more specific, both about the problems with the aforementioned phrasing and your accusation of my bias. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:44, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

I guess it's fallen to sealioning now... To your removed question (now found in the edit history), yes, the wording "potential" in the source supports may for Vincke. Does that explain it? --Cold Season (talk) 02:02, 17 December 2024 (UTC)

(ec) Call it what you like, but when editors unfoundedly accuse me of bias, I generally persist in the hopes that I get an actual explanation. In this case, evidently not.

Is your issue specifically with the word "may"? It's supported by several sources (they suggest there may be a mistranslation but lack knowledge to verify), but I've rephrased to avoid it, merged the PC Gamer source into the preceding sentence, and added some references that misinterpreted his comments as criticism. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 02:26, 17 December 2024 (UTC)