Talk:Undead Nightmare

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Undead Nightmare/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 11:23, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

I'll be back with comments in three days or so. Ping me if I'm overdue. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:23, 7 August 2016 (UTC)

Review

I'm surprised to be saying this, but I can't find anything here to stop this from being an Instant Pass. Congrats! --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:09, 9 August 2016 (UTC)

Title

Shouldn't it say "Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare"? Simply leaving it as Undead Nightmare, makes it seem as if it's an entirely separate game, when in reality, it's just an expansion pack to the original game.Dohvahkiin (talk) 02:40, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

Expansion titles don't need the prefix if they're commonly discussed in sources without the prefix. It's the common name and more recognizable (the name most people will call it), natural (reflecting what it's usually called), precise (unambiguously identified), and concise (not longer than necessary to identify), per the naming criteria (article titles policy) czar 18:36, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

If that's the case, the first nine articles on the page in references all call the expansion "Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare". I'm pretty sure the page's title used to be that as well.Dohvahkiin (talk) 12:07, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Journalists cite many games with long titles by their official name for their first usage—the point is how they refer to them afterwards. The "subtitle" in this case is how the expansion is primarily known. If I were to talk about the expansion, I would not repeat RDR: UN each time—that is the essence of the naming policy I linked above. czar 20:42, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Ok. I was just used to seeing it in the category with the prefix, plus, I usually refer to it by its full name, so it just looked a bit strange. I think this is the only expansion I've actually seen it happen to actually....Dohvahkiin (talk) 22:48, 23 September 2016 (UTC)

Some of the more prominent expansions were changed to the full format in the last year—haven't had time to contest them czar 05:01, 24 September 2016 (UTC)

If there was another article by the name of "Undead Nightmare", then I think the prefix would be useful as a disambiguator (e.g. The Last of Us: Left Behind, since there are several other articles titled Left Behind), but in this case it's not necessary. – Rhain ☔ 22:41, 22 September 2016 (UTC)

• Change the article title to Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare. That's the correct title of the game. Neptune's Trident (talk)

  Please refer to the move discussion below, thanks! Lordtobi (✉) 16:20, 21 October 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 20 October 2016

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: Not moved - based on the consensus, current title is common name (non-admin closure) Fuortu (talk) 18:16, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

---

Undead Nightmare → Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare – Full title, there also is a guideline on this I currently acannot find. – Lordtobi (✉) 15:33, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). — Andy W. (talk) 18:35, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

• • Contesting – There is actually a guideline on it, but it suggests the opposite – see WP:COMMONNAME and WP:OFFICIALNAME. – nyuszika7h (talk) 17:08, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

    Can't quite agree that COMMONNAME would result in this. Glancing over the References section, all titles including the name introduce it in full, "Red Dead Redemtpion (or, in one case, RDR): Undead Nightmare", and so should we, with the title, the infobox, and the first mention at the beginning of the lede. Lordtobi (✉) 17:22, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

    Well, I'm not entirely sure what's the common name in this case, so I might be wrong. nyuszika7h (talk) 17:30, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

    Therefore, I think the COMMONNAME argument is out of place. Also I believe there is another guideline for cases like these, which is the reason for the naming of Fallout 4: Far Harbor, BioShock 2: Minerva's Den, etc. Hence, the page should be moved. Lordtobi (✉) 17:36, 20 October 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose. Your nomination doesn't address anything raised in the previous discussion: Talk:Undead_Nightmare#Title. The common name goes in the infobox, article title, and throughout the article. Usually isn't a big deal to put the full title at the beginning of the lede, but good prose is also more important than guidelines. The redundancy in "Red Dead Redemption: Undead Nightmare is an expansion pack to the 2010 video game Red Dead Redemption" is bad writing. As for the precedent of other DLCs—some only changed names recently and haven't been challenged and others also sit without the main game's name in the title. If the DLC is sufficiently known by its subtitle and not its full title, that's what we use. That's the basis of common name and the article naming criteria: more recognizable (the name most people will call it), natural (reflecting what it's usually called), precise (unambiguously identified), and concise (not longer than necessary to identify). czar 22:28, 20 October 2016 (UTC)
• Oppose, per WP:COMMONNAME and WP:CONCISE. No other Undead Nightmare article, so adding Red Dead Redemption in front of it is making it unnecessary long. soetermans. ^{↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK} 11:52, 23 October 2016 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.