Talk:Unknown Worlds Entertainment

Comment

Okay, it's been two years since this discussion page was deleted and three years since UWE's actual page was deleted. In light of NS2's release scheduled for this year and an article on Kotaku which mentions their Steam-distributed sequel to their first game, Natural Selection which was downloaded over two million times. The article also mentions that they've developed their own engine which they will be licensing out upon completion.

UWE are also talked about by GamersHell and have a company info page made for them on Gamespot.

Is the article allowed to be reinstated?

...I'll take that a yes.Tesseraction (talk) 01:13, 4 June 2009 (UTC)

Note from a passerby: The reference in the article to the "phenomenal success" of some game seems awfully hypey to me. It should at least be edited to "success". Geneven (talk) 19:10, 21 October 2011 (UTC)

Incorrect info on the Unknown Worlds page

Hello from Unknown Worlds! There are a number of errors on the page about our company. I'd be happy to make the edits myself, but I realize there is a conflict of interest and would prefer it be done by editors.

For example, Perfect World is no longer an investor in the company and doesn't own a single share. You can see public confirmation of them selling the majority of their stake (back to the company) here: http://vip.stock.finance.sina.com.cn/corp/view/vCB_AllBulletinDetail.php?stockid=002624&id=5537137 They've since sold the rest back as well.

Furthermore, we don't have 162 employees (and never have). Our team is currently 38 people, the largest it's ever been.

With people often referring to this page for info about our company, we'd like it to be as accurate as possible.

UnknownWorldsEnt (talk) 08:01, 5 February 2021 (UTC)

I've removed the employee count until there's a good source for it, but I do find it strange that LinkedIn (the original stated source) shows 163 employees. Even if that's people not updating their account after leaving the company it would still be like the entire supposed staff of 38 was turned over many times.

As to Perfect Worlds, that source is anything but clear. The most straight-forward bit I saw in there was this statement: "The increase was mainly due to the sale of part of the equity of Unknown Worlds Entertainment, Inc., a subsidiary, and the remaining equity formed a long-term equity investment and the impact of investment income confirmed by other invested entities". I would say that's far too vague to confirm they've given up majority equity. Is there any public statement in a secondary source (as opposed to this report by the company itself)? I tried to search a bit, but only found a source for the initial purchase. -- Fyrael (talk) 17:47, 9 February 2021 (UTC)

Regarding Perfect World, their 2019 annual report states "对外出售" (roughly "For sale to the public" according to DeepL) for "Unknown Worlds Entertainment, Inc". Also compared to their 2018 annual report, Unknown Worlds does not appear in the list of entities anymore. I could not find a separate notice about the sale though, perhaps someone can find it on Shenzhen Stock Exchange's info site. IgelRM (talk) 18:17, 16 February 2021 (UTC)

These changes related to company ownership have already been implemented by user 208.69.41.164 (an IP address in the San Francisco area). I can confirm that the Company Report for 2018 doesn’t feature Unknown Worlds anymore, so it could be that the edit is truthful. But we must now tag the page as potentially being edited by a COI author. Ferkijel (talk) 12:57, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Ferkijel: please explain how adding that banner makes sense. It reads "A major contributor to this article appears to have a close connection with its subject", which is extremely different from one detail being changed by an IP user that there's no evidence has any connection. Also...July 2020? I'm totally baffled by this addition. -- Fyrael (talk) 19:57, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@Fyrael: There’s no reliable source to confirm the company’s ownership, the role Perfect Worlds has or doesn’t have, or why it was so important to the user with the COI. The COI banner isn’t editable, so it’s either that or nothing. Since it doesn’t affect content, I thought it prudent to at least warn that COI edits are present. If you feel so strongly about it being unnecessary, feel free to remove the banner. I won’t fret. Do you have recommendations on how to deal with the not-too-infrequent situation where edits are declined, and the exact same edit request gets implemented by an anonymous user shortly after the last rejection? Cheers. Ferkijel (talk) 21:18, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

My suggestion would be the same as for any other edit that is made without a source: try to verify the information yourself and add a source if you find something, or failing that revert the change back to what we can verify. That banner suggests to any reader who comes along that the bulk of this article was written by a potentially biased source, which is just not what has happened here. Do you think we should give that impression based on one piece of potentially incorrect information (which we can just revert if we feel like it, or tag with {{cn}})? -- Fyrael (talk) 21:32, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

Also it could be worth reporting as a sockpuppet, although I honestly don't know a whole lot about how those investigations work. -- Fyrael (talk) 21:38, 30 March 2021 (UTC)

@IceWelder: I recall you have questioned the reliability of the MMOs.com source on Talk:Studio Wildcard. Should the ownership be removed from the infobox? IgelRM (talk) 23:20, 5 May 2021 (UTC)

IgelRM, I replaced it with the actual SEC filing, which even included the price paid for the two investments. IceWelder [✉] 09:03, 6 May 2021 (UTC)