Template:Did you know nominations/Quantic Dream
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by Cwmhiraeth (talk) 06:44, 1 November 2018 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Quantic Dream
[edit]- ... that the French video game developer Quantic Dream would consider moving to Canada if its tax breaks were taken away?
- Reviewed: Vincent van Gogh (Russell painting)
- Comment: Promoted to GA on the submitted date. Hook is sourced with ref. 1 in the article.
Improved to Good Article status by Cognissonance (talk). Self-nominated at 21:58, 17 August 2018 (UTC).
- Good to go
- Good to go
- Article promoted to GA on 17th, nominated on 17th
- Well over the size minimum
- Passes Earwig's Copyvio Detector (8.3% hit is a cited direct quote)
- Hook is short and sourced "To tell the truth, without tax breaks I’m pretty certain we’d be in Canada right now."
- QPQ provided
- The Squirrel Conspiracy (talk) 00:48, 25 August 2018 (UTC)
an issue was raised with the hook at WP:ERRORS2 (permalink). It looks like the wording of the hook, which implies the company would up and leave immediately if the tax breaks were removed, does not match the tongue in cheek nature of the conversation from the source. Cage also says in the same interview that "If there were no tax breaks… well the project would probably still go ahead, but a lot less money would be spent on it", which suggests maybe he wouldn't take the Canadian route. Needs some rewording or perhaps an alt hook I think. — Amakuru (talk) 21:46, 12 September 2018 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: There was no tongue-in-cheek. "the project" that would "probably" still go ahead is Heavy Rain. Only after this does he talk about the company as a whole: "To tell the truth, without tax breaks I’m pretty certain we’d be in Canada right now". "now" is referring to 2011, a year after Heavy Rain was published. The interviewer asks "Seriously?" Cage answers "Seriously." Also hard to believe he's being unserious when he goes on to describe the benefits of Canadian tax breaks. I want this hook repromoted. Cognissonance (talk) 00:43, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- No, it can't be stated as a fact. It might not move. Other things may happen. The best you could hope for would be to say that they said they'd move, not that they would. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: You're moving the goalpost. You were wrong and are now looking for more reasons to disregard my hook. There is nothing wrong with the word "would". It represents a desire to do something. Cage stated his desire to move the company in factual terms. Cognissonance (talk) 10:44, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- No, I'm not. Would does not represent a desire to do something. It means it "would" happen. And that's not guaranteed at all. I'm done here, good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:49, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, the way the hook is phrased, it sounds like we're saying in Wikipedia's voice that the move to Canada would follow the removal of tax breaks, as surely as night follows day. That is emphatically not what the source says. Cage is simply making a point about the relative advantage that he sees his Canadian competitor enjoying, and how he would seriously consider upping sticks if the French tax breaks disappeared. That's as far as it goes, but we don't know if he would really move under those circumstances. All manner of eventualities and compromises might emerge. So to suggest anything more than that is WP:CRYSTALBALL. I suggest rewording the hook to make it clear that this is something that Cage has said, rather than it being an objective fact. — Amakuru (talk) 18:58, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- "I would do that" is not the same as saying "I will do that". The first is a statement of possibility, the second is one of certainty. "...according to the founder of the French video game developer Quantic Dream, the company..." defeats the purpose of having a hook. Ruins the flow. Cognissonance (talk) 20:39, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- I disagree. "Would" is a conditional, which generally means that if the condition does indeed get met, then the mentioned consequence will definitely occur. "The Earth would get colder if the sun disappeared". Said in Wikipedia's voice, that becomes a basic truth. If the consequence is not certain, however, merely postulated by an individual, than you have to rephrase it as "would consider moving to Canada" or "Joe Bloggs says he would move to Canada" — Amakuru (talk) 09:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Amakuru: Whatever, I'm tired of it all. Cognissonance (talk) 00:29, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
- I disagree. "Would" is a conditional, which generally means that if the condition does indeed get met, then the mentioned consequence will definitely occur. "The Earth would get colder if the sun disappeared". Said in Wikipedia's voice, that becomes a basic truth. If the consequence is not certain, however, merely postulated by an individual, than you have to rephrase it as "would consider moving to Canada" or "Joe Bloggs says he would move to Canada" — Amakuru (talk) 09:47, 4 October 2018 (UTC)
- "I would do that" is not the same as saying "I will do that". The first is a statement of possibility, the second is one of certainty. "...according to the founder of the French video game developer Quantic Dream, the company..." defeats the purpose of having a hook. Ruins the flow. Cognissonance (talk) 20:39, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- Yes, the way the hook is phrased, it sounds like we're saying in Wikipedia's voice that the move to Canada would follow the removal of tax breaks, as surely as night follows day. That is emphatically not what the source says. Cage is simply making a point about the relative advantage that he sees his Canadian competitor enjoying, and how he would seriously consider upping sticks if the French tax breaks disappeared. That's as far as it goes, but we don't know if he would really move under those circumstances. All manner of eventualities and compromises might emerge. So to suggest anything more than that is WP:CRYSTALBALL. I suggest rewording the hook to make it clear that this is something that Cage has said, rather than it being an objective fact. — Amakuru (talk) 18:58, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- No, I'm not. Would does not represent a desire to do something. It means it "would" happen. And that's not guaranteed at all. I'm done here, good luck. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:49, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- @The Rambling Man: You're moving the goalpost. You were wrong and are now looking for more reasons to disregard my hook. There is nothing wrong with the word "would". It represents a desire to do something. Cage stated his desire to move the company in factual terms. Cognissonance (talk) 10:44, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
- No, it can't be stated as a fact. It might not move. Other things may happen. The best you could hope for would be to say that they said they'd move, not that they would. The Rambling Man (talk) 10:13, 13 September 2018 (UTC)
@Cognissonance: Do you still wish to pursue this nomination? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 09:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
- @Narutolovehinata5: Yes. I changed the hook to Amakuru's suggestion. Cognissonance (talk) 16:57, 14 October 2018 (UTC)
Yes, that's absolutely fine. It's ready to go again. — Amakuru (talk) 13:27, 29 October 2018 (UTC)