User talk:2601:140:C002:D0F0:14F4:2750:1E53:31FA

Trivial content on Postal Redux

Hello, I noticed that you have undone my changes to the Postal Redux article. I have reviewed what you had written, and most of it is trivial content written in prose rather than a bullet list, as it was before. I supported the article when it was created, but the problem is that trivial content like this is forbidden by WP:TRIVIA. In addition, none of these bullet points was actually sourced in any way. With a new edit just now, you enhanced the situation with some sources, however, there is a problem: Most of the things cited are changelogs (unnotable) and promotional material off YouTube (unreliable on an already unreliable site), wherethough it is regardless who the content posted. Exceptions to such sources are made if they are notable and reliable, and that is only the case with secondary sources, meaning gaming magazines or marked-as-reliable websites such as PC Gamer, Polygon, Destructoid, etc. Such pages are cited in the introduction of the article. Luckily, none of the sources you provided are tertiarry sources, such as fan sites or similar, but primary sources. Though primary sources may be used as a small fraction of sources cited in an article, they must not be the only elements spanning across multiple sections. So combine trivia, promotional material, and primary sources, and you can see that it does not work out properly. As I played the game through myself, I knew good that the changes listed were valid, and so I cleaned up the article where possible and tried to hold it up, but after a long time-passing, and no reliable sources covering those changes falling under my radar, I took on getting rid of the trivial again, which happend to be when your edit was put in as well. Sorry if you felt insulted for that. Currently, I would rather adhere deleting the article, and merge its contents with the article of the original game from 1997 per notability guidelines (WP:GNG), as the subject did not receive significant coverage (WP:SIGCOV). If think that Postal Redux establishes notability, please try to cover all the content you added through reliable, secondary sources (good websites for that may be found at WP:VG/S). Thanks! Lordtobi (✉) 11:28, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

You aren't gonna find any secondary sources because the game itself didn't get much coverage after release. Likewise, as it says in wiki's own guidelines: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Identifying_reliable_sources

The first thing it says on "reliable sources" is: The piece of work itself

Given this is a video game which you yourself have played and verified as true then there is no issue. Hell, because it is a video game, a Youtube video of the game in action can be considered a valid source (assuming the video in question doesn't include un-official modifications). If its false then sure delete it, if not then leave it as is. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:140:C002:D0F0:14F4:2750:1E53:31FA (talk) 11:38, 14 January 2017 (UTC)

---