Talk:Angry Video Game Nerd

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on Angry Video Game Nerd. Please take a moment to review my edit. You may add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it, if I keep adding bad data, but formatting bugs should be reported instead. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether, but should be used as a last resort. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20150518094540/http://www.brawlcustommusic.com/game/2093 to http://www.brawlcustommusic.com/game/2093

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—^{cyberbot II}_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:37, 30 March 2016 (UTC)

Ghostbusters

Hello everyone. In the first source, James is mentioned and describe in one sentence.

"And then there’s “The Angry Video Game Nerd,“ a misogynistic web show whose sycophantic Wikipedia entry made me pine for hemlock in my coffee."

Attributing misogamy to Ghostbusters is WP:UNDUE as the two sources do not say misogamy.

His observations comes from "Brave, not-sexist movie critic refuses to watch the new 'Ghostbusters'" and "Heroic angry nerd refuses to review new ‘Ghostbusters’ movie"

Both are written in condescending and passive-aggressive tones. Which also seems to violate WP:NPOV. Cheers. Supergodzilla2090 (talk) 04:04, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Not entirely following you. The misogyny is attributed to Angry Video Game Nerd by Hickey, not the two other sources (he just uses the two sources as his example). He also calls it "crap" in the next sentence. Not sure why it's undue to include that information. The various other sources in the reception and legacy section, which are overwhelmingly positive, are given far more weight right now. FuriouslySerene (talk) 14:59, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I'm not familiar with FiveThirtyEight, but is it a reliable source? Because the article comes off as sensationalistic. Additionally, I'm not sure this recent Ghostbusters topic is overall relevant to the article, since most sources aren't "attacking" AVGN itself, but instead Rolfe and Cinemassacre. This Hickey is probably the only article that explicitly attacks the AVGN web show as "misogynistic". κατάσταση 16:44, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

538 is a reliable source, when it comes to political and sports statistics. Nate Silver in particular is good at predicting electoral election results. However, personally, I feel like the Hickey article is attributing qualities to Rolfe which do not exist. PaintingTurtle (talk) 17:46, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

Exactly, it is more of a sensationalistic opinion piece. κατάσταση 19:26, 20 May 2016 (UTC)

I feel as if the accusations of misogyny are undue weight, given they came from a single author. Neither of the two sources the author provided actually claim AVGN is a misogynist. Furthermore, Rolfe comments made about the new Ghostbusters comments were not part of the AVGN series. If anything, this is a discussion that should be held at his article. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  00:23, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I agree. I created this conversation to stop the edit war but it did not seem to work. So this article might need to be protected. Supergodzilla2090 (talk) 06:16, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I was going to open a request for protection, but Qed237 (talk · contribs) beat me to it. I guess I'm getting old and too slow on the draw. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  17:04, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

There's an article at the Atlantic brings up the issue and mentions Rolfe twice and not in a particularly flattering way. It doesn't use the word misogynistic but it does call all the complaints "logically flimsy". At the very least this has become a notable event for Rolfe. I'm not really following any of this and don't know who Rolfe is or what AVGN is but if the consensus is that this is more about him than AVGN (did his video show up on the AVGN channel?) then I see no problem moving it. SQGibbon (talk) 18:12, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

@SQGibbon: To answer your question, Rolfe is a director who has a production company called “Cinemassacre”, which creates videos ranging from web series, commentaries, reviews, and playthroughs. Angry Video Game Nerd is one of Cinemassacre’s productions, and arguably the most popular thing Rolfe is known for. This Ghostbusters commentary aired on Cinemassacre, but was not part of the Angry Video Game Nerd Web series. There are quite a few sources that discuss Rolfe’s refusal to review (or even watch) the new Ghostbusters, but I hardly feel these views reflect the Angry Video Game Nerd series. I also feel these have little to do with Rolfe, and more with the 2016 Ghostbusters film. Perhaps we can move it to the trailer section of that article? I’m sure there are other famous people who have disliked the trailer as well. I think the general consensus here is to remove the content pertaining to Ghostbusters any sexism accusations from this article, but I look forward to seeing what others have to say. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  20:18, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

It seems that his refusal to watch the film and his video about it have become notable incidents and most of what I'm reading is directed more against him than discussing the film. Whether he deserves it or not people are saying that at the least there are some misogynistic subtexts at play. It doesn't matter if this is true or even a fair description of his intent, what matters is that reliable sources are stating it and thus it is more about him than the movie. I'll defer to others' wisdom as to whether this content belongs here or in the article about him but right now there seems to be enough juice to include it in some article about him. Now also including his review at the Ghostbusters article is fine and there we would just summarize his views about the trailer and the film without mentioning any of the backlash against him because that would not be relevant to the film. SQGibbon (talk) 21:07, 21 May 2016 (UTC)

I think the content on Ghostbusters should not even be included, since it's hardly relevant and few actually journalistic articles have documented it. But if the consensus is to include it, move it to this article because it doesn't pertain to AVGN itself. The criticism isn't headed towards the AVGN web series, but rather towards its creator (actually, Cinemassacre, but since it doesn't have an article, then post it in Rolfe's article) κατάσταση 00:04, 22 May 2016 (UTC)

The issue is that Hickey's comments directly pertain to this article. He even links to this Wikipedia page. He supports the claim with the two links to the Ghostbuster's review, which I guess can be moved to a more relevant page. But the comment itself is about this show. He also calls it crap and says it's an example of a show that is much more favourably reviewed by male reviewers. FuriouslySerene (talk) 19:17, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Hickey's article is the only that directly criticizes AVGN as "mysoginistic". The articles he links mention AVGN, but discuss James Rolfe and his AVGN-unrelated video. Just because one bigot with one sensationalistic article from "538" made such a claim, doesn't mean it's relevant enough to the discussion. Most websites such as AV Club (or the two links Hickey gave) do not have AVGN as the target of criticism. If this were moved to Rolfe's own article, it would make somewhat more sense. κατάσταση 23:27, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Including a serious slander against a person's character solely on the basis one heavily biased opinion piece seems very flawed. I could easily find articles name calling any high profile person all sorts of horrible things, but it takes more than that to warrant such charges being included in an article. It would only warrant inclusion if it was widely discussed across multiple reputable sources in a much more balanced, measured way. Besides, AVGN the show has nothing to do with movie reviews. Even if this information was deemed valid for inclusion (which I clearly don't think it is), it would make more sense on Wolfe's bio page, rather than AVGN. Zaqwert (talk) 01:31, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

This issue was talked about by more than one source -- a link to an Atlantic article, for example, is provided above. I think consensus exists to move this material to Rolfe's article though. So if someone wants to do it I think it would be fine to do so. SQGibbon (talk) 15:08, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Hey everybody, it appears that the James Rolfe article already mentions this issue and does so with various sources and in a neutral matter. Since the consensus was to move this information to that article anyway I've gone ahead and deleted it from here. SQGibbon (talk) 15:11, 18 June 2016 (UTC)

Apostrophe Needed

An apostrophe is needed in a section of this article. It should be "channel's creation", not "channels creation".—Bde1982 22:58, 24 May 2016 (UTC)

Discussion of the article's title

Per the official logo of the webseries, the correct title of the article should be The Angry Video Game Nerd. Does anyone have a counterargument? –Matthew - (talk) 16:35, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

I think this was discussed in February 2015 during a move discussion. The result moved 'The Angry Video Game Nerd' to 'Angry Video Game Nerd'. Wikipedia:THE seems to have been the deciding factor back then. --  StarScream1007  ►Talk  16:45, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

That makes no sense to me. This would seem to be a clear case of the example of "The Old Man and the Sea."--Scottandrewhutchins (talk) 14:21, 31 August 2019 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Angry Video Game Nerd. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added {{dead link}} tag to http://www.allmediany.com/details_news_article.php?news_artid=749
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160304131619/http://kentballs.com/post/15169157112/i-dont-like-the-angry-video-game-nerd-or-his to http://kentballs.com/post/15169157112/i-dont-like-the-angry-video-game-nerd-or-his

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 04:09, 6 July 2017 (UTC)