Talk:Nexon
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nexon article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Nexon" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: 1 |
This article has not yet been rated on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details.
|
BlockParty was nominated for deletion. The discussion was closed on 1 March 2021 with a consensus to merge. Its contents were merged into Nexon. The original page is now a redirect to this page. For the contribution history and old versions of the redirected article, please see its history; for its talk page, see here. |
sorry but why isn't this game in the list?
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ghost_in_the_Shell:_Stand_Alone_Complex_-_First_Assault_Online ArmorShieldA99 (talk) 01:57, 28 April 2021 (UTC)
Lawbreakers
Why isn't Lawbreakers included in the Games section? 24.198.81.163 (talk) 21:13, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/LawBreakers — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.198.81.163 (talk) 21:16, 16 December 2021 (UTC)
Project DX
Why is there no mention on Project DX? It's been announced for a while now 102.176.228.21 (talk) 14:35, 27 January 2023 (UTC)
In favor of adding Controversial section please comment here or in edit notes.
so far I count 4 wiki editors in favor of a controversy section which is majority. I will go ahead and add it since the majority want it. But still feel free to comment if you want it added. Also the Nexon Dark and Darker controversy is international news currently. See news links below. https://www.ign.com/articles/dark-and-darker-devs-distributing-game-on-discord-as-playtest-goes-ahead-amid-legal-issues https://www.eurogamer.net/dark-and-darker-dev-asks-players-to-torrent-latest-playtest-after-removal-from-steam
https://kotaku.com/steam-pc-rpg-dark-and-darker-ironmace-torrent-playtest-1850338181 https://www.gamesradar.com/dark-and-darker-devs-ask-fans-to-torrent-april-playtest-because-its-taking-time-to-resolve-the-steam-situation/ Netherleash (talk) 13:24, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Please don't. I will revert you again. Starting a discussion without waiting for input by others doesn't mean "oh, now I can do the things I want to do". That's not a consensus. Who are those four people? Regardless, like I've said before, we try not to have a "controversy" section. The issue with P3 is simply part of Nexon's history. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 13:30, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- I agree with Soetermans. Indeed, we try not to have a controversy section. Integrate relevant new information with the existing prose, and keep it neutral. —Alalch E. 14:33, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you for your input Alalch. Which news article did you read? Do you have a natural interest in this page? This is a major gaming controversy hence the articles in Kotaku, IGN, Eurogamer, etc, a police raid on a gaming studio by another studio is not a common occurrence. Hence why 4 editor are in favor of a Controversy section. So far 4 for, 2 against. Netherleash (talk) 14:58, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Happy?—Alalch E. 15:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Very very happy. You are awesome at editing. I'm sorry I was rude. The other editors and visitors will be happy too. Netherleash (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Thank you, no problem, and welcome to Wikipedia. —Alalch E. 16:40, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Very very happy. You are awesome at editing. I'm sorry I was rude. The other editors and visitors will be happy too. Netherleash (talk) 16:16, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Happy?—Alalch E. 15:32, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Support, plenty of RS are discussing this already. ShaveKongo (talk) 19:06, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hi ShaveKongo, we do not have 'controversy' sections. Any issues, review bombs, setbacks, financial disasters, you name it, are part of the history and do not go into a separate section. If you missed it, Alalch E. already expanded the article quite a bit. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 21:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hello @Soetermans, I read through the relevant policy, and I see now. I'll cleanup articles in the future when I find a controversy section. I believe from a reader's viewpoint this specific bit of history is fairly interesting and maybe we should give it a subheading if not its own section, a section not labelled controversy of course. ShaveKongo (talk) 21:24, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Adding more information to this article would not be WP:DUE. This much detail here is already stretching it. More details belong to Dark and Darker#Legal issues. A subheading is not needed for content that is one paragraph long. —Alalch E. 21:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- I guess we will just have to see how the story continues to develop, it appears to be far from done and I predict more and more RS will pick this up as it progresses. Wikipedia should very much lag realtime events so i'll check back in 6 months to a year to see what else has happened. ShaveKongo (talk) 22:02, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Adding more information to this article would not be WP:DUE. This much detail here is already stretching it. More details belong to Dark and Darker#Legal issues. A subheading is not needed for content that is one paragraph long. —Alalch E. 21:34, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hello @Soetermans, I read through the relevant policy, and I see now. I'll cleanup articles in the future when I find a controversy section. I believe from a reader's viewpoint this specific bit of history is fairly interesting and maybe we should give it a subheading if not its own section, a section not labelled controversy of course. ShaveKongo (talk) 21:24, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- Hi ShaveKongo, we do not have 'controversy' sections. Any issues, review bombs, setbacks, financial disasters, you name it, are part of the history and do not go into a separate section. If you missed it, Alalch E. already expanded the article quite a bit. soetermans. ↑↑↓↓←→←→ B A TALK 21:10, 15 April 2023 (UTC)
- All unassessed articles
- Articles copy edited by the Guild of Copy Editors
- C-Class company articles
- Low-importance company articles
- WikiProject Companies articles
- C-Class video game articles
- Mid-importance video game articles
- WikiProject Video games articles
- C-Class Japan-related articles
- Low-importance Japan-related articles
- WikiProject Japan articles
- C-Class Korea-related articles
- Mid-importance Korea-related articles
- WikiProject Korea articles
- C-Class Maryland articles
- Low-importance Maryland articles
- WikiProject Maryland articles