Talk:Massively multiplayer online role-playing game

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

This article is or was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hutchidd.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 03:35, 17 January 2022 (UTC)

Society and Culture

Isn't it fine to talk about the legal issues that MMORPGs. I know that there are already a video game controversies page, but since we're section this off from general video games, it should be talk about, especially in this small of a realm. Also the question about the new that was added, I had not finished editing it. I just had that place until I came back. I was going to change the title and bring in more facts about how we change MMORPGs into something else.Hutchidd (talk) 19:02, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

The problem is proper focus (Undue weight), tone and sourcing. You may want to review the list of reliable secondary sources at WP:VG/RS. "We" don't change MMORPGs into something else. Wikipedia reports what our reliable secondary sourcing is saying, we do not create our own original research. -- ferret (talk) 19:07, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

Then would the section be fine if I rewrote the ending sentence to make it more formal and informational? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Hutchidd (talk • contribs) 19:21, 19 October 2018 (UTC)

As Izno noted, it's still undue weight to have this section anchored entirely to a sole author's opinions. -- ferret (talk) 15:58, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Not even just a sole author's opinion; it's trying to scrunch any kind of controversy into the article when that's not the point of the article. We have others (as noted in the edit itself) that can and should capture concerns about video games. Video game captures it at a WP:SUMMARY level and Video game addiction/Video game controversies capture it at a more-detailed level; it shouldn't be injected into a genre article or even specific video games. As you have been reverted multiple times, you should stop making the attempted change until there is consensus. --Izno (talk) 16:20, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Then, if talking about the legal issues is a problem then it shouldn't be talked or have it's own section. Instead I should link this page to the main page about video game controversies. Is that correct or should I not worry about the legal issues whatsoever?Hutchidd (talk) 16:35, 22 October 2018 (UTC)

Adding to Licenses Section

I want to add to the Licenses Section about how small groups of people acquire the right to bring back a game from another company or the franchise.Hutchidd (talk) 02:36, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

I reverted your edits for now. While we haven't discussed geekreply.com at WT:VGRS, I doubt it would ever be considered a reliable source. The authors don't appear to have any degrees or credentials or experience in games journalism (in fact, they're looking for more writers and state "you don’t even need to have prior experience"), there are no published editorial standards, the site is filled with advertisement and SEO "articles", and they don't appear to be cited by other reliable sources which points to a lack of a reputation for fact-checking and accuracy. Now the Game Revolution article, while a reliable source, is simply a roundup of MMOs that they like. It doesn't make the claim that "MMORPGs have been showing up with no shortage of stopping", which is a ridiculous WP:CRYSTALBALL-ish assertion that we shouldn't make on Wikipedia. If you can locate reliable sources that talk about games licenses—like sources listed at WP:VG/RS—we can certainly discuss how to add to the article. I hope this helps! Cheers! Woodroar (talk) 03:23, 8 November 2018 (UTC)

That makes sense. It seems hard to find sources that are giving me information that answer or give me the information that I want to add to the page. Hutchidd (talk) 16:41, 9 November 2018 (UTC)

Requested move 22 May 2020

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Consensus to not move. (non-admin closure) — YoungForever^(talk) 20:32, 29 May 2020 (UTC)

---

Massively multiplayer online role-playing game → MMORPG – It is much easier to link to MMORPG. 14bauhr (talk) 18:19, 22 May 2020 (UTC)

• Oppose. Most reliable sources tend to spell out the term—at least the first time—and searches for "massively multiplayer online role-playing game" tend to give more scholarly sources than "MMORPG". Besides, if the issue is linkability, you can always link to MMORPG and it will redirect to this article. Woodroar (talk) 18:49, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose as the Massively multiplayer online role-playing game name is more appropriate and understandable for any reader ~Amkgp ✉ 19:19, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose "Ease of linking" is not a valid reason to move a topic, especially since you can already link that way as a redirect. -- ferret (talk) 19:41, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• Oppose. "It is much easier to link to" in the nomination gives the game away. Links are not here for editors' convenience. No evidence has been provided that "|MMORPG" is the common name. 94.21.219.127 (talk) 22:12, 22 May 2020 (UTC)
• Weak oppose. This is a good point. MMORPG is arguably the most common moniker. I wouldn't mind a move. Still, I slightly prefer the longer, more descriptive title. Cheers, Manifestation (talk) 12:27, 23 May 2020 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Merge - April 2023

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

Electing to close this discussion as Not merged, as aside from the nominator, the result has been unanimous and the discussion has been open for two months now. At the very least, the result changing would require a significant sharp turn in the consensus to even reach a no consensus result. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:29, 8 June 2023 (UTC)

---

The fork looks like the result of some languages lacking a proper translation for the term. Every native translation of it should involve creating an acronym in the _target language, since that expresses a fundamental aspect of internet culture plus the media genres which MMORPG'es actually base themselves on. Nira gliro (talk) 02:26, 8 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. MMORPGs are a type of MMO. There are also Massively multiplayer online first-person shooter games, Massively multiplayer online real-time strategy games, and any kind of game where the server allows for hundreds or thousands of players. Reliable sources regularly cover those other genres, too. Woodroar (talk) 06:59, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Neither article mentions any notable much less real-time strategy games. Nira gliro (talk) 18:16, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

Massively multiplayer online first-person shooter game includes a link to List of massively multiplayer online first-person shooter games, and List of massively multiplayer online first-person shooter games includes a link to List of massively multiplayer online real-time strategy games. Woodroar (talk) 18:33, 10 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose Woodroar already covered it. I get the sense that there some sort of right-great-wrongs at work here. This is English Wikipedia, so the articles reflect the English names for these genres and sub-genres. -- ferret (talk) 18:34, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose There are MMOs that are not MMORPGs (MMOFPS, MMORTS, etc.). ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 12:54, 15 April 2023 (UTC)

Can anyone find one example where the term is mutually exclusive? Global Agenda for example is an MMORPG as well as MMOFPS, since the game takes a story-driven role-playing approach. Nira gliro (talk) 20:52, 21 April 2023 (UTC)

MMORPG.com is NOT a reliable website. Also, I think you can't call World of Warcraft, Guild Wars 2 or Final Fantasy XIV as MMOFPS/MMORTS. Za9941 (talk) 12:31, 29 April 2023 (UTC)

• Oppose. Even if an MMOG might have RPG elements, they're not necessarily MMORPGs. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 02:56, 29 May 2023 (UTC)
• Oppose Theres enough here to keep them separate.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 14:46, 2 June 2023 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.