Talk:Black Myth: Wukong

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because the cited article was created in September 2020, after this wikipedia page was created. In fact, the cited article is a copy of this Wikipedia article.

--Big Wang (talk) 06:11, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted as an unambiguous copyright infringement, because the page itself is properly cited, if very sparse on details. The website the nominator alleged that this article has committed a copyvio for, behaves strangely when I clicked on it...the window just closes automatically for some reason. Perhaps it is a dodgy website which mirrors or rips off the Wikipedia article, and not the other way around. A better approach would be to send this to AfD instead, if notability of the subject topic is a concern. --Haleth (talk) 14:17, 7 November 2020 (UTC)

Black myth wukong

Is Black Myth Wukong gonna be a open world??? 2601:140:8400:FDD0:BC5F:1B68:5D:795F (talk) 21:47, 5 January 2022 (UTC)

It's not expected to be, no. 37.223.106.200 (talk) 15:47, 27 January 2023 (UTC)

Controversy

The controversy section seems to contain content that is not directly related to this game, what is the intention? --高田の鉄橋 (talk) 02:41, 27 April 2024 (UTC)

Yes, the section does seem to be a loose fit for the article. The article on the game shouldn't include every questionable tweet and comment by those who made it, or even controversies about the company that made it. It's the same reason why sexual misconduct allegations for Ubisoft or Activision Blizzard aren't incorporated into the articles of every game they made. I went ahead and removed it per WP:CSECTION. Meeepmep (talk) 09:42, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

Why is controversies connected to some companies and games allowed but not others?

Generally when LGBTQ communities does the attacks the controversy gets deleted.

But when LBTQ communities gets attacked its kept.

Why is that? 155.4.92.41 (talk) 15:30, 15 June 2024 (UTC)

in that case, if this kee continuing im advocating this article should be locked into semi-protected. Just to steer clear only confirmed users could edit. 118.136.207.29 (talk) 14:11, 16 June 2024 (UTC)

I think some of the recent edits, specifically those claiming that Sweet Baby Inc. attempted to extort the developers, are knee-jerk reactions to an IGN article on the development of the game which covers the harassment and sexism women faced at the studio. There's a conspiracy theory claiming that Sweet Baby Inc is behind these articles because the studio didn't use their services. So far the only source cited for this claim is an article which is a retelling of a Youtuber going over a handful of tweets and unfounded claims. I think locking this article would be a good idea as I think it'll be constantly edited with this misinformation. 157.211.217.149 (talk) 22:19, 17 June 2024 (UTC)

What are you even on about you absolute buffoon? The criticism is about poorly translated text from Chinese being used to smear the company as sexist. Was the text crude and vulgar? Yes. Were they sexist? No. SBI has barely any connection to this matter if any at all, so all this nonsense about CoNsPiRaCy ThEoRiSts are just you attacking a strawman you set up

Do better my man 2A05:9CC3:7C:1631:5C37:F88:FD5C:6F4A (talk) 07:51, 18 June 2024 (UTC)

I don't want to cause a flame war on Wikipedia, but I think dismissing the article because of mistranslations (which, after double checking the translations, don't seem to exist) is silly. What about the interviews with former employees who all have experienced the sexist culture at the company? 203.76.224.90 (talk) 01:11, 19 June 2024 (UTC)

What about them? The scope of the article is the game, so content needs to stay on that topic. Social commentary on the company culture or the gaming industry on its own is offtopic. --Cold Season (talk) 15:04, 22 June 2024 (UTC)