Template talk:Video game reviews

Where's the 32X and Sega CD fields?

Hello. May I ask why there isn't Sega CD, 32X and CD 32XX as platform fields? User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:57, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I'd guess it'd be due to the combination of relatively small sizes of their respective game libraries coupled with the even less likely scenario of someone adding a platform-specific review for that platform. For example, there's apparently only about 40 32X games out there, and many, like Knuckles Chaotix and Kolibri wouldn't need it because it's a 32x exclusive and needs no such designation.) Sergecross73 msg me 14:22, 24 August 2025 (UTC)

I've encountered multiple cases where a magazine reviewed both the Genesis and 32X version of a game, and give them different scores. NFL Quarterback Club (video game) for example User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 13:26, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Oh for sure, it definitely happens. Just not all that often. I believe all the presets are for the more common platforms. Sergecross73 msg me 14:19, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Yeah I was going to ask the same. While I agree its not a common platform, some historically important or popular titles are ported to systems like 32X or Sega CD that had been previously available as Genesis games, or in the case of the 32X, Genesis games. (i.e: Mortal Kombat II, Night Trap). The current version of the Virtua Fighter article even makes its own "fake" review box so it can include the 32X for comparison ratings. I do believe including both of these would be useful for comparisons sake. I'm working on the Mortal Kombat article (User:Andrzejbanas/MetroidII if you want to take a peak) and the critical reviews of the Sega CD version do come up. They are generally lukewarm to bad because critics at the time were like "this is basically the same as the genesis one, and I just bought that last year and its 1994 and I just want to play MK II already geez!!!). I've been shoving the SegaCD scores into the Genesis review box, but its getting very busy there. Allowing us to add these up might be a good for this case and other than its uncommon, I don't really see a downside? Andrzejbanas (talk) 16:01, 25 August 2025 (UTC)

Even if it did happen the minority of the time, it still happened. User:HumanxAnthro (BanjoxKazooie) 19:50, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

It was neither my decision, nor do I even know who/where it was decided. I'm merely brainstorming. These platforms have been out for 30+ years and have highly developed content on Wikipedia, so I doubt it was merely a case of no one ever noticing until now. Sergecross73 msg me 20:40, 26 August 2025 (UTC)

Clearly at least some editors did notice Serge, as it led to them creating their own make-shift box to include it as the Virtua Fighter article does. This has similar helpfulness that another unpopular system that had high cover it in its heyday with the Atari 5200, which also mostly a lot of ports and few new games. I would suggest adding them as clearly they will be just as ignorable for users who don't care as they will be for users who do think it'd be the best way to display some information. Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:13, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure you read my comment correctly. I was saying that it was not the sort of scenario that would go unnoticed. They're platforms that get a lot of attention by experienced editors on Wikipedia. Which was what lead me to believe that was this was not some sort of oversight, but rather, done for a reason. Which lead to the brainstorming. Which I guess I should have kept to myself, as its only lead to people trying to argue with me over something I didn't do, enforce, or propose. Sergecross73 msg me 15:36, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

That Virtua Fighter makeshift box is a really bad idea/example. There was an editor years ago (Now a twice cbanned sockpuppeter) that whenever the template didn't fit exactly what they wanted, they would just substitute the template and edit it instead of engaging this page or the project. They did this in isolation on their own, and other project members have been cleaning the mess up for years. This means that table is never updated with any formatting changes to this template. I'm personally not a fan of the multiplatform format of this template, because like on the Virtua Fighter page it tends to leave a lot of blank cells. But it's easy enough to just add the other systems if they are needed and its appropriate. -- ferret (talk) 17:28, 27 August 2025 (UTC)

Ahhh I had no idea. I feel like we can trust our non-banned editors to balance out when it would be appropriate or inappropriate to include such consoles (i.e: not leave a dozen blank spots to shove in the one or two 32X reviews). And apologies Serge if I misinterpreted your post. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:07, 22 September 2025 (UTC)

Proposed addition: Amstrad CPC

Proposing adding this line in the platforms list of the template:

{ 'Amstrad CPC', 'CPC' }

We have Amstrad Action as a source in the template, but no means to differentiate CPC specific titles from other computer systems of the era. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 01:13, 5 September 2025 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 21 September 2025

I want to add the CPC to local systems:

{'[[Amstrad CPC|CPC]]', 'CPC'}

Thanks. Cos ^{(X + Z)} 22:03, 21 September 2025 (UTC)

 Done — Martin (MSGJ · talk) 20:26, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Adding a publication

Hi all. I can't recall, where do I post to recommend a publication be added to this template? Any help would be much appreciated. Helper201 (talk) 15:06, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

This is the right place. Masem (t) 18:48, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Could we add Slant Magazine and Trusted Reviews to the template please? Helper201 (talk) 19:34, 23 September 2025 (UTC)

Masem? Helper201 (talk) 04:12, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

I've added Trusted Reviews as TR, but for Slant I don't see much specialized video game coverage as to make it a hard coded addition (such can always be added with the additional fields in the template). Masem (t) 13:36, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Masem, your edit broke things. "TR" was already being used for TechRadar, and you forgot to add closing brackets to the Trusted Reviews wikilink. Please fix ASAP. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 14:45, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Fixed, and made Trusted Revies to TRev Masem (t) 14:57, 26 September 2025 (UTC)

Template-protected edit request on 14 October 2025

That Slant Magazine please be added to this template. Helper201 (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2025 (UTC) Helper201 (talk) 19:20, 14 October 2025 (UTC)

Already objected to above. This is not an uncontroversial request. – Jonesey95 (talk) 17:33, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

As I outlined here, they have a whole main section dedicated to video games, so they do have plenty of specialized video game coverage. Helper201 (talk) 22:45, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

Did they just recently start up video game coverage or something? I watch over a lot of articles and I have to say, it feels like I rarely see them added to reception sections... Sergecross73 msg me 00:17, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Just because its rarely used by regular contributors, does not really add up to much. To answer you question, from a quick glance at their site they have been covering video games since at least 2009, so for over 16 years.Andrzejbanas (talk) 15:27, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm not sure I understand that sentiment - why add something that's rarely used? Sergecross73 msg me 15:33, 17 October 2025 (UTC)

Apologies, I had been off Wikipedia for a few days but I was going to say the same, the publication has been covering video games since 2009, so I don't see a problem here. Helper201 (talk) 00:34, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

It is used as a source regularly on several well developed articles: The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time, The Legend of Zelda: Majora's Mask, Phantasy Star, Dr. Mario, Ikaruga, Metal Gear Solid 2: Sons of Liberty. Do you require us to provide more as I feel like we've established our case. Andrzejbanas (talk) 00:45, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas Not a single one of these articles is using a review from Slant, except Dr. Mario. And there it's using the review of a different game to cite a gameplay difference. Are there any examples of a Slant *review with score* being used in an article and included in the template? -- ferret (talk) 02:08, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

Regardless the cite is used for the community for video game content and has over ten years of it. I'm not sure what the resistance is to this. Is overloading this box a problem? Andrzejbanas (talk) 03:03, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

@Andrzejbanas To a degree, yes. The template does require that any reviews listed within it are used in prose. But no one has presented an example of any Slant reviews being used for reception and in the template. What is the point of implementing a dedicated code for a source that no one is integrating or using? -- ferret (talk) 12:31, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I don't "require" anything, I asked a simple follow up question. (??) Sergecross73 msg me 02:13, 19 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm more than willing to add Slant reviews to articles but it would certainly be helpful to have the code added first so they could be added to reception tables. Helper201 (talk) 16:40, 20 October 2025 (UTC)

Remember that the review template has field to add any other source that is not already in the code for cases like this. We don't require a source to be codifed in the template to be used as a review, but as others have pointed out, we shouldn't be added every possible review source as a code, particularly, if that source is not heavily used across the project space.. Masem (t) 12:41, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Can it automatically get ratings from Wikidata or metacritic.com?

Hi, or should I write a script for that? Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 22:21, 15 October 2025 (UTC)

@Vitaly Zdanevich Yes, there is support for Metacritic, OpenCritic and GameRankings to be pulled from Wikidata. Please read the doc page and search for "wikidata" to find it. -- ferret (talk) 01:22, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Here currently we have just {{Video game reviews}} and it render nothing - but in related Wikidata item we have ratings. Vitaly Zdanevich (talk) 04:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Replying at Module talk:Video game wikidata#Render nothing :(. -- ferret (talk) 12:41, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

Adding The Washington Post

Could someone add The Washington Post to the Module:Video game reviews/data (in the local reviewers section)? The site maintains a consistent video game review base (featured on Metacritic) and Washington Post is a great perennial source per WP:WAPO.

The webpage clearly notates video game reviews vs. video game coverage: https://www.washingtonpost.com/entertainment/video-games/ Yoshiman6464 ^♫🥚 16:38, 16 October 2025 (UTC)

RFC: Slant Magazine

Can we add Slant Magazine to Template:Video game reviews? I'm starting this because responses appear to have stopped on the discussion up to now. Please see posts under the titles, "Adding a publication" and "Template-protected edit request on 14 October 2025" above this for context. Helper201 (talk) 03:34, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Yes. Slant Magazine is a reliable publication with a long history of video game journalism and video game reviews. Helper201 (talk) 03:36, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

We don't use RFCs for this process, you should have continued from the previous discussion. Masem (t) 12:39, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

RFCs can be used for this process. WhatamIdoing (talk) 01:27, 27 October 2025 (UTC)

Just use revN and revNScore parameters. No one has been able to show that this source is used anywhere for video game reception currently, nor any instant of it currently being in the template. The template is updated to reflect practices, not to cover every possible source that publishes a video game review. -- ferret (talk) 12:58, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

It does not make sense to create a separate discussion for this. The last one fizzled out (days ago) because there's nothing left to say. Sergecross73 msg me 13:11, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Oppose. Use custom field. Named fields are for frequently-used sources. Above discussion failed to produce even a single (potential) example review with a score suitable for the template. RfC is overkill. —  HELLKNOWZ ∣ TALK 13:12, 26 October 2025 (UTC)

Comment while I was supportive of it previously, it might be better to apply it across the board first. That being said, it has the potential to be a frequently used source, so I feel like even if we did do this, its just pushing one or two editors to do a lot of work just to have re-edit it again later. Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:57, 27 October 2025 (UTC)