Talk:Relooted

Steam Charts

Steam Charts player count wasn't added to the game's 'Reception' when it's one of the most reliable statistics of player reception and engagement JackFrostyG (talk) 09:31, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

Those are third party tools, which are unofficial and can't be confirmed and have known error ranges. Harizotoh9 (talk) 17:05, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

They also don't have the '___ Players In-Game' from the official Steam Community Page so it's not possible to see the current player count. JackFrostyG (talk) 19:01, 12 February 2026 (UTC)

This isn't our problem. We are here to summarize reliable sources. If they mention sales or player count, then we can include it. Harizotoh9 (talk) 22:25, 13 February 2026 (UTC)

@Harizotoh9 Dude, you are so full of shi*. The only reason you don't want to include it because you are simping for this game and therefore being biased and cherry-picking only articles that are positive and the reason I know this is because you summarized AV review as "praise" (which is also an extremely vague summary) but the score was "B+". How can something be an object of praise and receive B+? Also, it took me 30 seconds to find an article discussing low player count. https://insider-gaming.com/relooted-launches-double-digits-steam-reviews/

And also having the audacity to give a smug lecture to someone about Wikipedia's editor function, while not doing the basic minimum expected of a Wikipedia editor (referring to your biased editing of the article and not researching the topic properly) is just shameful and disappointing. ~2026-57794-9 (talk) 00:27, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

We summarize reliable sources, and insider-gaming is not one. That's really it. The Unknown_9:_Awakening#Release_and_legacy article covers player count, because reliable sources covered it. Harizotoh9 (talk) 00:37, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

And why is it not a reliable source? ~2026-57794-9 (talk) 00:39, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

Gaming especially is rife with lower quality and blog-like sources. With the rise of AI it's even more prominent. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:07, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

It should be added as WP:RSPS says: "A source's absence from the list does not imply that it is any more or less reliable than the sources that are present. Absence just means its reliability has not been the subject of serious questioning yet. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence.

Considering insider-gaming is not explicitly considered unreliable per WP:RSPS, I don't know why you said it's unreliable. It clearly has a person as an author, and I don't know why are you implying AI had something to do with that article. ~2026-57794-9 (talk) 01:15, 18 February 2026 (UTC)

You're free to suggest it, or to create your own Wiki that operates on different rules. If a RS doesn't mention it, then the information doesn't exist even if it's true. We summarized cited information after all. See WP:TRUTH. It's basic scholarship. With gaming especially there's a near infinite amount of small gaming news websites, and it's a race to the bottom. With the rise of AI generated content, there is going to be a sea of low quality sources, and extreme caution is needed. Harizotoh9 (talk) 01:52, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

I don't understand why you reverted my edit, as I have already written that WP:RSPS says: " A source's absence from the list does not imply that it is any more or less reliable than the sources that are present. Absence just means its reliability has not been the subject of serious questioning yet. Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." Just because Insider gaming is not mentioned in the list that does not mean it's not a reliable source. Also this sentence in the article "The trailer for the game says “Is it stealing to take back what was stolen?"" is sourced from TheWorld which is also not on the list in WP:RSPS, yet there is no problem of it being included. Additionally, this sentence is also from a source that is not on the list "The game's soundtrack uses modern synthesizers or traditional African musical instruments.". Tell me why you have not waited for other sources to cover those two statements, since that was the reason my edit was reverted? It seems to me double standards are being applied in this article. ~2026-57794-9 (talk) 10:42, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

• RFI is Radio France Internationale.
• The World is a public broadcasting radio program.

These are pretty standard mainstream sources. Gaming news in contrast, has been going down a race to the bottom in the last decade (and only accelerating with AI), where fly by night self-published sites are created. There's an endless amount of them and I as a rule ignore the vast majority of them. Due to an environment that is so low quality, it's better to have high standards. And I don't want to play whack-a-mole since you can replace one site with another infinitely. So stick to reliable mainstream sources. Harizotoh9 (talk) 19:12, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

I understand what you are saying, but you can't just unilaterally proclaim a source is unrealiable just because you think AI might be included or for any other opinion . If consensus is reached for Insider gaming to be put on WP:RSPS as unreliable, then it's justified to not have it as a source, but for now there is none. There is atleast one other article that uses said source as a source for the article: Skull_and_Bones_(video_game). ~2026-57794-9 (talk) 19:27, 20 February 2026 (UTC)

WP:VG/S points to an inconclusive discussion about Insider Gaming in 2023. Rhain described it as unreliable, while NegativeMP1 said "I'm leaning possibly reliable". It might be worth creating another discussion there to reassess its status, hoping that more editors will weigh in. Daisy Blue (talk) 14:15, 27 February 2026 (UTC)

Wiki Education assignment: WRIT 340 for Engineers - Spring 2026 -8am

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 7 January 2026 and 30 April 2026. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Junzhe Ouyang, 304student, Justintao223, Mwsoto (article contribs).

— Assignment last updated by 1namesake1 (talk) 14:55, 9 April 2026 (UTC)