Talk:Ustwo

Proposed split: Moving ustwo games into separate article

I propose splitting the "ustwo games" section into a standalone article.

Rationale:

- The entity has its own leadership, branding, and operations, and is listed as an independent company on the gov.uk site.

- Significant independent coverage (sources below)

- Meets WP:ORG and WP:N guidelines

- Has been independent from ustwo for over 10 years

Draft here: Draft:ustwo games

Sources:

- https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/ustwo-games-makes-layoffs-to-support-pc-first-pivot

- https://www.gamesindustry.biz/ustwo-games-to-consider-hiring-more-contractors-to-reduce-development-costs

- https://mobilegamer.biz/ustwo-games-is-weaning-itself-off-apple-arcade-and-netflix-amid-strategy-shifts/

- https://www.ign.com/articles/ideals-like-full-time-employment-and-job-security-are-too-romantic-in-game-dev-says-monument-valley-studio-ceo

- https://www.pcgamer.com/gaming-industry/a-gaming-ceo-just-said-weve-been-a-little-bit-too-romantic-about-the-idea-that-we-should-have-employees-and-give-people-long-term-job-security-and-doesnt-that-sum-up-everything-wrong-with-the-industry-right-now/

- https://find-and-update.company-information.service.gov.uk/company/09812157

JXfUcpVALq (talk) 13:09, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

• I don't get it--that draft is basically half this article, and if you split this in half this way without significantly adding content to either, you have two halves, not two wholes. Drmies (talk) 13:22, 25 June 2026 (UTC)

  The new draft is just a start to a full article. My understanding is that once the split is approved, I can officially shift more of the Games-specific content into the ustwo Games article, so that it's more complete.

  The new draft currently notes what ustwo Games is, its history and its current leadership team, along with key milestones in their history and the games they're most known for. These elements are specific to ustwo Games, separate to ustwo.

  Games hasn't been a part of ustwo for over 10 years, and the ustwo product studio has a totally different focus, leadership team, philosophy, etc. JXfUcpVALq (talk) 12:24, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  It seems like this could be solved by explaining things more clearly within this article, and adding a new section if needed. There's just not enough here to justify splitting. I think if you can really add that much more to this existing article, you may have an easier time justifying a split at that point. – OdinintheNorth (talk) 15:28, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

  Thank you, that's helpful, I'll do that! JXfUcpVALq (talk) 20:07, 30 June 2026 (UTC)

Oppose spkit. No size issues that both can't be covered here. They are still connected companies. Masem (t) 12:43, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

There are many cases where a standalone business spun out of another business, where they now have independent Wikipedia pages. The most relevant example given the naming structure may be General Electric, which spawned a number of independent businesses that all have their own pages, such as GE HealthCare, GE Aerospace, and GE Vernova. On the GEHC page, it references its founding as such:

• September 28, 1994; 31 years ago (as a subsidiary)
• May 16, 2022; 4 years ago (formation of corporate entity)
• January 4, 2023; 3 years ago (spin-off from GE) Another example is Ebay and PayPal, or Kraft Foods dividing into Kraft Foods Group and Mondelez International. So I see no reason why we wouldn't do the same for these two pages. Regarding the idea of the companies being "connected," they are nonetheless independent businesses with different ownership. ustwo studios is employee-owned, whereas ustwo Games is owned privately, with majority ownership by the co-founders.

JXfUcpVALq (talk) 13:34, 1 July 2026 (UTC)

While a split is technically possible, the argument raised above is that there is no need to split it. Taking your Kraft Foods example, there are three articles involved that have 4398, 2100, and 576 words, respectively. The Ustwo article presently has, in total, 441 words. A split would break one tiny article into two even tinier articles. I would even go as far as to say that Ustwo, outside of Ustwo Games, is not all that notable. If you think there is a case for major expansion, this action should precede. The topic of a split could be revisited thereafter, or even converting the entire article towards Ustwo Games and relegating the OG Ustwo to the history section. IceWelder [✉] 16:12, 2 July 2026 (UTC)

To add to that, a split for a company X that creates a separate division or company Y as to have articles on X and Y only makes sense is if there is continual coverage of X that continues after Y was split off. The examples given by JXf all fit that pattern. But here, Ustwo the parent has almost nothing that can be said about them after Ustwo Games was created. This makes far more sense to take the approach IceWelder has, to focus this article on Ustwo Games and discuss Ustwo the parent enough to get that basis in place. Masem (t) 16:18, 2 July 2026 (UTC)