Talk:Hot Coffee (minigame)

Requested move 9 December 2021

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: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Extraordinary Writ (talk) 19:11, 16 December 2021 (UTC)

---

• Hot Coffee (mod) → Hot Coffee
• Hot Coffee → Hot Coffee (disambiguation)Hot Coffee (disambiguation)

– Page is clearly the primary topic by pageviews. Views have vastly eclipsed the other potential topics for "Hot Coffee" that are not a partial title match. Even when the controversy was not relevant earlier this year, page views were numerous times that of the film, the next highest topic in popularity. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 10:50, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• Support per nom. JOEBRO64 12:57, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose While the McDonalds' coffee case is not known as "hot coffee" the fact that that is a likely search term for a far more broad subject matter than this would make it inappropriate for this page to solely take "hot coffee". --Masem (t) 13:01, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

  Good thing I am not suggesting for it to be moved to hot coffee, but rather, Hot Coffee (the proper name). If the consensus is for the disambiguation page to be moved to hot coffee instead, I am okay with that. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:07, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose. I know the mod, I played the mod and I was an active gamer when this all happened and it still wouldn't be the first thing I think about when I hear "hot coffee". I would - like Masem - probably think about the McDonald's court case. That article, where Hot coffee case already redirects to has vastly more pageviews than this article (if you don't just look at the last few weeks). If anything, we probably should redirect "hot coffee" there as well and not here. Regards SoWhy 13:15, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

  Per WP:DIFFCAPS, the "Hot coffee case" is not known as the proper name "Hot Coffee", so I didn't include it. That's because "Hot coffee" is a nickname for the case and not the official name of the case. _{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 20:04, 9 December 2021 (UTC)

• Oppose no wp:primarytopic the case has decidedly more long term significance per page views—blindlynx 14:53, 9 December 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose would be misleading In ictu oculi (talk) 22:51, 12 December 2021 (UTC)
• Comment: I think that this also needs to have Hot coffeeHot coffee redirect to Hot Coffee (disambiguation). I think with the current Hot coffeeHot coffee → Hot Coffee redirect this will be hard to resolve. snood1205^{(Say Hi! (talk))} 20:29, 13 December 2021 (UTC)
  • Hot coffeeHot coffee should probably redirect to Coffee, since coffee is often served hot. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:15, 14 December 2021 (UTC)
• Oppose: Considering the film, the place in Mississippi, and the beverage, I don't think this rather obscure hidden video game feature should be considered primary. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 22:15, 14 December 2021 (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.

Requested move 10 February 2022

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: moved. There is a consensus that Hot Coffee is the common name not only for the mod/patch, but also the untitled minigame. (closed by non-admin page mover) Sceptre (talk) 17:33, 21 February 2022 (UTC)

---

Hot Coffee (mod) → Hot Coffee (minigame) – This article discusses two things: a sexual intercourse minigame and a mod that unlocks said minigame. The main subject of this article is the minigame. The development, controversy, all revolve around the minigame. Several sentences in the article erroneously referred to the minigame as "mod", meanwhile the mod itself is sometimes referred as "patch". Neocorelight (Talk) 11:52, 10 February 2022 (UTC) Neocorelight (Talk) 11:52, 10 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support: This makes perfect sense to me. The lead sentence even says "'Hot Coffee is an unofficial name for a minigame in the 2004 video game Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas". Popcornfud (talk) 12:59, 10 February 2022 (UTC)
• Support. It's really strange to call it a mod given that it's a minigame that was apparently built into the original game. The only modding involved is someone basically "activating" the code for the minigame. And as stated by others, it's really not about that mod, it's about the minigame itself. --Xurizuri (talk) 01:40, 11 February 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose The thing that was named "hot coffee" was the mod that unlocked it. Given that we have to disambiguate this, "mod" makes the most sense. We have no idea what Rockstar called the minigame. --Masem (t) 01:50, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

This is an interesting point, but it doesn't matter what Rockstar called the minigame, it matters what the minigame is called by sources, per WP:COMMONNAME. A quick scan of the sources produces no clear result there - it seems the name is used interchangeably to refer to the game and the mod that unlocks the game. If it's decided that "Hot Coffee (mod)" is the correct title for the article then the article body (such as the lead sentence I quoted above) needs to be altered to reflect that. Popcornfud (talk) 01:56, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Then going that around, there are actual two better names (given sourcing I was just doing): Hot Coffee scandal or Hot Coffee controversy (eg in either case, dropping the parenthetical) Both are terms used in the sourcing, though I think the latter is more neutral as it was less a "scandal" after all was said and done. --Masem (t) 02:45, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

The (unnofficial) name of the minigame is Hot Coffee as RSs call it, this name is taken from the mod that unlocked it, which in turn is taken from in-game slang for sex. The subject of this article is the minigame and per COMMONNAME, its title is Hot Coffee. Neocorelight (Talk) 02:05, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Keeping the current title is unrepresentative of the content because the mod is not the subject of the article. We certainly wouldn't title this article "Cut sexual intercourse minigame in Grand Theft Auto: San Andreas". Neocorelight (Talk) 02:16, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support per nom and Popcornfud's response to Masem. Sources overwhelmingly use the term "Hot Coffee" to refer to the minigame itself rather than the fan-made patch, so we should too. JOEBRO64 02:38, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

Sources overwhelmingly use the term "Hot Coffee" to refer to the minigame itself I just wanna make sure that's definitely true. I only did a very quick source check, and the results were mixed based on that, so don't just take my word on it. Popcornfud (talk) 02:58, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

I did a cursory glance at recent sources that brought up the conundrum due to its discovery in the Definitive Edition collection, and they refer to the minigame itself as Hot Coffee: Nintendo Life ("Hot Coffee was a naughty hidden minigame..."), Video Games Chronicle ("... files claimed by users to be related to the infamous, canned San Andreas sex mini-game 'Hot Coffee'"), IGN ("... it also appears to contain files related to the infamous sex mini-game 'hot coffee'"), and Eurogamer ("Dataminers have discovered code relating to the infamous Hot Coffee mini-game..."). I think it's safe to say that the name "Hot Coffee", in the decade-and-a-half since the controversy, is now generally used to refer to the minigame itself rather than the patch that was created to unlock it. I think "Hot Coffee (mod)" was an acceptable name when the article was first created, because "Hot Coffee" was the name of the mod. But times change, and I think these sources serve as a testament to that. JOEBRO64 03:10, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

• Support Hot Coffee is not in fact a mod but deleted ingame content unlocked via a mod. I believe this could also be moved to Hot Coffee minigame instead per WP:NATURAL. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:08, 11 February 2022 (UTC)

  Yes, I think dropping the parenthesis would sound better. Neocorelight (Talk) 01:07, 13 February 2022 (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.

GA Review

The following discussion 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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hot Coffee (minigame)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Vami IV (talk · contribs) 03:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Preamble from Vami

Hello, and thank you for your contributions to Wikipedia. My name is Vami, and I will be your reviewer. During this review I may make small edits such as spelling corrections, but I will only suggest substantive content changes in comments here. For responding to my comments, please use  Done, Fixed, Added,  Not done, Doing..., or Removed, followed by any comment you'd like to make. As my comments are addressed or rebutted, I will cross them out, and only my comments.

If I have demonstrated incompetence or caused offense, please let me know. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 03:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Prose

• [...] "include new functionality and interaction in line with the 'vibe' of the game" [...] Appears there's a missing or errant apostrophe in here.
• [...] and he collaborated with a modder in the United States to create the mod. First mention of any specific mod.
• The lead should probably talk about how RockStar lied about creating Hot Coffee rather than just leaving it at their initial and short lived silence.

GA progress

Images are relevant and free/tagged. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 03:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

No copyright violations. Note to future reviewers, if you run Earwig's, the similarity likelihood is as high as it is because of the amount of direct quotations used in the article. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 03:23, 12 August 2022 (UTC)

Customary ping @GhostRiver, as the review has been sitting around for close to a month. IceWelder [✉] 21:50, 8 September 2022 (UTC)

@Vami IV: Since GhostRiver seems to not be reponding, I would like to finish up the article to not let your now one-month-old review go to waste. I have made some copyedits to article, including changes I believe should address your latter two points. However, I'm not sure what you would like to have improved in the first one; the quote seems fine to me, with "vibe" surrounded by apostrophes as a quote-in-a-quote. IceWelder [✉] 19:08, 12 September 2022 (UTC)

@IceWelder: I commend you for your intervention. I will pass the article now. –♠Vamí_IV†♠ 02:48, 13 September 2022 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

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.

Requested move 13 August 2025

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: not moved. Favonian (talk) 10:37, 20 August 2025 (UTC)

---

• Hot Coffee (minigame) → Hot Coffee
• Hot Coffee → Hot Coffee (disambiguation)Hot Coffee (disambiguation)

– I am trying for the same move again, as I believe that the previous move attempt years ago was shot down for non-policy-based reasons. The rationale behind the move is that the minigame is still easily primary topic in pageviews and arguably long-term significance over the documentary film of the same name, Hot Coffee (film). The minigame had a demonstrable lasting impact on the video game industry, as seen at Hot Coffee (minigame)#Impact on the gaming industry. Furthermore, when compared to hot coffee, it falls under the WP:DIFFCAPS policy similar to other pages - we would not disambiguate Iron Maiden despite Iron maiden being a purported torture tool, and hot coffee ought to still redirect to coffee as a form of the drink. I don't believe that when one would type "Hot Coffee" into the search bar with caps for both words, they are necessarily looking for the drink. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:01, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose: Considering the film, the place in Mississippi, and the beverage, I don't think this rather obscure hidden video game feature should be considered primary. Caps for both words is not involved – only for one of them. Due to Wikipedia's technical design, hot Coffee leads to the same place as Hot Coffee. —⁠ ⁠BarrelProof (talk) 07:06, 13 August 2025 (UTC)
• Oppose Its not very clear that "Hot coffee" (caps or not) would be the primary term for the GTA thing, particularly as that's more a term within only the video game field as compared to the McDonalds' lawsuit which is known by a much broader group of people. Using pageviews here is likely not a good metric due to that. Masem (t) 12:07, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

  As the lawsuit is called the "Hot coffee case", I am not sure how it conflicts. It is only ever said as "Hot coffee case" or "Hot coffee lawsuit", all in lowercase, I'd appreciate some explanation on why it would be equivalently primary to something simply named "Hot Coffee". It should not even be on the DAB page at all. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 14:19, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

  Using "hot coffee" to look for the McDonald's case is a completely reasonable search term. We can't expect readers to know own naming schemes so we have to anticipate common terms they may search under. Masem (t) 14:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

  I am not seeing how something so generic is a reasonable term for search. That would be like claiming someone ould be searching for "War of the Worlds" just by typing "War". It's far too generic to lead them to anything related to their query. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 19:44, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

  In the case of war v war of the worlds, that "war" has a very clear primary target obviously makes sense that it be at that page and that there would be a disambiguation page for others. For this case it would need to be argued that the GTA hot coffee has the same type of primary topic claim as war has, and that's just not convincing at all. As a gamer I absolutely recognize the term and it's importance to the industry, but that it really only is a term known to the industry and not outside it. It would need to be akin to something like Mario which has a broad awareness outside of gaming for this argument to be made. Instead, I would argue far more people know hot coffee as the McDonald's thing than the GTA thing. Masem (t) 20:50, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

• Oppose per the 2021 RM. Per WP:THREEOUTCOMES, when an RM is closed "not moved", "editors (...) should probably not propose this move in the future until and unless circumstances change." There is no indication that anything has changed since the last discussion. 162 etc. (talk) 17:21, 13 August 2025 (UTC)

  As I explained before, I wasn't confident that policy had been properly used in the discussion, as WP:DIFFCAPS had essentially been ignored entirely. Sadly, it's continuing down the same path here. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 11:01, 19 August 2025 (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.

Slight wording addition

In reference to the sex scenes in GTA IV, V (and Online), I added a few words indicating that at least in terms of GTAV/Online there is minimal input required from the player (unlike Hot Coffee's minigame aspect). In fact other than choosing one of three options (of varying costs, but involving different positions), and the limited ability to move the camera, they're basically cutscenes. Nonetheless they would have gotten the games AO ratings if they'd come out in the GTA San Andreas era. But just as with TV shows, more explicit content is allowed these days (see Witcher 3 as another example, plus GTAV has a side mission involving a sex tape that is more explicit than anything in Hot Coffee). 136.159.160.127 (talk) 20:02, 21 August 2025 (UTC)