Talk:Rayman Legends Retold: Difference between revisions

Line 35:

:I think information about both the leaks and the official announcement could be moved to an "Announcement" section. —[[File:RRRGBAIcon8.png|class=sprite|link=User:Hunchman801]][[File:RRRGBAIcon0.gif|class=sprite|link=User:Hunchman801]][[File:RRRGBAIcon1.png|class=sprite|link=User:Hunchman801]] 18:17, 10 June 2026 (UTC)

== Points of Order ==

Briefly coming out of my sabbatical from the fandom in light of the news, just wanted to bring to attention a few things that the Wiki could do with having some official policy on:

===Leaks===

I noticed that this page went up back when the only information was from leaks. While it was proven to be true, I am of the opinion we should not have live pages for hearsay or rumour, only for official items. Whether or not that should be Wiki Policy, I think needs clarification.

===Sources and Tone===

I noticed that the statement "''Furthermore, the development of the sequel to Rayman 3 will depend on the sales of this remake.[2]''" cites ''The Gamer'', the article in of itself was more a collation of various sources of rumours and official interviews rather than itself having generated new information. The item that actually makes mention about sales is the interview that article itself cites - https://www.gamesradar.com/games/rayman/ubisoft-is-planning-a-new-more-adventurous-3d-rayman-game-but-only-if-everything-goes-well-with-its-rayman-legends-retold-remake/

In light of the amount of Game News Websites that regurgitate rumours from Reddit, simply repeat what other outlets state and add their own takes to it, or even worse make AI generated editorials, we need to ensure we cite the sources that come as close to official places as possible. Not places repeating information, or editorialising based on something stated elsewhere. I'd propose changing citations 2 and 5, which currently point to ''The Gamer'' to the GamesRadar article, which is where the words from Loïc Gounon are actually stated.

In addition, I'm not particularly comfortable with having that statement front and center in the article. I share the sentiment but I feel it's besides the point when it comes to what the article should be speaking about. The article should be kept neutral and should not be meant to campaign.

Anyways, hope everyone's doing well!

--[[User:Master|Master]] ([[User talk:Master|talk]]) 15:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

@@ Line 35: / Line 35: @@
 :I think information about both the leaks and the official announcement could be moved to an "Announcement" section. —[[File:RRRGBAIcon8.png|class=sprite|link=User:Hunchman801]][[File:RRRGBAIcon0.gif|class=sprite|link=User:Hunchman801]][[File:RRRGBAIcon1.png|class=sprite|link=User:Hunchman801]] 18:17, 10 June 2026 (UTC)
+== Points of Order ==
+Briefly coming out of my sabbatical from the fandom in light of the news, just wanted to bring to attention a few things that the Wiki could do with having some official policy on:
+===Leaks===
+I noticed that this page went up back when the only information was from leaks. While it was proven to be true, I am of the opinion we should not have live pages for hearsay or rumour, only for official items. Whether or not that should be Wiki Policy, I think needs clarification.
+===Sources and Tone===
+I noticed that the statement "''Furthermore, the development of the sequel to Rayman 3 will depend on the sales of this remake.[2]''" cites ''The Gamer'', the article in of itself was more a collation of various sources of rumours and official interviews rather than itself having generated new information. The item that actually makes mention about sales is the interview that article itself cites - https://www.gamesradar.com/games/rayman/ubisoft-is-planning-a-new-more-adventurous-3d-rayman-game-but-only-if-everything-goes-well-with-its-rayman-legends-retold-remake/
+In light of the amount of Game News Websites that regurgitate rumours from Reddit, simply repeat what other outlets state and add their own takes to it, or even worse make AI generated editorials, we need to ensure we cite the sources that come as close to official places as possible. Not places repeating information, or editorialising based on something stated elsewhere. I'd propose changing citations 2 and 5, which currently point to ''The Gamer'' to the GamesRadar article, which is where the words from Loïc Gounon are actually stated.
+In addition, I'm not particularly comfortable with having that statement front and center in the article. I share the sentiment but I feel it's besides the point when it comes to what the article should be speaking about. The article should be kept neutral and should not be meant to campaign.
+Anyways, hope everyone's doing well!
+--[[User:Master|Master]] ([[User talk:Master|talk]]) 15:12, 16 June 2026 (UTC)