It certainly is more mask off this time around. They aren’t trying to hide behind euphemistic slogans like “ethics in game journalism”. Now they are just blatantly open about their anger that women and minorities are being represented in games and how that’s a bad thing.

Those secondary sources often aren’t reliable as well. It depends on the source and its history of accuracy in reporting. There’s plenty of newspapers that have been determined to not be a reliable source, including any tabloids.

It’s also rather inaccurate. One can use a primary source like the DOT for information to add to an article. It’s just that a primary source like that doesn’t contribute to general notability and importance of the subject matter. The subject needs to be shown to have relevance that has been covered in other forms than just primary sources.

The use of primary sources has long been restricted to minimal usage, since primary means any form of self-published claim. And that sort of source shouldn’t contribute to any form of notability.

“Then on the other hand you can find an article on every Pokemon on Wikipedia.”

You’re rather out of date with that claim. Once upon a time, like a decade or more ago, this was true. But when the notability requirements became stricter, the vast majority of Pokemon articles were removed and redirected to list articles. There are currently only 28 articles on individual Pokemon, out of a possible 1021.

I remember this controversy. The highway editors in question were super opposed to any form of referencing requirements for these highway articles that all other Wikipedia articles have to adhere to and wanted individual articles on the most minute small road routes.

When the editing community at large suggested having broader higher level articles that combined these much less notable articles into a bigger article that was more properly referenced and better showcased a level of importance, the highway editors…well, to put it bluntly, had a hissy fit.

Apparently referring to what is going on in West Bank as colonialism counts as anti-semitism now.

There has to be a middle ground response here. Yes, ban people saying “death to Jews” and committing violence and other attacks on Jewish people.

But banning any support for Palestine, which isn’t Hamas, is dumb.

By that, you mean criticism of China’s known actions that are detrimental to their neighboring countries and the world?

If you want to call that “anti-China”, then sure, but it’s an appropriate reason to be, just as appropriate as being “anti-Russia”.

Better? My point still stands.

Tia Nadiezja over in the comments there also has good points:

"Bethesda games get a pass on serious, game-breaking problems that would kill games from other companies. Skyrim still, a decade and more after its original release, two full remasters in, has more glitches and bugs than Mass Effect: Andromeda or Cyberpunk did at launch, and those bugs did serious damage to those games’ reputation.

Throw in the horrific treatment of staff by Bethesda’s management and the open transphobia they’ve displayed, and people should not be playing this bad game. Have some standards, folks!"

"An honest conversation about Starfield needs to come from judging the game for what it is. And the game itself is … fine, I guess? A recent Kotaku article articulates in more detail how Starfield isn’t “humanity’s greatest achievement,” but it’s an enjoyable game and that’s fine. The menu system is extremely clunky and the aforementioned encumbrance issue is still there—all systems that haven’t changed in decades. Whether it’s deliveries or the fate of the galaxy, nobody else seems to do anything but you, the player. Just because these are hallmarks of past Bethesda games doesn’t mean that they get a free pass.

And herein lies the problem. Because Starfield is so similar to Bethesda’s previous offerings (for better or worse), Bethesda “fans” are pushing back against critiques of the game as a critique of all Bethesda properties. Looking at Sterling’s video about encumbrance again, the online defense of the game’s issues boils down to fans saying, “I can’t tell you why. I just do.” This is indicative of the lack of thought that Bethesda actively encourages in their games."

Yeah, that article does a good job at summing up the issues here. It really shows that maybe we need to have a broader conversation about how most past Bethesda games are worse in retrospect, actually. Starfield is helping to exemplify and point out that.

“if you just take it for what it is without thinking what you wanted it to be”

Why would I do that for any video game? With that mindset, you could claim any game is good, because you aren’t actually engaging with its content on the level that it deserves.

Don’t prop up bad games.

“So many complaints I can just address as “it’s a bethesda space game, and this is what it’s supposed to be like”.”

Why do you have such an incredibly low bar for Bethesda in particular? Demand better or you help make the entire video games industry worse.

A significant amount of the bugs do seem to be based on how long you’ve been playing and how far into the game you’ve gotten. The farther you get, the more bugs start appearing.

People have been reporting various bugs in a number of places. Here’s one example: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/168i21o/psa_major_bug_do_not_board_enemy_ships_to_capture/

And a bunch of people bringing up various things here: https://www.reddit.com/r/Starfield/comments/166vco5/starfield_bugsissues/

That’s precisely what I’m seeing with streams of the game. There’s so many bugs and just bizarre design decisions, especially with the opening hour or so, but the streamers then claim it’s a perfect game with no problems.

My concern is when I’m seeing streamers play games like Starfield and run into a ton of bugs, often game-breaking ones, but then go and praise the game to high heaven.

I just want a basement level of proper standards, that’s all I’m asking for.

I have more fun watching other people play it, discover new secrets, and talk about the lore than I ever would playing the game myself.

Though at this point, it looks like Trump will get the nomination with no real competition from DeSantis or anyone else, regardless of going to jail.

Trump fleeing and some states striking him from the ballot will enrage his supporters and make them not vote for who the actual nominee is.

I think the fleeing outcome harms the Republican chances more.

I mean, him running away to Russia would split Republicans even more. He’d still have his dedicated followers, but it would cause even more of a fight regarding DeSantis and others.

I’m trying to decide which would be more chaotically beneficial for the rest of us, him going to jail or fleeing.

I am very happy and ready to get another formulation once available. I’m up to date currently.

And I would like a new vaccine sooner rather than later. People at work are already starting to contract the new variant. I’m trying to limit my own exposure, but it’s difficult.

They know that there’s nothing meaningful to find from such an investigation, they were just demanding it because of the implication and because they can keep pushing conspiracy claims.

But an actual investigation to reveal the nothing is terrible for Republicans, because it cuts short the made up things they’ve been claiming.

Hence, their only option now is to try and discredit the very thing (and person) that they’ve been calling for.

If the reason for this is to prevent pedophilia content, then this will do nothing. People who access that sort of thing on the dark web aren’t going to be affected by this whatsoever.

If you read the linked thread, it’s because of the BBC’s increased bigotry toward LGBT+ people over the past few years.

I will stop using any websites that try to do that.

Like what? Bank websites don’t really use ads. And I don’t use LinkedIn.

Then I will stop browsing them? I stopped using Facebook, Twitter, and Reddit quite easily. I can do it with others if they’re going to go down this route.

I mean, I’m using Chrome right now, but if they actually implement this and my ad blocker stops working, I’m switching to Opera or something.

Do they really expect to not lose browser users with this move?

Yeah, I don’t get it either. I rather easily went through and deleted all of my posts and comments. It was quite freeing, really.

I also went through each sub that I moderated (solo, since I didn’t want to cause conflict with any co-mods or others) and both privated them and set them to NSFW. I did set the co-run ones to NSFW though and they haven’t been changed back yet, so I guess the others are okay with that.

And I have yet to receive any messages from admins telling me to change them back. I go and check my account every week or so. Nothing’s changed.

Also, it’s not like they don’t make the exact same argument even if the trans woman in question didn’t go through a male puberty and was on blockers and then hormones from their teenage years. All that does is force them to move the goalposts on their anti-trans arguments.