Select Page

User talk:Sergecross73

Vandalism part 36

Serge's 36th iteration of his own personal WP:AIV and WP:RFPP. Feel free to report anything you feel may need admin intervention. Sergecross73 msg me 16:50, 29 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A barnstar for you!

The Original Barnstar
For helping out in the Mario Kart 7 article. Thank you. TzarN64 (talk) 02:16, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
No problem, It's been on my watchlist for years. I didn't write much of it, but I've maintained it over the years. Sergecross73 msg me 12:54, 1 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

A Filet-O-Fish for you!

🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 19:04, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Haha, that's a new one. Thank you. Sergecross73 msg me 19:05, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
You're welcome. 🗽Freedoxm🗽(talk · contribs) 19:06, 2 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Donkey Kong discussion

I hope you've been tracking the discussion over on the Mario (franchise) page. Either way, I must admit I am getting very frustrated with my inability to convince people the article should say Donkey Kong is the first Mario game. Is there any advice you have on how I can change this trend? I feel like I'm on the edge of a breakthrough. Mk8mlyb (talk) 04:59, 3 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I've been watching. I've got 2 recommendations.
  1. First and foremost, I think you should drop it. It's been going on for 2 months and you haven't convinced anyone. Its a huge time sink with very little payoff. It simply doesn't matter much. I think you should be spending your time on more constructive, important things.
  2. If you absolutely feel the need to continue this, then you need to change your approach. This constant stream of wall-of-text responses are obviously not working.
  • Re-review your sources. I've skimmed some, and to me, it doesn't appear they're making the same assertion you claim they are. And I fear you made too many weak proposals and now they're not taking your future proposals seriously.
  • Trim out the weak sources and identify the the strongest ones. Make sure they're ones outlined at WP:VG/S or WP:RSP as usable/reliable. Focus on ones that very directly say "(X) is part of the (Y) series". Remove the ones where you have add your own explanation to explain why they say what they say. If the source is clear, you won't need to explain it.
  • Read up on how to create a valid, strong WP:RFC, and should you decide to do one, when you add your stance to it, include the strong sources you've singled out. Sergecross73 msg me 13:20, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I did check my sources, and almost all of them are WP:VG/S-approved sources. I did lots of painstaking research and specifically picked which sources directly stated Donkey Kong is part of the Mario series and double-checked to make sure they directly stated my case. Can you explain to me which sources you don't think state my case? I realize I need to understand policy better, but I feel like I've done my best to create a valid argument with reliable sources. Mk8mlyb (talk) 18:45, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sure, we can discuss some that have perplexed me. For example, you presented https://www.ign.com/articles/2008/07/31/the-other-mario-games-vol-1 and I do not understand why. It simply lists off Donkey Kong as a game that features the character Mario, a fact no one disputes. It absolutely does not directly state that Donkey Kong started off the franchise. Its my belief that examples like this are actually weakening your argument. Sergecross73 msg me 19:14, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I thought that source was viable because it mentions Mario starring in "a few clunkers and bizarre off-shoots since his debut in 1981 as Jumpman", thus implying that they were considering the Mario series to have started with Donkey Kong, but if you don't see it that way, I can understand that. However, I do believe Time, Invisible Culture, VG247, GameSpot, Game Revolution, Screen Rant, and Radio Times are good sources to use for my case. What do you think? Mk8mlyb (talk) 04:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Like I said, if it were me, I'd use only sources that say it very directly, and only ones listed as 100% reliable at WP:VG/S or WP:RSP. Not because it's required, but because it would make a more impactful argument in something that's been heavily disputed. Sergecross73 msg me 11:00, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Do you know how to make a sandbox page? Mk8mlyb (talk) 17:23, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, everyone one has an default one. For example, mine is at User:Sergecross73/sandbox. Yours would be at User:Mk8mlyb/sandbox. You can make as many as you want, as long as you're using them for a constructive purpose. You just make up the title after your user name. For example, if a sequel to Super Mario Odyssey was announced, but I wasn't sure if it was ready to have its own article, I could create a draft for myself at User:Sergecross73/Super Mario Odyssey 2. Sergecross73 msg me 17:35, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
All right, I've written up a rough draft of an RfC here. How does it look? Also, are there any other sources you want to express doubt over? Mk8mlyb (talk) 07:16, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll add some recommended tweaks in formatting and structure. You don't have to use them, feel free to revert or not use anything I suggest. Sergecross73 msg me 12:57, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
If I held your stance, and felt the need to run an RFC on this, I'd propose it like this. Of course, you can still see your version in the page history.
Some thoughts:
  • I modeled it after this common RFC format.
  • The question section should just be basic question needing answering, along with a series of clearly defined answers.
  • There should be a "Survey" section where people just give their basic stance with a brief explanation. That's where you write in your personal stance in the argument.
  • There should be a separate "Discussion" section. Generally that's where all the longer and back-and-forth messages go, so it doesn't distract from the question.
I cut down your version drastically. You'd probably okay going into a little more detail in the "Discussion" section than I did, but I think its important that you don't get caught again in all these monologues about Smash Bros or Luigi's Mansion and all these other tangents. Its these sorts of wall of text responses that make people tune out and stop listening to you. Don't get stuck in that cycle again. But if you must get into it, keep it in the discussion section.
But again, that's just what I would do. You don't need follow my advice, you're free to approach it how you want. Good luck. Sergecross73 msg me 18:23, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
So in simple terms, the long comments are actually hurting my cause instead of helping it. Mk8mlyb (talk) 19:03, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
That is my opinion on the matter, yes. Also, FYI, I removed that part because RFC's are shown at alternate places, like the RFC hub itself, so it'll be seen by many people who are not, in fact, following all the arguing, nor have they ever read the Mario (franchise) article at all. In short, you're not just speaking to the talk page anymore if you launch it as an RFC. Sergecross73 msg me 19:29, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS Vita Unit Sales

Thank you for the other day. According to Microsoft, PS Vita sales are 17 million units. (https://cdn.arstechnica.net/wp-content/uploads/2022/10/MS-Position-for-Publication-FINAL.pdf) A former Sony employee also mentioned this figure in 2021. (https://www.reddit.com/r/vita/comments/mmrz7p/i_am_a_former_sony_employee_ama/?utm_source=embedv2&utm_medium=post_embed&utm_content=post_body) I'd like to believe that this figure is reliable enough. More importantly, it's great that PS Vita has sold 6.9 million units since fiscal year 2015! Hooray! 240D:F:2074:4B00:79E9:1AE4:2C4A:89BF (talk) 09:29, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I don't see "Vita" or 17 million" in your Arstechnica source, so I'm not following where you're getting that from. The edit summary seemed to suggest WP:OR/WP:SYNTH issues again. Reddit posts aren't going to work either, due to WP:USERG.
I get it, I'd like to get more concrete Vita figures too, but we've been stuck at 10-15 million for years now, because Sony stopped announcing official figures, and Wikipedia policy prevents us from using any of these estimates that require tons of math, forum posts, etc. Sergecross73 msg me 12:59, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. There's now more explanation about the 17 million units mentioned earlier. Microsoft said that PS sales in 2021 would be 151.4 million units, but PS4 sales were 117.1 million units and PS5 sales were 17.3 million units at that time. If you subtract that, you're left with 17 million units. I thought that was the figure for the Vita. Sorry if I'm wrong. Certainly, 17 million units seems like too many...Sony itself stopped publishing Vita sales figures in July 2012, and continued to publish figures for the PSP and other consoles until March 2015. At this point, the total number of PSPs and Vitas was 92.6 million. In fact, Sony had already announced that the PSPs were 80 million at this time. If you subtract that, the Vitas would be 12.6 million. If that's the case, there's no need to do that kind of calculation. 240D:F:2074:4B00:C407:68CF:5C7B:8F1C (talk) 13:54, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yeah, unfortunately, we, as Wikipedia editors, cannot be doing "calculating" like this, or we fall afoul of WP:SYNTH. We need a reliable source that states/estimates figures outright. Very literal stuff like "Vita sale were (number)." Sergecross73 msg me 13:56, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm going to sleep now. Thank you. It's 23:04 in Japan now. I'll give you more details tomorrow. (It's fine if it's just for reference.) 240D:F:2074:4B00:C407:68CF:5C7B:8F1C (talk) 14:05, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds good. I'll be around, and I've kept an eye on the Vita page for many years now. Sergecross73 msg me 14:09, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'll let you know the detailed sales figures for Vita at around 0:00 tomorrow UTC. Please use it as a reference. (Please sleep to stay healthy.) 240D:F:2074:4B00:C407:68CF:5C7B:8F1C (talk) 14:12, 5 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

PS Vita and PS TV sales figures

240D:F:2074:4B00:5C15:79DD:273:407 (talk) 00:53, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, there's a lot here. I'll try to review it tomorrow and see what can be implemented into the article. Sergecross73 msg me 02:10, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
As of February 2014, 60% of all PS4 owners also own a PS Vita. (https://www.gamedeveloper.com/business/around-60-of-ps4-owners-also-have-a-ps-vita)240D:F:2074:4B00:5C15:79DD:273:407 (talk) 02:22, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
At this point it was around 7.5 million.240D:F:2074:4B00:5C15:79DD:273:407 (talk) 02:25, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Was it you who added the 14.1 million estimated sales for the Vita too? That was a good find, I had not seen that one before. I'm torn if it should replace the 10-15 or change it to something like 14-15. Sergecross73 msg me 15:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's right. I included it because you discovered the numbers on the Vita talk page a year ago.240D:F:2074:4B00:23:2BEF:738D:C51F (talk) 08:42, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
There is also a theory that the Vita's sales volume fell short of that of the Wii U. However, I noticed that the 11.2 million to 12.3 million units mentioned earlier were sell-throughs, not sell-ins. When the PS4's sell-through was 106 million, the sell-in was 109 million. Using this as a reference, 97% of the sell-in reached consumers. If we use this for the Vita, the sell-in would probably be 11.5 million to 12.6 million. However, since 2015, most Vitas have not reached consumers overseas. According to the official website, there are currently over 2.5 million PSPs in stock. Given this, it is not unreasonable to think that the Vita has exceeded 15 million units. 240D:F:2074:4B00:23:2BEF:738D:C51F (talk) 08:53, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, whoa, you're right, it was actually me who found that source, back in 2023. Totally forgot about that. I wrote a lot of the article in the mid-late 2010s, I haven't written much of it in recent years, so I guess I never got around to adding it.
Your sources and calculations are definitely an interesting read, but unfortunately, I don't think a lot of it is directly usable, due to our WP:OR and WP:SYNTH rules. That aside, at least it helps understand that the estimates from reliable sources/analysts are likely in line with sales.
The part about PS4/Vita attach rates is interesting, that could probably be added in there somewhere. Sergecross73 msg me 12:55, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! That's right! I've been calculating sales figures for years. In 2013 analysts estimated that the PS Vita sold 4.2 million units. (https://www.playstationlifestyle.net/2014/01/23/analyst-ps-vita-sold-4-2-million-units-in-2013/) As I said, there were other estimates as high as 7.5 million.240D:F:2074:4B00:64E1:AC19:DB30:1B0F (talk) 22:00, 7 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Administrators' newsletter – May 2025

News and updates for administrators from the past month (April 2025).

Administrator changes

added Rusalkii
readded NaomiAmethyst (overlooked last month)
removed

Interface administrator changes

removed Galobtter

Guideline and policy news

Miscellaneous

Sent by MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 15:02, 6 May 2025 (UTC)[reply]