Wikipedia talk:Manual of Style/Video games

Review score phrasing

Per a discussion on the talk page recently at Template talk:Video game reviews (as well as past conversations of in 2015, here in 2016, and here in 2023, the idea of converting numeric ratings into one overall score has been deemed to be failing WP:STICKTOSOURCE.

Per the above, I'd like to adjust the phrase "Convert star ratings and other number-based scores to the equivalent numerals without changing the scale or the score itself (e.g. use "3/5" for a score printed as , but do not convert it to a ten-point scale such as "6/10")." to "Convert star ratings to the equivalent numerals without changing the scale or the score itself (e.g. use "3/5" for a score printed as , but do not convert it to a ten-point scale such as "6/10")." losing the "and other number-based scores" to not cause any confusion. Any thoughts? Andrzejbanas (talk) 17:51, 9 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that you've been changing the star ratings into numerical ratings. I tried to glance at past discussions, and it seemed to be widely agreed upon that the 10-star ratings should be converted to numbers due to fact that 10 stars widens the infobox, and thus it's a formatting problem.
But, I can't find a widespread agreement on not using the 5-star images. I do notice in the guidelines, that it suggests to convert ALL star ratings (and not just the 10-star ones); however, I can't find the discussions that came to this conclusion.
Personally, I don't see the big deal tbh. 5 stars conveys the same message as 5/5, without it messing up the infobox. And, having the 5-star images accurately reflects the review scores (we are still using percentage scores, point-based scores, and numerical scores after all). Unless I'm overlooking some sort of formatting-based issue? Xanarki (talk) 22:23, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
The template documentation and MoS guidelines on avoiding {{rating}} came from this 2023 discussion. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:38, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! I must've misread the initial options. Xanarki (talk) 23:13, 14 September 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestion for cover art

Given that many many games no longer are released with packaging and digitally instead, and particularly with cross platform games on consoles, a common cover image provided from the devs or publishiers are more squarish than portrait or landscape, even if other versions are offered. I would suggest that if there are multiple cover options for games released primarily in a digital format, square-ish aspect ratio art is preferred over other formats (though editors shouldnt crop to bring art to square, it needs to be offered directly). Eg: a good comparison is the various different covers offered for Keeper here, and the square one appears visually hte best to fit into infoboxes without pushing them down too far on the page, as well as the most details at reduced size. Masem (t) 16:11, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, but 4:3 portrait should still be preferred first if available. It's the aspect ratio used by most older games, as well as biographies, films, books, etc. In the case of Keeper, square seems most appropriate. TarkusABtalk/contrib 17:55, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm mostly talking games that will lack a physical release, or that may get a physical release far down the road. Games that still release to physical media (like most console games), yes, the printed cover art should be used that includes the console branding if exclusive. But most games don't have physical releases any more or aren't exclusive, so there's no branding to worry about, and instead we can go with an image that is better suited to page layouts. Masem (t) 22:54, 19 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I'm saying that no matter the release format, digital or not, 4:3 portrait key art (when available) should be preferred first over square. Square would be second best. TarkusABtalk/contrib 19:16, 20 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I've replaced square/smaller images with the portaited library ones from SteamDB (fantastic resource for cover art BTW) in the past as they tended to match older games better. But I see the logic in making them square/4:3/landscaped, as less scrolling improves readability on mobile devices. — Dissident93 (talk) 00:50, 23 October 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Proposal for sales section-specific advice

It may be helpful to establish a guideline that clarifies how ranking charts, tables, and lists (particularly those produced from estimates by market analysts such as Circana and others) can be used in the sales section of video game articles.

Ranking charts are primary sources and should generally not be interpreted by Wiki users beyond what the charts explicitly state, as they may be non-exhaustive and limited (e.g., exclusion of games).

  • For example, interpretations often take the form of "[Video game] was the second best-selling game of January 2026 in the United States."
  • Similarly, it would be also be inappropiate to attribute interpretations to analysts if they did not explicitly make those conclusions: "According to [Analyst], [Video game] was the second best-selling game of January 2026 in the United States."

However, it may be appropriate to present a game's relative position in the context of the chart.

  • As an example, "[Video game] placed second on a Circana ranking of best-selling games in the United States for January 2026."

--Cold Season (talk) 11:49, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

allikas: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia_talk:Manual_of_Style/Video_games