The following discussion is an archived record of a request for comment. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this discussion. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

As shown in the article, sources are divided between Minecraft and Tetris as to which should be considered the best-selling video game. The main problem is with Tetris definition. Many sources consider it a video game, but some also consider it a franchise. How should this be resolved? Kazama16 (talk) 07:32, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

• There's no options here for me to easily vote, but my pick is leave it as is (keep Minecraft as the top spot). The concern here is sparked from whether or not Tetris is a singular game or a game franchise. This is a debate that goes well beyond this list and is honestly something that probably the entire WikiProject Video games would need to discuss. Or at the very least, further consensus at Talk:Tetris (worth noting that a previous RfC seemed relatively divisive with no strong consensus even if the majority of votes went towards one side). To make the judgement of what Tetris is here would be to establish it all on our own and that's obviously inappropriate. Anyways, due to the contention behind the claim, it seems entirely reasonable to simply classify Minecraft as the best-selling game still. Unlike Tetris, we know for sure what the definition of Minecraft is, with no contention, and its sales are also from official financial reports from Microsoft. There are still reliable sources that classify Minecraft as the best-selling game of all time, too. Therefore, the way it is now is fine. λ NegativeMP1 16:36, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • With the recent consensus over at Talk:Tetris#RFC on How to Define Tetris concluding that it is a singular video game, we should reflect that. I will stay true to my words posted above on how a locally established consensus is inappropriate. Changing my vote to Include on list. λ NegativeMP1 17:12, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Tetris is clearly a game series of numerous games with mostly similar but not identical gameplay, especially when factoring in alternate modes, so I think Minecraft is the obvious best-selling singular game here. In a metaphor I made before, it would be like saying Call of Duty Modern Warfare is a single game because they were all realistic first-person games with guns. But there was already an RfC on this that didn't gain consensus, I don't see how this will gain consensus. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 22:49, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  The result of the RfC linked in the above comment disproves your opinion here. Tetris is not "clearly a game series." It is clearly a puzzle video game with spin-offs, according the the result of the RfC. pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more 15:14, 22 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

  That RfC you're talking about is entirely a joke. It went "Let's go with the sources with contentious information instead of using our minds!". Literally no one in that so called RfC did much analysis on their own. Like how the each Tetris release plays and differs. No and nothing. You think Tetris Effect and Tetris Game Boy are the same game? Even a kid can tell how significant the difference is. ~2026-41912-9 (talk) 21:37, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

• Include on list: You could probably guess what my view on this is. Despite the opinions of editors, among the sources, whether Tetris or Minecraft is the best-selling game is about 50/50. This has to be acknowledged in the article. We can't just unequivocally say Minecraft is the best-selling game as if it were uncontentious. Adding to that, I think that this is best resolved by leaving the paragraph the way it is, as I believe that it accurately grasps the contention among the sources, while also incorporating Tetris' aggregated figure into the chart itself. As I said before, I feel that the article, which would include the list as well, has to reflect the sources appropriately. I feel like this can be done in an uncontroversial manner by potentially adding it alongside Minecraft or with an asterisk next to it. Man-Man122 (talk) 12:34, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• Include on list: I appreciate the nuance of the subject handled in the introduction, but an introduction should be a summary of the list/article at-hand. Tetris needs to be listed in slot #1 on the list, with "Tetris: all versions", 520 million because that's the way the data is presented by reliable sources. Tetris needs to be included on the list, since it's a list of the most popular video games, and at 520 million, it can't be included anywhere except first.

Detailing the nuance in the intro, and supplying the caveat of "all versions" on the list gives due weight and neutrality to the contention and allows readers to determine for themselves if they would agree that Tetris beats out Minecraft on its technicalities. But failing to include Tetris on the list at all, considering the technicalities is a gross oversight, particularly considering the result of the RfC on this subject which defines Tetris as a video game, albeit a puzzle video game. But this list makes no distinction between genres of video games being compared. pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more

• Include on list, per Pickalittletalkalittle. I believe the aggregation of Tetris sales is just as fair as the aggregation of Minecraft sales, but even if not, the list is incomplete without including the title which is so well-discussed in the lead. Readers who prefer to discount Tetris can do so more easily if included than readers who would prefer to include it if it is discounted. — HTGS (talk) 03:54, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• As I argued in an earlier discussion, I don't think sources are that divided on the matter, so Minecraft should be kept in the top spot. However, I do also believe the current introduction of this article gives too much importance to games not on the list. Maybe something like a "Caveats" or "Disputes" section should be created below the list and we should go back to having the lead section be first a summary of the list like it was at the end of 2024 (with a short summary of the potential "Caveats" section at the end that mentions the dispute about Tetris). --Quand nous chanterons (talk) 12:39, 23 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]
• I'm being neutral on whether or not to include Tetris on list, if Tetris as a whole ends up being included in the list, the Game Boy version of Tetris should be removed on list as a result as it is a variant of Tetris so obviously it would be redundant. As a matter of fact, Tetris can be considered both a video game and a franchise per the official site. [1]: first paragraph introduces it as a video game then scrolling down a bit, it says "Maya Rogers is CEO of Tetris, one of the leading and most distinctive video game brands and franchises in the world". I think a note should be applied in this case. Kazama16 (talk) 18:21, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Opposing the inclusion of Tetris. Well, it is a video game but in a way a franchise too. Many sources don't seem to acknowledge this fact. They just publish what they saw on the internet with no own analysis, which is quite lazy to be honest. ~2026-61956 (talk) 00:53, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• I will always maintain that Tetris is much more of a series than it is a single game, which should exclude its overall sales figure from this list. If the consensus is ultimately to include Tetris, then it should have equal weight with Minecraft, given that reliable sources are split on the issue. Prefall 21:43, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]
• Tetris in no right way a single game. Sure there are variants but they are so much different from each other that they can be called different games. 40 years worth of distinct releases from like 1984 to present time collectively being a "video game" just don't fit right into my mind. So I'll suggest not including Tetris. Glockenspiel53 (talk) 06:56, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

By not making the claim. Polygnotus (talk) 08:35, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

How would we go about doing that, though? It's a ranked list, something has to be listed in the top spot.

In a previous discussion, I considered these as three potential options to address the issue:

1. Adhere to status quo. Give more weight to Minecraft, but acknowledge the Tetris dispute later in the lead. Do not include Tetris (or other disputed figures) on the list.
2. Change consensus on the inclusion of disputed figures on the list. This would allow Tetris and Minecraft to have equal weight in the lead. Tetris (and others) would be present on the list, but with some sort of marked format to highlight their disputed figures.
3. Change consensus on Tetris. If it's deemed a single game, then it could be given more weight than Minecraft and included on the list. The dispute among sources would still need to be mentioned in the lead, just in a different manner.

For context, the current local consensus is that Tetris's 520 million sales figure is for the franchise as a whole, rather than a single game (The Game Boy version of Tetris is still included on the list, with 35 million sales), and that disputed figures should not be included on the list itself (They are still acknowledged and explained in the lead). Prefall 09:28, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The entire discussion doesn't make sense. The article says Other sources, however, such as the BBC, Guinness World Records, and GamesRadar, consider the best-selling video game to be Minecraft, which has sold 350 million copies as of 2025,.

The opinion of Guinness World Records is of course irrelevant, they just write down what someone tells them, they don't fact check nor do they have access to sales numbers. And its not even their opinion, they have outsourced anything videogame related.

The BBC writes: But neither comes close to Super Mario as the best-selling franchise: it has sold more than 800 million games across its entire multi-game series. The second top franchise is retro puzzler Tetris, which has sold more than 520 million copies across its different variations since the 1980s.[2] That article is clearly based on a quick look on Wikipedia, see Citogenesis. And the fact probably comes from some underpaid intern who has to write copy for the website, not someone who actually checked. Also, counting copies sold is very complicated because people license a bunch of games and install them on 1m phones. Does that mean 1m copies sold? Or does it only count if I go to the shop and buy a physical product? It is impossible to get a real number during its 40+ year history, starting in the Soviet Union. The article explains how muddled and confusing the licensing was from the very start. Tetris#Spread_beyond_the_Soviet_Union_(1985–1988) And what if I update the game, make a fork, sell it under a different name or sell illegal copies. Does that count?

GamesRadar just republishes a claim they saw on the internet somewhere, and writes a quick blog post based upon a press release.

So none of those qualify as people who have actually done research to actually determine what the best selling video game was or is.

Because no one has a clue how many copies of Tetris were sold, as a game or as a franchise, the only option we have is to say we don't know. But we shouldn't pretend to know based on some incredibly weak source. Polygnotus (talk) 10:58, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Nearly all video game sales figures are driven by primary sources. There is no independent third party that has access to worldwide sales data, at least not on a broad scale. That's just the nature of the industry. The reliability of sales data is a different issue altogether.

We're just looking to settle whether or not Tetris should be considered a single game or a series. If it's a single game, then it is eligible for this list. If it's a series, then it is not eligible (List of best-selling video game franchises exists for series instead).

It's probably worth noting that the issue of how to classify Tetris recently plagued the Tetris article's FAC, which was withdrawn due to the dispute. There was also an RfC six months ago that attempted to settle this dispute, but it was met with mixed results. Prefall 11:24, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Exactly. That is why, in response to the question How should this be resolved? I responded with By not making the claim. On Wikipedia, if we have no reliable source, we just omit the information. In rare cases we do use WP:ABOUTSELF for statements like someones preferred pronouns, but we can't use ABOUTSELF in this case.. Polygnotus (talk) 11:43, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

We can say that the Tetris.com website made the claim, if you google site:Tetris.com "520 million" you'll find it does.[3] Polygnotus (talk) 13:20, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I get the logic here, but this is a ranked list. If we didn't include either Minecraft or Tetris on the list at all because of contention, then that would leave GTA V as the best selling game of all time. Which I am almost certain no reliable source has ever made that claim and would probably be original research in of itself. λ NegativeMP1 16:29, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@NegativeMP1 The list is a list of claims by video game publishers (which may or may not have been true at the point the statement was made). We can avoid repeating the claim in wikivoice. We can even add an {{efn}} to explain that is it not explicitly specified if its Tetris the game or Tetris the franchise. Polygnotus (talk) 16:40, 6 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I think a note would work here yeah. Timur9008 (talk) 09:22, 11 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Note: I notified WikiProject Video games of this discussion as it wasn't gaining much traction on its own. Prefall 13:43, 9 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Since this is somewhat related, I invite you all to participate in the RfC being held at Talk:Tetris#RFC on How to Define Tetris. Lazman321 (talk) 21:58, 16 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious why you didn't submit a vote to the Tetris RfC. pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more 19:05, 31 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Tetris is definitely a series, I don't care what anyone thinks otherwise. There have been sequels to this: Welltris, Hatris, and Faces...tris III. Kazama16 (talk) 06:56, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

That's your opinion on the matter, but not a solution to the question that you yourself asked. The problem at hand is that a healthy chunk of sources don't. Man-Man122 (talk) 18:52, 21 December 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It feels like this discussion is losing steam. Tetris RfC determined that Tetris is defined as a video game. Discussion here is that more votes agree Tetris should be included on the list, but a few editors engaged in the discussion portion question the validity of the sources being used to determine neutrality and accuracy of data. And then they disappear from the conversation.

Can we just put Tetris in the top spot of the list and keep the discussion in the lead explaining the controversy? Then the list is explained, and people coming to Wikipedia to reference top-selling video games have all the information they need to make their own educated opinion? pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more

Definitely not "few editors" trying to question the validity of Tetris sales and definition. Go into the archives of this talk page, and you will find even more editors doing the same. They haven't just participated or may not even be aware of this RfC. This is like a decade-long debate; it is not as simple as you might think. I would suggest waiting until this RfC is closed. Kazama16 (talk) 08:03, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Pinging some editors for this RfC: @Sergecross73 @Pokelego999 @Dissident93 @PresN @Rhain. Kazama16 (talk) 08:32, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In their defense, you did have people in this RfC just kinda drop in, say something, and leave without even voting for the past almost month. In this particular discussion, I'd say the "few editors" thing is pretty accurate, truth be told. Man-Man122 (talk) 15:24, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

That's fine (Thanks, @Man-Man122). Let's see what happens over the next while. I review the RfC discussion board when I hop on to edit, and this RfC has been open for nearly 30 days with minimal participation. I was trying to advocate for a close. But it's chill. The Tetris page has gone to RfC twice in the last year alone to determine definition of "video game" vs "franchise" vs "series," etc., and both times the RfCs closed as "video game." I don't remember details from before this year on that particular page.

At the end of the day, it's what do the sources say? And have we described them neutrally? I believe the combination of the details we have in the lead plus putting "Tetris" in the top spot resolves those questions. pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more 17:36, 1 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Putting Tetris in the top spot would be kinda problematic, as Minecraft is also considered the best-seller by sources. Kazama16 (talk) 19:06, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Wait, what if we rank both games 1st with a note attached explaining the division between sources. Although the lead already explain that. Kazama16 (talk) 19:10, 2 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

This is what I initially suggested many, many weeks ago, so I'd be amenable to this, in the event that putting Tetris on top prove to be too problematic. Man-Man122 (talk) 04:05, 4 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think this would work. Erring by not having Tetris on the list at all does not work, per WP:Neutral, WP:RS, WP:DUE, or WP:LEAD. pickalittletalkalittle^🐤🐤🐤talk a lot pick a little more 15:34, 5 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I think no matter the outcome, there should be a note on the “first place” listing. — HTGS (talk) 03:08, 6 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I don’t wish to be hasty, but it’s been ten days since you pinged those other editors and none of them showed up, it’s been a week since the last actual vote, and the RfC is already over a month old. I think it’s nearing its conclusion Man-Man122 (talk) 18:08, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Oh man, I'm honestly tired of this. I assume they didn't vote because they find this case too complex to even have a clear conclusion on what to do. In addition to those editors I had pinged, four other editors that were part of discussion in this RfC including @Prefall @Lazman321 @Timur9008 and @Polygnotus haven't voted in the survey either (at the time of writing). I wonder why. Kazama16 (talk) 20:33, 10 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the discussion as of right now is essentially frozen and the voting even more so. In my view, a consensus has emerged (4-1-2, with MANY abstentions) to include Tetris’ aggregated figure on the list. If you still wish to keep it open, that’s perfectly understandable, but I’m just sharing my thoughts on the matter. Man-Man122 (talk) 18:07, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In addition to Prefall. Now it's (4-2-2). Assuming it was a neutral vote. Don't get me wrong but I think the idea of include on list basically came because of the recent RfC held on the Tetris talk page. With votes saying it is a video game. Doesn't change the fact that it can still be argued for its definition regardless. It can be logically considered a franchise, a genre, or a concept and there are sources out there saying it to be, although not that many. I wouldn't deny the fact that Minecraft is a franchise too but you know why there is no contention for it? Because it's completely transparent the sales are about a singular game, which isn't the case for Tetris at all. If we prioritize quality over quantity and logic over regulation, Minecraft edges over it. (Also I won't be closing this RfC cause I'm having second thoughts about this; instead, an administrator will do it. Usually they do it.). Kazama16 (talk) 09:33, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You can have your thoughts on the issue, but the fact of the matter is that reliable sources are legitimately split on whether Tetris or Minecraft is the best selling game. That just is the case. As you said, there are many sources describing Tetris in a variety of ways, but most tend to lean towards calling a single game with variants. We are prioritizing what the sources are saying, that’s the crux of what Wikipedia is. I’m not sure what having second thoughts would change if it just ends up closed either way, but take your time. I appreciate that you started the RfC to begin with. (Also on a personal note, I don’t think I necessarily agree with your point about the sales. Last I checked, the sales figures for Minecraft aren’t broken down by version, and frankly, I see just as many differences, if not more, in a current Bedrock edition game of survival mode compared to 2014-ish console editions than I see in a game of marathon in Tetris on the GB compared to marathon in Tetris 99 or Elements. But that’s just nitpicking, though.) Man-Man122 (talk) 18:16, 15 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Tetris games or versions whatever they are, have more differences comparison to Minecraft versions. Let's suppose you take a survey on the road showing gameplay of Tetris Effect and any older Tetris version from the 80s and asking strangers if they are the same exact game. I guarantee they would say no or may even laugh at you for finding that question obvious and ridiculous. ~2026-41912-9 (talk) 21:56, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Your input is appreciated, but the RfC on how to define the game already ended with a consensus. This talk page isn't the place to debate that matter further. λ NegativeMP1 21:58, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know. So what? Isn't this a place to discuss something. I was just sharing my thoughts. That's how discussions work right? ~2026-41912-9 (talk) 22:02, 19 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've come back again to request that you close this RfC, as another week has passed without a vote. After nearly two months of discussion, much longer than you generally should keep an RfC open, a consensus has emerged and has remained unchanged. The last non-neutral vote was over twenty days ago. There is just no point in keeping this open any longer, to put it plainly. Man-Man122 (talk) 17:15, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I already said I won't close this RfC, an administrator would close this RfC with a more sensible decision. Survey alone won't determine the consensus but discussion also. Be patient. Good things take time. See GTA 6 for example. Kazama16 (talk) 23:17, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I've abstained to this point because I don't really mind either way, even though I have my preference. I agree that if Tetris is added to the list, we should rowspan the "1" rank between Tetris and Minecraft with a note. Prefall 21:46, 11 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't vote because this topic is confusing to me. But like Prefall I don't mind either way. Timur9008 (talk) 07:13, 23 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Here's my take: the RfC on the Tetris talk page concluded that Tetris is a video game, and that consensus should be respected. However, the primary source for the claimed 520 million sales originates from the official website's about us and by the numbers pages, and in-context, it is very unclear what versions are being included in the sales figure. All the website says is "Over 520 million units of Tetris have been sold worldwide". The question of what versions are included is important because while many versions could reasonably just be considered "variants" of the same game, some are harder to justify. Is it including Welltris? Tetris 2 + Bombliss? Tetrisphere? Puyo Puyo Tetris? Their gameplay are so different, they might as well be different games. Are they included in the sales figure? This ambiguity put the reliability of the sales figure under question. It's not enough for me to opposes its inclusion, but it is enough for me to abstain from voting. Lazman321 (talk) 18:06, 20 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

As far as I'm aware, 425 million of those come from mobile versions. What more surprising is that if we look at the history of Tetris sales. The figure 125 million was presented back in 2009. [4] Then it suddenly skyrocketed to more than 425 million in 2014. [5] Quite literally incredible. Kazama16 (talk) 13:52, 25 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

It is Tetris, after all. Man-Man122 (talk) 09:03, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Which Tetris, though? There are like hundreds of different versions. Or do you like the game concept in general? Anyways, as per my knowledge, I thought Tetris' popularity peaked from the 1980s to the 1990s, in which era the Game Boy console launched. The claim that its sales increased by more than 300 million in just 5 years (from 2009 to 2014), when it wasn't a new thing to be attention-grabbing, sounds fascinating. The price 10 dollars of the mobile version might be the most important factor in this case. [6] Kazama16 (talk) 15:20, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

In that statement, I was referring moreso to Tetris as a whole. Personally, I like the Gameboy version and Elements the most. I’m not sure Tetris is something that ‘peaks’ in the traditional sense, but to put those stats into context, this was a pivotal era for mobile gaming as a whole, as the adoption of smartphones became much more widespread. Before this, mobile phones that could properly play games were present, but still pretty niche and in their infancy, but after the release of the first iPhone, I’d say this is when they start to become an “essential non-essential”, for lack of a better phrase. With Tetris already being a household name, all while being available for purchase at an affordable price on just about every one of them, it’s no wonder it did those numbers. It’s staggering, but not terribly surprising, all things considered. Man-Man122 (talk) 19:22, 26 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I intended initially to have an editor or an administrator come and close this RfC. It was then where I learned that, in the case of discussions that are extremely old and with a clear consensus/outcome, closures are nothing but a formality and that one could feel free to "just go ahead and implement the decision". I intend to do as much, just giving a heads up. Man-Man122 (talk) 19:24, 31 January 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I'm really sorry, but I feel you are exaggerating one side you prefer and ignoring other arguments presented. There is no clear consensus. Taking all survey votes and discussion into account. The result will surely be mixed. Let an expert do the work, and you just chill bro. This RfC would have been closed long ago if the consensus were crystal clear. The fact that it is not is why this RfC is still open. Kazama16 (talk) 08:24, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Listen. Generally speaking, the longest an RfC should really be open is about 30 days. We’re almost at the two month mark. The discussion is essentially dead in the dirt and, not counting non-editors, the votes have remained largely stagnant. And, for the most part, you’ve been actively delaying this closure. That’s why it’s been open this long. The result is obvious (4-2 with a couple of ambivalent/content neutrals) and this RfC has been open for far too long. Man-Man122 (talk) 08:52, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Why are you accusing me of all this? If you missed what I said then I repeat that the closure of this RfC doesn't depend on me and consensus is not transparent. You are creating your own rules own methodology for the consensus that you want this RfC to be achieved. That's not how it works. You can request an administrator for the closure of this RfC, but don't blame me. Blaming me is not a part of this RfC. Kazama16 (talk) 11:10, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Re-reading the whole RfC, I do not see a consensus either. In the survey, barring the vote of two users whose vote is their one and only edit, 4 (you -@Man-Man122 -, NegativeMP1, pickalittletalkalittle and HTGS) voted to include, 3 (ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ, Prefall - "Tetris is much more of a series than it is a single game, which should exclude its overall sales figure from this list" - and me) voted against. Kazama16 voted neutral but is against you closing this RfC and would like we wait for a third party to do it.

In the discussion, three other editors expressed an opinion: Polygnotus said we should not claim that Wikipedia knows how many copies Tetris sold "because no one has a clue how many copies of Tetris were sold, as a game or as a franchise [...] We shouldn't pretend to know based on some incredibly weak source" but also questioned the reliability of this entire list, Timur9008 isn't sure but "don't mind either way" and Lazman321 agreed with arguments from both sides so abstained from voting.

Most editors in the RfC agreed however that the way the article presents this situation should be reworked, be it by rewriting parts of the Lead or adding a note on the number one ranked game.

By the way, reading the RfC on How to Define Tetris, I don't think its result is that useful for this RfC: it wasn't about defining if Tetris is a singular game or a series but about how Wikipedia should define it in the first sentence of its article. Out of the 8 editors voting "Option 1", at least three justified their vote by saying Tetris was first a game, then became a series and that the first sentence should not confuse the reader (an opinion I agree with). This does not mean we should consider Tetris to be a singular video game and not a series in all circumstances. Accordingly, the first parapragh of the Tetris article currently calls Tetris "a video game" in its first sentence and "a video game series" in its last.

For reference, the Encyclopedia Britannica article also begins by calling it a "video game" before saying it created a "franchise" with "numerous sequels". And in their latest press release, when citing the "520 millions sold" figure, The Tetris Company defines Tetris as a "brand" and a "franchise" ("The Tetris® brand is one of the leading and most distinctive video game brands and franchises in the world. Created in 1984, the brand continues to be loved globally by people of all ages and all cultures. Billions of Tetris games are played online every year, and over 520 million units have been sold worldwide.").

@Kazama16 regarding your earlier question about how Tetris sales inflated so much on mobile phones, Oscar Lemaire, one of France most reputed video game journalists, explained in 2017 in Gamekult that "It is possible, and even probable, that this [425 millions Tetris games sold on phones figure] includes the versions of Tetris that existed before the widespread adoption of smartphones, back in the days of black and white mobile phones where you had to send codes to a premium-rate number to get basic games that offered a welcome change from the endless rounds of Snake."

On a related note, Oscar Lemaire uses the same logic in this article to disregard the sales of Minecraft on phones (i.e mobile versions of Minecraft have sales that are also artificially inflated plus they are too different from console versions to be considered the same game) and if we followed him, Wikipedia should conclude that GTA V is in fact the best selling game of all time 🫠 (he did not conclude that himself but only because, at this point, GTA V had only sold 80 million copies). Quand nous chanterons (talk) 11:14, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m afraid I interpret it differently. The way I see it, there are 4 proper votes in favor, two proper against, and two neutrals. Counting Prefall’s vote as one against is strange, especially considering that they said they “don’t really mind either way”. That aside, the discussion is filled with people dropping a couple of words with no vote. Even taking that into account, there’s more confusion there than editors actually ardently being against it. The only reason I brought this back up is because, when I was going to get an administrator, I saw the disclaimer on the closure page saying that the changes should be enacted instead of making an administrator close it in the case where the result is obvious and the RfC is old (in this case, incredibly so). I was under the impression that 4-2 in a dead discussion and practically no more voting after nearly two months would fall under that definition.

If editing in line with what the disclaimer says is too controversial, then I have no problem getting an administrator, if that’s what’s preferred. Man-Man122 (talk) 13:13, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You went out of your way to specifically tell me that you weren’t having the RfC closed based on “having second thoughts”. You put the blame on yourself quite some time ago. I’m not making rules up. I went to the request for closure page to get an administrator to close it, and one of the first disclaimers there is explicitly to not ask for an administrator if the result is obvious and to just do it yourself. Man-Man122 (talk) 12:46, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Nevermind, might have been a misunderstanding. I have mentioned the word "administrator" multiple times whenever you talk about the closure of this RfC. Because administrators usually make more sensible and neutral decisions compared to regular editors, who may make decision based on their own bias. RfCs can take over multiple months for proper consensus about very very controversial topics, so it's a normal thing. Also, what I mean by making your own rules is that you are not counting the votes of the other two people who opposed the inclusion of Tetris just because they don't fit in your category of "editors", making it a 4-4 not 4-2. This RfC is open publicly so anyone can vote whether they are regular editors or not and their votes are acceptable. For reference there are RfCs that lasted more than a month for proper consensus for example see this one. Opened in April and closed in June, lasting two months. Kazama16 (talk) 21:22, 1 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

An RfC is editors who edit, not for random accounts with no edits to chime in. Not a made up rule. Wikipedia makes it clear that RfC’s are for editors. Just because you found an RfC that lasted two months doesn’t they’re all supposed to. That’s the exception, not the rule. They’re not supposed to go on this long. Man-Man122 (talk) 10:33, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You just be missing anything I'm saying or misunderstanding it or even taking it in the wrong context. See WP:UCS. Kazama16 (talk) 12:16, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

You accused me of making up rules. I pointed out that you were wrong. Putting this bickering aside, I’m going to restate my view that it’s time for this to close. Not too long from now, I’ll submit this on the request for closure board for someone to review. If you feel the same, feel free to do it before me. If not, we’ll see what happens.

See WP:RFC Man-Man122 (talk) 13:03, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

"See WP:RFC"? That wasn't necessary 😭😭😭 Kazama16 (talk) 16:36, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Just thought you needed a refresher on how an RfC works and the rules around it, based on the previous discussion (I just realized that this could come off as snarky, but I meant it unironically and honestly)Man-Man122 (talk) 18:44, 2 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RFCRESPOND says that all editors can participate. If “votes” are to be discounted, it should primarily be on the basis of a lack of substance in their participation. Remember the process is a discussion, not a vote, which is why many editors will use “!vote” as a shorthand for “non-vote”. (See WP:!VOTE) — HTGS (talk) 19:22, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I’m aware that all editors can vote, and excuse me if I’m parsing words here, but are they editors if they’ve never edited anything on any article? This RfC are their sole contributions to this site as a whole. Man-Man122 (talk) 21:15, 3 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

Again, it is not a vote. If a closer decides to value their opinion less, I would hope it wouldn’t be merely on the basis of their edit history, but would be primarily on the substance of their comments—the rationale, the sourcing, and the coherence of their logic within the rules and guidelines. There are no rules on this though, as far as I know. Primarily because—say it with me—the process is not a vote.

(You might find precedent within the discussions of past closure reviews—the equivalent of reading appellate court opinions—but I wouldn’t waste my time if I were you, given that you aren’t closing this discussion.) — HTGS (talk) 22:21, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]

I know it’s not a vote, but the vote still matters. These two things can be true at the same time. That’s the reason I was pointing it out. I appreciate your thoughts on the matter. Man-Man122 (talk) 23:31, 4 February 2026 (UTC)[reply]