Fandom

Saints Row Wiki

Pre-release information

Forum page | Redirected to Forum:Pre-release information from User blog:452/Pre-release information

Ad blocker interference detected!


Wikia is a free-to-use site that makes money from advertising. We have a modified experience for viewers using ad blockers

Wikia is not accessible if you’ve made further modifications. Remove the custom ad blocker rule(s) and the page will load as expected.

Forum Index > Saints Row Wiki > Pre-release information
Posted by 452 on 2015-11-30 15:57:32

Since September 2011, {{upcoming}} has been used to mark pre-release information in articles. The purpose of the template is to improve the reliability of the wiki by marking what is known to be unconfirmed.

One thing the template doesn't say, but is often assumed to say, is that "the game comes out in the future". That is not the purpose of this template.

Every now and then, a well meaning user removes {{upcoming}} from an article, using the edit summary "This game is already out".

While I've continually updated the wording of the template in an effort to avoid this, it still happens, so I'm going to explain the purpose of the template, in detail.

edit: To further attempt to avoid the removal of the template, it has now been renamed to {{unconfirmed}}.

Here is the current version of the template:

Ui act question This article contains some unconfirmed information regarding [game-name-here].
  • Pre-release information from developers is often inaccurate or misleading.
  • Some facts on this page may be incomplete or outdated.
  • Verify everything and add proof, such as references and screenshots.
  • Always check sources of information. Ask questions on the talk page.
  • Remove this header once you have verified everything is correct.
UI N-A

It's kinda long. It used to be shorter, but people were using the existence of the template as evidence that the wiki was unreliable: the opposite of the purpose.

As explained in the template text itself, the purpose is to say "some information has not been confirmed.", and to place that origin of that information squarely on the source: pre-release statements by the developers.

This template, like many things on this wiki, is a response to the claim that the Saints Row Wiki is unreliable and contains false information. Despite the fact that anyone can correct false information, some people would rather complain than just fix it. It would take less time to fix it than to complain about it, but some people just want attention, and they get more attention making a post on an unrelated forum instead of quietly fixing it. (On the occasion when these people do choose to fix it, they still choose to be attention-seekers by using an edit summary like "This is complete bullshit!" instead of "correcting false information".)

Highlighting the information which is known to be unconfirmed raises the over-all reliability of the Saints Row Wiki. So, when complainers complain about things they should fix themselves, they look like idiots since the article already says there are unconfirmed things in the article. And complaining that "The Saints Row Wiki contains information marked as unconfirmed, they suck" is nonsensical.

The intent is that, post-release, people will verify and update all of the information in the article. The problem is that some people try to remove {{upcoming}} without updating information.

One of the other ways this wiki combats the accusations of unreliability is references. A reference tells the reader "We didn't make this up, here's the source of the information". They're not required in all cases, but given the volume of pre-release information, and the statistical likely hood of some of it being bullshit from an uninformed mouthpiece, all pre-release information now requires a reference. Before Saints Row: The Third, we tried simply marking new information with [citation needed], but by the time Saints Row IV was announced, there was still unsourced pre-release information about SRTT, so the policy was updated to immediately remove anything which did not cite the source.

In general, when an editor adds information, they are assumed to have confirmed the information themselves, so second-hand information should always have a reference.

Case study
Without the {{unconfirmed}} template or references.
  • Jim Boone repeatedly claimed in pre-release videos that there is a "cover system" in Saints Row IV.
  • An editor adds "There is a cover system in Saints Row IV" to the Saints Row IV or Combat articles.
  • A reader sees "There is a cover system in Saints Row IV", and whinges on his favourite forum that "The Saints Row Wiki says there is a "There is a cover system in Saints Row IV", those people are full of shit, you can't trust anything on a wiki."

Thanks a lot, Jim Boone.

(Of course, smart people know that "The Saints Row Wiki" doesn't say anything, it records things that other people have said, and which can be corrected by anyone if they notice something is false.)

With the {{unconfirmed}} template or references.
  • Jim Boone repeatedly claimed in pre-release videos that there is a "cover system" in Saints Row IV.
  • An editor adds "There is a cover system in Saints Row IV" to the Saints Row IV or Combat articles, with a reference to the videos in which Jim Boone explicitly stated that "There is a "cover system" in Saints Row IV", and places {{unconfirmed}} at the top of the article.
  • A reader sees "There is a cover system in Saints Row IV", notices {{unconfirmed}}, checks out the reference, and whinges on his favourite forum that "Jim Boone says there is a "There is a cover system in Saints Row IV", he's full of shit, you can't trust anything Jim Boone says.

After the game is released, editors can later update the information with "Jim Boone claimed that there is a "cover system" in Saints Row IV*, but there is not.", and remove {{unconfirmed}}.

In conclusion, Jim Boone is not a reliable source, and using him as a source makes the wiki look unreliable, so if you're adding information which you didn't confirm yourself, always cite your source, or you will be the one who is unreliable.

452, 2015-11-30T15:57:32Z (last edited: 452, 2016-05-08T08:57:43Z)

In addition to pre-release developer statements being false, there's also third-party pre-release statements to deal with.
Around a quarter of the way through the story, a mercenary unit called STAG (Special Tactical Anti-Gang unit)
IGN - Fucked Up Fridays: STAG Films in Saints Row 3

IGN called it "Fucked Up Fridays", so I guess they lived up to their name by fucking up.
Unfortunately, we're still using that page as a reference because it's the earliest known source for the expanded name of STAG.
Reference replaced.
452, 2016-08-20T07:01:32Z (last edited: 452, 2016-08-20T07:15:09Z)

Also on Fandom

Random Wiki