Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 08:02, 27 January 2015

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Video games Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks: Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks view watch edit history shell vg talk alerts purge AfDs Jack Manifold (2 participants) Gameplay of World of Warcraft (4 participants) Pokémon Trading Figure Game (1 participant) Buff Technologies (3 participants) Imakuni? (3 participants) Tetr.io (7 participants) Benedikt Johannes Hofer (6 participants) Untitled Minecraft spiritual successor (23 participants) Double Fine Comics (3 participants; relisted) Westballz (2 participants; relisted) Merge discussions Console game (discussion) Atari Interactive (discussion) Nintendo DS Lite (discussion) Pokémon Essentials (discussion) Input lag (discussion) Neo Geo Pocket (discussion) Minecraft – Volume Beta (discussion) Other discussions No major discussions Featured content candidates List of generation II Pokémon (nom) Kim Kitsuragi (nom) Lego Indiana Jones: The Original Adventures (nom) Ethan Winters (nom) Good article nominations Dark Urge (start) Jeanette Voerman (start) Deathloop (start) Ridley (Metroid) (start) Blast Wind (start) Project Zero 2: Wii Edition (start) Barry Burton (start) Sea of Stars (nom) Pokémon Stadium (nom) Otogirisō (start) Bit Pilot (start) Tom Clancy's The Division 2 (start) Gardevoir (nom) Cybermania '94 (start) Berzerk (video game) (start) Frostpunk (start) Cry of Fear (nom) Aperture Desk Job (nom) A Space for the Unbound (start) The Sims: Livin' Large (nom) DYK nominations Sun Haven Reviews and reassessments The Legend of Dragoon (rev) Appy Awards Anarchy Online (nom) Deus Ex (video game) (nom) List of major Super Smash Bros. Ultimate tournaments Articles that need... assessment (1) (0) reassessment (0) cleanup (4) infoboxes (8) cover art (252) screenshots (9,032) photos (72) translation from japan (187) creation merging Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Feminism Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Feminism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Feminism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.FeminismWikipedia:WikiProject FeminismTemplate:WikiProject FeminismFeminism Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Gender studies Mid‑importance This article is part of WikiProject Gender studies. This WikiProject aims to improve the quality of articles dealing with gender studies and to remove systematic gender bias from Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate in the project, you can choose to edit this article, or visit the project page for more information.Gender studiesWikipedia:WikiProject Gender studiesTemplate:WikiProject Gender studiesGender studies Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. To-do list: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Assess : see Unassessed Gender studies articles and Unknown-importance Gender studies articles Cleanup : edit to see Collaborate : see /Collaboration Copyedit : edit to see Deletion sorting : see /Sexuality and gender Expand : edit to see Infobox : see Gender studies articles needing infoboxes Merge : edit to see Notability : edit to see NPOV : edit to see Orphans : Brannon Masculinity Scale · Holy Virility · Media and gender · Michael Kaufman (author) · Women's education in Saudi Arabia Photo : see Misplaced Pages requested photographs of gender studies Split : History of feminism Stubs : see Gender studies stubs Translate : see /translation Update : edit to see Verify : Riot grrrl Needs attention : see Gender studies articles needing attention

This article was nominated for deletion. Please review the prior discussions if you are considering re-nomination: Keep, July 1, 2010, see discussion. No consensus, January 5, 2006, see discussion.

This article was nominated for merging with Gamer in the past. The result of the discussion was to not merge.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Women and video games article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2Auto-archiving period: 2 months

Archives

1, 2

This page has archives. Sections older than 60 days may be automatically archived by Lowercase sigmabot III.

Split Off the Notable Women

I'd like to suggest splitting off the 'Notable Women' section into a 'Women in Video Games' category (assuming one doesn't exist already.) The inclusion of just a few women in that section, who don't necessarily represent the most notable or influential female developers, strikes me as problematic, and updating to make it a more accurate list would require so many additions that the section would become ungainly. (Not to mention the weird disconnect between the 'Notable Women' section and the 'See Also' section.) Andrhia (talk) 01:57, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Makes sense to me. I'd like to hear some other thoughts on the idea, but I think you make a good point. -Thibbs (talk) 03:31, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

I am ambivalent about a separate article for that list (title would be "List of..." per MOS for stand-alone lists, to distinguish it from this article of prose about the topic?). Lots of articles have a section of this sort of thing in the main article (typically each one annotated, as if a WP:DAB page) to separate them out of the clutter of a seealso. Are there sufficient others to include that a separate section here would overload this article? DMacks (talk) 17:39, 5 January 2014 (UTC)

Yes, there are sufficient others. On top of the many notable women in the history of games (the most notable as listed in this write-up) there's been a Fortune write-up of the 10 most powerful women in gaming and periodic Gamasutra articles of the top 20. Note also that I'm talking about creating a category and not a list-of page; many of these women already have their own Misplaced Pages articles and write-ups here are redundant. You could make a case that if they're notable enough to be included here at all, they should have their own pages to begin with. Andrhia (talk) 14:48, 6 January 2014 (UTC)

I am going to attempt to locate and add photos for the notable women section.JBculkin (talk) 02:36, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Any reason why Roberta Williams isn't mentioned here? She's arguably one of the most famous/important female game designers in game history. HaiDeaf (talk) 06:10, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

She is actually mentioned briefly, she's just not spotlighted with her own subsection like some of the other women in the article. There was originally no coverage of individual women in the article at all. This changed in October 2013 when User:152.33.61.191 added subsections on the 5 individuals we currently see in the article. I have no idea why Roberta Williams wasn't given a bigger subsection. Frankly the whole idea of spotlighting a handful of particularly notable women seems like it might be a mistake. There will always be disagreements about who are the most important individuals in any field. A category as suggested by User:Andrhia above might make the most sense. -Thibbs (talk) 11:13, 19 August 2014 (UTC)

• Support just cutting this section and creating a category or a list, and adding any appropriate information to the prose. Per normal process on articles vs lists vs categories. Almost the entire Heather Kelley article is duplicated here, for example. And listing all these women's respective game credits is definitely WP:NOTDIRECTORY. bridies (talk)

I support splitting off Reine Abbas and Julie Uhrman into their own articles at least. Then just having a nice list of people and quick blurbs as to what made them important would be appropriate. This section feels a bit too long. Zero Serenity 13:35, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

Do you mean an embedded list or a Stand-alone list? I see the same kinds of inclusion problems potentially plaguing an embedded list. I think a history subsection might work better with notable women worked into it in prose. A separate list article might be an interesting way to accommodate a list, but I still prefer categories because they are dictated by common sense whereas a list article would have to demonstrate notability as a topic. Of course we could also do both. -Thibbs (talk) 16:48, 25 August 2014 (UTC)

I've found this image, which is a compilation and Who's who of notable women. It may be used to look for references and start that list. Diego (talk) 16:11, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

Nice find, Diego. I started a list of redlinked women in video game BLPs just the other day and the idea of a list article is growing on me. I think a category would also be helpful, but with moderation a list article could serve as an article creation guide in this area where WP:VG has a bit of a gap in coverage. -Thibbs (talk) 21:28, 1 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm moving several entries from the "See also" section here into talk for now:

• Frag Dolls
• Amy Hennig
• Brenda Brathwaite
• Corrinne Yu
• Jade Raymond
• Anita Sarkeesian
• Sheri Graner Ray<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.zdnet.com/news/explaining-disconnect-between-women-video-games/148404|title=Explaining the disconnect between women and video games|publisher=]|author=Nicole Girard}}</ref>
• Roberta Williams<ref name=yap/>
• Heavy Rain<ref>''''. Myona News. 2011.</ref>

These are mostly specific women (and in one case a specific game that apparently marketed well with women) who should appear together with the other notable women in the "Notable women in the video game industry" section if at all. I'm still in favor of turning that section into a category or splitting them all into a separate list article as suggested by bridies. There seems to be bare consensus that this is a good idea so I'll try to tackle it pretty soon. -Thibbs (talk) 16:55, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Graphs and tables

(NOTE: Shifted into a new section from above -Thibbs (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC))
The numbers in the chart also vary from year to year, some years its console gaming, some years its online gaming, some years it's not specified. The same measurement (console, online, whatever) needs to be used every year. 65.130.114.65 (talk) 10:22, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

IDSA stats for 1998 through 2003 reflect PC gaming. ESA stats for 2004 through 2014 reflect gaming in general. Console, online, whatever stats only appear in the notes to provide additional information not appearing in the chart. This is explained in the note at the top of the chart, but perhaps this should be made yet clearer. How does this edit look? Even if it's apparent by looking at the graph itself, I hope this modification should provide an additional alert for readers that the figures listed in the notes are additional and don't match the numbers in the graph. Does that seem reasonable? -Thibbs (talk) 11:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

I've moved the above comment to this new section to discuss the new tables and graphs generally. I believe that they are essential to enable digestion of the barrage of figures found in the many gender ratio studies. The IP commenter above brings up an issue that I tried to make central to the graphs/tables: "The same measurement needs to be used ." So with this in mind,...

• In the first two graphs I tried to find the longest possible span of time that used the same figure. This worked out to PC gaming prior to 2004 and general gaming thereafter for the ESA stats and general gaming throughout the ESAC stats. I would have liked to have included other countries too to give it a more international treatment, but most of the relevant non-North-American associations only started studying gender ratios within the last two years or (e.g. in the case of the Australian IGEA) their studies have been irregular (e.g. IGEA stats seem to cover only 2005, 2009, and 2012). So I didn't think they'd provide much of a reflection of how ratios have changed through time.
• A much more international comparison was possible for the single year 2012 when most relevant associations made a study, but of course there are glaring holes for asia/oceania, south america, africa, and the middle east. If we could find RS data covering 2012 gender ratios in these regions they should be added to the table. Likewise if we could find a more recent set of figures of equivalent breadth then we should update the table accordingly.

I've also had to make some pretty ugly workarounds in creating the graphs in particular so I have no prejudice against them being recreated properly by someone who knows the wikicode better than I. I think this makes the demographics section much more comprehensible than the previous version which was just a random collection of factoids from a wide variety of sources (gaming magazines, gaming associations, and world news outlets). These factoids are still present in bullet form, and I think we should work on cutting and organizing them into more of a prose style. Any help there would be greatly appreciated. -Thibbs (talk) 14:35, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

Also note that the graph's colors follow traditional gender stereotypes which I suppose some may dislike. I selected the colors based on those used here. I don't see any good reason to change them but if there is interest in changing the colors it's easily managed. -Thibbs (talk) 14:58, 6 October 2014 (UTC)

For several reasons I'm not entirely happy with the way the graphs have turned out. First of all, the workarounds I've used in the bar graphs produce screwy hovertext for the male-gamer percentage. Secondly, I've tried to be clear in the USA ESA/IDSA graph that the early part relates to PC gaming and that the later part refers to gaming in general. I had put them both on the chart in order to extend the timespan, and I used PC gaming because I was under the impression that PC gaming was bigger in the late 1990s than console gaming and thus more likely to reflect the average. More recently, however, I've seen early NPD Group (the tracking agency used by IDSA) reports suggesting that the opposite was true. So now I'm more concerned with the "same measurement" issue from above. I came up the line graph collapsed below as an unambiguous way to display the results for the USA chart:

Would there be any objection if I swapped the current USA bar graph for this one (non-collapsed of course)? -Thibbs (talk) 12:54, 15 October 2014 (UTC)

Seeing no objections I've made the swap. for consistency's sake I swapped the Canadian bar graph for a line graph as well. I'm collapsing the old bar graph below in case anyone wants to revisit that style at a later date.

As I see it the biggest benefit is that the figures are more comprehensible, but the biggest negative is that there's no hover text to give the actual datapoints. From a WP:ACCESS that's bad, but then again no hovertext might be better than screwy hovertext like we had before, and ACCESS issues might be solved via prose in the section above. Anyway I welcome thoughts and opinions on these graphical styles. -Thibbs (talk) 16:46, 20 October 2014 (UTC)

Scarlett Transgender

This article may not be aware that Scarlett is actually a transgendered male. I think this is important to the overall picture and makes existing statements in this article need more attention. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.115.163.29 (talk) 10:45, 17 October 2014 (UTC)

Sorry, but I doubt that would be a suitable inclusion in this article. According to the cited article, "The response ot her success from the gaming world was was mixed. Many people celebrated her wins. But a loud minority of fans attacked her gender identity at every opportunity. Hostyn herself rarely talks about this aspect of her life, even going so far as to say it’s disrespectful to even acknowledge the fact in online encyclopedia entries about her." Keeping in mind that WP:BLP is Misplaced Pages policy, we would need multiple high quality secondary sources illustrating the fact to be important to the overall picture. -Thibbs (talk) 11:18, 18 October 2014 (UTC)

See also the related section below. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 22:51, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Reworking the bulleted lists

I've just made a bold reworking of the bulleted lists of stats. Considering that we have a large graph showing the ESA and ESAC data I don't think we need to present yet further material from these groups in the bulleted points unless necessary. Although they seem to be the longest-established groups collecting demographic data, I wish to avoid overemphasizing their particular studies over other studies. So I have removed from the list several ESA-based claims including reports by The Washington Times and CNN that were covering the ESA's publication of its yearly statistics. These articles are from RSes and are good sources, but they shouldn't be used to imply that they they there is greater diversity of research on these studies than there actually is. And again I think it is prudent to avoid overemphasizing the ESA-reported studies. I realize that this greatly shortens some parts of the list, but I will be adding further statistics in the next few days. Regarding the overall format I have tried to express first stats about male-female percentages among gamers in general which I understand to be the most basic question in these studies, and then I left one bullet point each for statistics on more specific topics like video game magazine readership; platform, format, and genre preferences; age ranges; and brand loyalty statistics. I added context to the second bulleted list which I think justifies removal of the "Specific" tag at the top. Please let me know if there are ways to further improve the bulleted list section. -Thibbs (talk) 13:13, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

Oh yes, and I wanted to provide a list of the sources I cut so they can be more easily reviewed and perhaps some of them like the Washington Times and CNN reports used more effectively. So here were the bullets I cut out:

• In 2006, The Washington Times reported that 38% of the gaming population was female.<ref name=washingtontimes2013>{{citation |url= http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2013/jun/11/report-nearly-half-gamers-are-women/?page=all |title= Report: Nearly half of gamers are women |publisher= The Washington Times |year= 2013 |accessdate= 2013-10-20}}</ref>
• In 2012, "Forty-seven percent of all game players were women. Women over the age of 18 represented a significantly greater portion of the game-playing population (30 percent) than boys age 17 or younger (18 percent)."<ref name=ESA2012/>
• In 2013, Entertainment Software Association's U.S. national study found that 45% of game players are female, 2% decrease from previous year's figures.<ref name=ESA2013/> However, women 18 years or older represented 31% of the game-playing population, one percent higher than the previous year, while boys 17 years and younger represented 19% of the game-playing population.<ref name=ESA2013/> Women over 18 were one of the fastest growing demographics in the gaming industry.<ref name=geekwire2013>{{citation |url= http://www.geekwire.com/2013/dudes-38-xbox-users-female-51-kids/ |title= Not just dudes: 38% of Xbox users female, 51% have kids |publisher= Geek Wire |year= 2013 |accessdate= 2013-10-20}}</ref>
• In 2010, a U.S. national study by the Entertainment Software Association had found that the percentage of women playing online had risen to 42%, up several percent since 2004. The same 2010 study showed that 46% of game purchasers were female,<ref>{{citation |url= http://www.theesa.com/facts/pdfs/ESA_Essential_Facts_2010.PDF |title= 2010 Sales, Demographic and Usage Data: Essential Facts About the Computer and Video Game Industry |publisher= Entertainment Software Association |year= 2010 |accessdate= 2011-01-10}}</ref> and this figure increased to 48% by 2012.<ref name=ESA2012/>
• In 2013, according to CNN, sixteen percent of gamers played with their parents, 32% played with other family members, and 16% played with their spouse or significant other.<ref name=cnn2013>{{citation |url= http://www.cnn.com/2013/08/08/tech/gaming-gadgets/female-gamers/index.html |title= Nearly half of all video-gamers are women |publisher= CNN Tech |year= 2013 |accessdate= 2013-10-20}}</ref> The same report stated that thirty-five percent of parents played games with their children every week and 58% of parents played with their children at least once a month.<ref name=cnn2013/>

That's all of them. Again I've removed them for purely stylistic reasons. All of the data is accurate, but I think it is unhelpful to the reader to present them as a block of jumbled and hard-to-digest statistics devoid of context. But any one of these could be restored if there is reason to do so. The CNN and Washington Times articles in particular would be appropriate to cite for their own commentary on the ESA stats. -Thibbs (talk) 13:21, 7 November 2014 (UTC)

I just noticed that one of the sources was misplaced due to an improper 2012 edit that inserted a claim behind a ref that didn't belong to it. So I've fixed the ref, but I've also made redundant another useable RS related to the ESA so I'll add it here just as I did for the above (collapsed) refs.

• Merripen, Clarinda. "Increasing The Bottom Line: Women's Market Share." Game Developer. 01 Feb 2005. 16. eLibrary. ProQuest LLC. ART INSTITUTE OF SEATTLE. 11 Nov 2009. <http://elibrary.bigchalk.com>.

No prejudice against its reintroduction if needed. -Thibbs (talk) 15:11, 25 January 2015 (UTC)

Merger proposal

In the Sexism in video gaming talkpage I proposed to include the content of that article in this one. Please contribute to the discussion! Heinerj (talk) 22:21, 11 December 2014 (UTC)

Sasha "Scarlett" Hostyn

Both § Women in Competitive Gaming and Electronic sports#Women in esports contain this text:

Canadian StarCraft II Zerg player Sasha Hostyn (Scarlett) first gained notoriety in the open qualifiers of IGN ProLeague 4, where she defeated top-tier Korean players. She is well known for being one of the few non-Korean players who can play at the same skill level as male Korean players.

I agree with IP 76.115.163.29's statement on this Talk page that we need to mention that Scarlett is a transgender, for the "overall picture". That Scarlett is a transgender is (very) relevant given the context. In these article sections about women - even the section titles include the word "women" - if we use Scarlett as an example, especially for " who can play at the same skill level as male ", without mentioning Scarlett is a transgender, then we're leaving out important information that the reader needs to comprehend/assess the entire picture. We're distorting reality. This is similar to the fallacy of exclusion and suppressed evidence. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 22:41, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Per WP:BB: edit and edit --82.136.210.153 (talk) 22:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I reverted the edit for WP:BLP, WP:NPOV, and WP:UNDUE reasons. If we get multiple high-quality sources saying it's important, then we can talk. And if we do add it, it would need serious rephrasing: saying "a transgender" is like calling someone "a black". Woodroar (talk) 23:06, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

I disagree with your decision. WP:UNDUE does not apply: that Scarlett is a transgender is factual and not a viewpoint. A fact that is relevant given the context; a required, proportionate detail. The reference is merely included as a reliable source for the fact. WP:NPOV - that includes the WP:UNDUE section - is primarily related to views, not facts. As you can see at WP:YESPOV, the explanation of WP:NPOV focuses primarily on the difference between facts and assertions/opinions. Including that Scarlett is a transgender is acceptable per WP:BLP. The reference makes the material verifiable, and the material and its tone are not misleading, not criticism, the material is not an under- or overstatement, not a viewpoint. The importance of including the fact stems not from external factors but from the use of Scarlett as an example of women in competitive gaming/esports in the Misplaced Pages articles. If we do not include that Scarlett is a transgender women, readers will assume that she is a regular female in terms of biology (two X chromosomes; different type of gamete), which would distort the "overall picture". This is especially true with the related material in the article that Scarlett is "well known for being one of the few" who are similarly skilled as male players. One of the few women who can compete with men is a man biologically. This is fascinating. It is properly sourced too. (See also, for example, GlobalPost and The New Yorker.) All articles from reliable sources that discuss or mention Scarlett that I have been able to find do in fact mention that Scarlett is a "transgender", "transgender gamer", "transgender woman". This is because it's noteworthy. I don't mind rephrasing the material. Feel free to add something you deem (more) appropriate/precise either in the article or, if you prefer, on this Talk page to discuss it further. --82.136.210.153 (talk) 07:59, 27 January 2015 (UTC)

Cite error: There are <ref group=lower-alpha> tags or {{efn}} templates on this page, but the references will not show without a {{reflist|group=lower-alpha}} template or {{notelist}} template (see the help page).

• All unassessed articles
• B-Class video game articles
• Mid-importance video game articles
• WikiProject Video games articles
• B-Class Feminism articles
• Mid-importance Feminism articles
• WikiProject Feminism articles
• B-Class Gender studies articles
• Mid-importance Gender studies articles
• WikiProject Gender studies articles