Hi, thanks for the notice. I would like to understand better with examples, what an "independent source, and from a neutral perspective" would be.
Even though I'm a fan of the game, my intention was not to advertise. I was just curious what's in Axie Infinity's wikipedia page and found that there was a significant amount of criticism that seemed to be misinformation.
So, I thought it's okay to write opinions citing sources. Was the issue due to too much paraphrasing from the cited source or maybe the cited source was from a website regarding NFTs, so would be seen as not neutral?
DottMySaviour (
talk)
04:59, 8 May 2023 (UTC)reply
My advice in these situations is this: Please look at what reliable,
independent sources say and summarize neutrally in your own words. Don't add stuff you personally know to be true and then look for sources after. Instead, pretend you don't know anything about the game, look for sources, and only then use your knowledge of the game to help summarize what those sources are saying so that other people can understand them.
What if I add the section drawing comparison of blockchain games to physical
TCG in
Blockchain game page? Also, replacing "
Axie Infinity" in the text with "
Blockchain game"? Would that pass?
Again, you should find a reliable source first, and then summarize what that source says -
nothing more, nothing less. If that reliable source is an opinion, you would have to attribute it as an opinion (such as "according to John Doe, writing for the journal Ludology Review...") so that readers could evaluate it for themselves. There would also have to be some reason to think the opinion has lasting encyclopedic significance, so
self-published blogs and similar are basically useless.
Like I said, it's much easier to start with sources and work backwards, not to start with
first-hand knowledge and then look for sources which support that knowledge.
Grayfell (
talk)