Talk:ENA: Dream BBQ/Archive 1

Restoration

@Celtoi: could you explain some of your changes here? It seems like it removed some of my explained edits. Namely, the initial paragraph should summarize the rest of the article, and "significant information should not appear in the lead, apart from basic facts, if it is not covered in the remainder of the article" - so I moved the DLC info further down. The gameplay/plot is explained before development per the video game layout guideline. Guerra and TanyaHastur's website is not mentioned on the PC Gamer source provided. I'm not sure how reliable iXBT Live and HorrorGeekLife are, so I had replaced them with PC Gamer, PCGamesN and Automaton, which are reliable per WP:VG/S. I guess I might've removed too much information on the DLC, though. (Also, names of web series and video games are italicized per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Titles of works#Italics.) ObserveOwl (talk) 16:23, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I forgot to add description because of the "edit conflict".

I doubt that gameplay should be explained before development, since the gameplay description doesn't play big role.

I think that DLC is just an additional information, but at least the first paragraph should be more information-dense than it was in your veriosn)

Guerra site should be mentioned, it is a part of a project and should be practically self-sourced, though more sources pointing at it will be better, yeah.

The sources that you added are good, really. I just by now work on a bad computer, so I don't have much ability to move sources. So, please, if you can, add them to the current version of the article, they are better absolutely.

Italics are good, didn't add them because of my current abilities.

So, if we work together then we should discuss the structure of the article. Personally, I think all the information that the article has now is good, and shouldn't be shortened. The "reception" topic that you've added is strange, so I think we should have "Gameplay" and plot with "Development".

I think by now we can agree on changing sources and correcting some mistakes? When we can finish this version of the article we can try to add more information, I think? Do you agree with such idea? Hope you'll answer) Celtoi (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! Yes, sure, let's discuss.

Most video game articles, including recognized quality articles, include gameplay and plot information before the development. I imagine this is because people should have an idea on what the game is about before proceeding to the game's real-life details, such as development and impact.

About the initial paragraph - I was planning to expand it after finishing with the rest of the article. The first paragraph should just repeat what the rest of the article says in a condensed manner, so it felt a bit odd to explain the DLC in detail there and not below. However, we could deal with that paragraph later when it becomes clear what points it should summarize.

Alright, I suppose the website could be self sourced. I was mostly wondering whether it would be due for the article, since merch information is usually not mentioned in artuicles unless reported by independent sources, but we can be a bit more lenient for the development section.

The Reception section is pretty much standard in video game articles too. It usually includes opinions from independent professional reviewers as well as sales and such, and it is the main section that demonstrates video game notability. I didn't think that the "surreal" characterization and the player response was part of the game's "Development" on its own, so I split it to further expand eventually.

Feel free to respond. I will in a moment add a reference to the official website, add italics, and add some more citations to reliable sources. ObserveOwl (talk) 17:03, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm, now I see. The initial paragraph should be longer absolutely, as far as I can see it mostly contains the date and publishment info, then a bit of gameplay and other information. Practically this should be an abstract, and the abstracts are written after the article, so by now let's left DLC info there (maybe), and already after finishing the article we'll write the paragraph, as you suggested.

Yes, I suppose such information is useful here, since the official site can be interesting for a reader, if it is only mentioned in external sources, it doesn't make much sense.

Definitely, reception can be found on some articles like this, but in our case I think we don't have enough sources and information to make such sections. I, personally, don't like short small sections, and prefer bigger with more information in them. Maybe, we should add information like "surreal" characterization to the initial paragraph? As far as I see such thing can be added there.

Thank you for your work) Tomorrow (about 10-11 hours from now) I will try to work on my main computer which is better for such edits. I think I'll try to rewrite some sections, maybe expanding them a bit. I suggest that if we want to add a new text to the article, it will be good if we try to publish the new text here before adding it to the section. What do you think? Hope you'll answer) Celtoi (talk) 17:27, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for responding! I do think we have enough sources for a passable reception section. Sure, there aren't very lengthy reviews giving a score between one out of five/ten from what I found, but post-release articles by PC Gamer and PCGamesN give some good analytical commentary on the chapter. Maybe this would amount to a longer paragraph that could be split to a reception section. It could also be two paragraphs if we separe the commentary and the user reactions; the latter could also have information on the concurrent player count at release (as reported by PCGamesN) and how the Automaton describes what the user reviews generally said.

Sure, I will suggest new text here. I think we could provide a bit more background on the original series and inspirations, from what I can read from the sources. ObserveOwl (talk) 18:00, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

(Although I still think the gameplay and plot could be explained before the development... Is there a reason this case is different from other video game articles?) ObserveOwl (talk) 18:12, 24 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

SleepyRedHair already placed gameplay before development, and I am completely agree with this. Sure, other articles place gameplay before, so we should do the same.

So, I think too that we can provide a bit more information than in sources. Maybe in gameplay we should add text such as this:

The game has voice acting in various languages besides English,(cite PC Gamer article) including Italian, Russian, Greek and Japanese. Some in-game characters are inspired by different cultures, such as French, or Peruvian - the native culture of the author of the game. (ENA: Dream BBQ - Chapter 1 | Preview - IndieGames can be cited here I think, and mentioning cultures of the languages above may be a tautology)

I don't think we should provide a lot more information on the gameplay itself. Mentioning voice actors and composers (such as Lizzie Freeman) may be a good idea, though I don't see a good place for this. Maybe we can also describe some game characters like Taski Maiden, who is highly inspired by peruvian culture, despite it will hard to find sources mentioning this.

More info on original series will be good, I think. Since we've created an article for the game, by now there is no big need for creating a separate article for the YouTube series. So if you can, it will be nice if you added some text about the original series' background.

Do you like the idea of the text I published? Maybe I'll try to add it into the article itself soon to see how it looks. So hope you'll answer) Celtoi (talk) 03:55, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I am not entirely sure whether indie-games.eu would count as a reliable source, since it seems operated by just three people and they don't list credentials (couldn't find much on their LinkedIn profiles either). I don't think the sentence listing the languages needs an inline citation, as I believe it can be verified by playing the game. I'm not sure if it was intended but you just added the text to the development section, when you suggested here to place it in the gameplay.

Cast lists are generally not appropriate for video game articles per WP:VGSCOPE #11. It doesn't seem like the voice actors have been covered much in reliable sources. The composers could be added to the infobox if they are in the credits.

I'll see if I can write add a bit more on the original series. ObserveOwl (talk) 09:10, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hm, maybe then there's no need to cite any sources there.

If we don't mention voice actors, then we should probably add more gameplay. I thought that languages and culture is more a description of the game itself, not game procces, though I'm not sure. Celtoi (talk) 09:59, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

So do you think it would be a good idea to move the language info to the gameplay, move the DLC info to development, and flesh out the lead? I have made a reception section from what I could. ObserveOwl (talk) 11:25, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, you've done a wonderful job! Reception section seems completely fine, and new info about series is good too. I'll try to expand the gameplay section then, though now we need to think about initial paragraph, if we are moving DLC into development. Celtoi (talk) 11:31, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Primary sources

@SleepyRedHair: I see you've added a couple "non-primary source needed" tags on the article. Why do you think they are needed? They don't violate WP:ABOUTSELF, as they are not used excessively, are not used for self-serving or exceptional claims, etc. Primary sources like interviews are pretty common in development sections. Maybe the sentence about the official website could be trimmed a bit down to mention just the Fangamer merch as described by this source? ObserveOwl (talk) 10:15, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You bring up a good point. My apologies, I'm usually pretty insistent on minimising primary sources as much as possible. The latter suggestion you made sounds constructive and could be effective, and if the primary source inline tags aren't necessary, perhaps Template:Primary sources references section could be used instead? SleepyRedHair (talk) 10:26, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, looks fine. If the suggestion is implemented, though, the template might not be needed as there would be just one primary source. ObserveOwl (talk) 10:33, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ty

THANK YOU!!! This page should have been created instantly, it was obviously notable! 64.83.140.155 (talk) 16:52, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I guess... Like Ena said: "bless you for your business!") Celtoi (talk) 17:23, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Verily! You preach true, honest words! Whoami313 (talk) 18:44, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

cult

@Celtoi, the mention of "cult" refers to the fact that it has an immense following. I believe that this should be included and have done so. 64.83.140.155 (talk) 17:02, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

please dismiss my previous statement. I rushed to fix something that was perfectly fine. however, I believe the reason for removing it should have been the lack of a citation. Who's Hore? no one knows. so it makes no sense to include. 64.83.140.155 (talk) 17:05, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Jamie Hore is the PCGamesN writer mentioned in the previous paragraph. ObserveOwl (talk) 17:06, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't really mind if it is not included, though. ObserveOwl (talk) 17:07, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I just thought that it is a strange mention which isn't that much necessary, and it will be better to place some statistics there. Hope everything's alright) Celtoi (talk) 17:21, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

It’s good Whoami313 (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

You’re probably going to see me a lot on this page. I won’t be able to leave it alone Whoami313 (talk) 18:45, 25 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

What is this supposed to mean? Celtoi (talk) 06:54, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i love ena, have been waiting for the page for a long time, and will probably be constantly nit-picking. 24.144.198.27 (talk) 14:33, 26 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Then why didn't you create the article yourself? Celtoi (talk) 02:21, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

because someone else was doing a source check or whatever it's called 24.144.198.27 (talk) 15:03, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Also, your edits are strange. You fixed some mistakes but created tautology, also mentioned a bit unimportant things. So I think I am a bit against your "nit-picking". Celtoi (talk) 02:26, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

how do I make edits that get reviewed, if that's possible at all? I feel a need to contribute but won't if this isn't possible. I'm very sorry. 24.144.198.27 (talk) 15:02, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, don't worry, most of us started editing on Wikipedia with similar situation.

The key ideas of editing here is providing enough sources and not overdescribing unnecessary things.

By now, I think, Dream BBQ achieved a stable form. The article has 99% of information which a common person will need. When something new will appear, I'll add it on this page.

But I see you really want to contribute. I think now I can suggest you creating a new article dedicated to the web series of ENA. There, you can add info about Once in a Lifetime, and movements in ENA which were inspired by this song's clip. It will simply be an entirely new article.

Actually, creating a new Wikipedia article is a hard thing, especially in your first time. You should really read a guide about this before start writing it.

Though, if you want to contribute in editing information about the game exclusively, I think you should visit fandom.com website, because it relies less on sources, uses less official lexicon, and just easier to edit. For people who want creating light edits with minimal attention and maximum contribution to a local community, "fandom" is the best choice. Celtoi (talk) 16:48, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’ll try, but I’m trash. Someone will probably have to fix a lot. Whoami313 (talk) 17:54, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I’m worse than I thought I would be. :( Whoami313 (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Well, not as bad as you might think)

I helped you with infobox a bit, so if you want you can start writing the full text of the article. Things like infobox are done almost exclusively with code, so you'll need time to learn how to use it. Celtoi (talk) 02:10, 28 April 2025 (UTC)[reply]