Talk:Campaign Trail: The Game of Presidential Elections

The Campaign Trail

@BOZ: The fact that the browser game is based on this board game is evidenced here: Reddit post. I am not including it as a citation for obvious reasons. KangarooGymnast (talk) 20:18, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

I suppose it is possible that this is the game he was inspired by to create his game (he does not identify the board game aside from its name, no publisher or date) but that may not be enough to say it is "based on" this game. I will leave the content on the article for now, and see if anyone else can comment as to whether including it here is WP:OR or not. It may also be WP:UNDUE to mention it here if the browser game has no independent sources of its own. BOZ (talk) 20:33, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

The link that Bryan attached to the post in the paragraph below where he explains it, appears as a copy of the board game when the link is inserted to the Internet Archive. (I am not inserting the link, again for obvious reasons). I am more than willing to alter the text to state "inspired by" if you so wish. KangarooGymnast (talk) 20:40, 11 December 2023 (UTC)

Sorry to say but right now this is WP:OR, and reddit is not a WP:RS. If we cannot find anything better, this claim has to go. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 01:22, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

Thanks, I'm inclined to agree with you. BOZ (talk) 04:01, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

I know Reddit isn't a reliable source, hence why I didn't include the citation "for obvious reasons". If the claim is considered original research, so be it. It's not a hill I'm willing to die on. KangarooGymnast (talk) 10:54, 20 December 2023 (UTC)

The Campaign Trail 2

@2603:8001:79f0:7be0:a142:109:a031:a006:, perhaps you could explain some more here. I too think the amount of detail ListMan38 was undue, but a very short mention in a legacy section seems acceptable to me, particularly when the Polygon mentions this: The Campaign Trail began in 2012 as a simple, lo-fi browser game designed by Dan Bryan, inspired by a board game of the same name. I was a bit confused by your assertion inclusion is WP:UNDUE because it is not functionally similar to the board game, as I don't think anybody is claiming it is, just that one part of this board games legacy (as very briefly covered in a WP:reliable source) is that it inspired a not particularly notable online game.

See also, this ongoing afd Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 16:46, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

It's clear that it's not notable and is frankly more of an attempt of advertising a browser game which goes against WP:NOTPROMO

Just cause it shares a name with an old board game does not mean that it and definitely not every fan remake of it should be mentioned in the article. 2603:8001:79F0:7BE0:A142:109:A031:A006 (talk) 16:50, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Well no, not every fan remake should be mentioned in an article, but it's not an original interpretation I've come up with because shares a name with an old board game, but because it is specifically mentioned as having inspired it by Polygon. I can also assure you I'm not trying to advertise anything, as I didn't even now the browser game existed before seeing an attempted canvasing campaign on Reddit today. I'm simply going of what the one source here says. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 17:01, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

The fact that there is canvasing campaign about this is why this browser game was mentioned on this article to begin with as shown by User:Lgndvykk and User:ListMan38 who have been involved with the page for the browser game and tried to turn this into a marketing piece for it as shown by https://wiki.riteme.site/w/index.php?title=Campaign_Trail:_The_Game_of_Presidential_Elections&oldid=1263079947 . In any case even if a browser game should be mentioned just because the creator used the same name which is commonly used in relation to elections and concept of American elections without any similarity in gameplay I do not see how there is any reason or merit for any fan recreations to be mentioned. 2603:8001:79F0:7BE0:A142:109:A031:A006 (talk) 17:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I agree with you one that. I actually was in the middle of rewriting the last time you reverted. I'd shortened it to something like the following:

The 2012 browser game The Campaign Trail, by Dan Bryan, was inspired by the board game.

Which aligns better with what the source says I think. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 17:32, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I think that's a reasonable way to mention it if we have to though we should try to find a better article if possible since that one seems to be mostly images from Reddit. 2603:8001:79F0:7BE0:A142:109:A031:A006 (talk) 17:55, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

Would the reddit post Dan Bryan made which goes more in depth about his inspiration be a good source under WP:SELFSOURCE or is Reddit not a usable source in any case? 2002crash1 (talk) 18:08, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

I dont think reddit should be used but maybe someone who knows more could answer. 2603:8001:79F0:7BE0:A142:109:A031:A006 (talk) 20:58, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

a) There's no way of us knowing that the pseudonymous Reditor is who they claim; and b) more importantly a WP:SPS would not do anything for the WP:PROPORTION concerns (we can only give weight to the things that secondary reliable sources do, in proportion). I also personally dislike using WP:SELFSOURCEs on articles about a different subjects, as it gives WP:UNDUE to extremely minor aspects. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 21:09, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

But the article you do want to cite is likely basing its claim on that post since its mostly images from that reddit and itself does not have another source. I think it would be best the leave the browser game off the page since it is not closely linked to the board game in a verifiable way. 2603:8001:79F0:7BE0:A142:109:A031:A006 (talk) 21:21, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

The difference is that we consider Polygon a reliable source (WP:VG/S#Reliable sources) and therefore trust them to have fact checked the statements they make in their own voice. The same isn't true of a random WP:REDDIT post. A reliable source including a couple of social media screenshots doesn't suddenly mean that the text isn't reliable. Cakelot1 ☞️ talk 21:39, 14 December 2024 (UTC)

References