User talk:Solidest - Wikidata
incremental game (Q18351283) and clicker game (Q126394863) are the same genres, why did you reverted my contribution? Kim Kelting (talk) 14:32, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- They're not the same. Clickers are just a subtype of incremental games, as not all of them have click spamming mechanics. Also UVL, Steam and PCGamingWiki have different identifiers for them. Solidest (talk) 14:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia (e.g. English, Spanish, French, and German) uses these words synonymously. The words describe the same games. On Steam and UVL, some of the same games are listed under the two terms. It's hardly possible to separate the two terms. And Wikidata isn't a dictionary. Kim Kelting (talk) 15:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia is a separate project from Wikidata, which sometimes has messy articles and does not have the detailing capabilities we have in Wikidata. And is definitely not a model for organising things on Wikidata, but can only guide in some cases (it's literally spelled out in the Wikidata rules). Wikidata has its own relevance criteria and is much freer than Wikipedia to create a detailed hierarchy of concepts. And external IDs are one of the reasons for that. When you say "hardly possible", you are obviously biased. Because it's not hard to distinguish between a game where clicks are part of your progress, and one where your progress is simply due to the passage of time. And generally regarding video game genres - having two identifiers on one site for one genre on WD is more of a rare exception when that site has duplicates or similar issues. Here, however, 3 separate external sites have both ids, two with different descriptions and Steam has 3186 vs 2211 games tagged under these two genres. That's enough to separate them on WD. Solidest (talk) 16:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe you are the one who is biased. You're basing your argument on Universal Videogame List and PCGamingWiki, which contains user-generated content, and Steam, which consists of content from a for-profit company and the respective developers, who are also for-profit. And now please prove to me with a non-user-generated source and a non-e-commerce source why these should be 2 different genres. Kim Kelting (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It's odd to call me biased when I point out an obvious difference to you, but you pretend not to have noticed it and offer no counterarguments to that. Not to mention that UVL is reason enough for a separate entry, since it is a non-user-generated and non-commercial database. But okay, here's a source that describes the difference between the concepts in depth from a technical point of view: [1] or for example in this list [2] they even separate idle game from both, describing incremental as something that combines both idle and clicker, and also mention idle RPG, for which there are also enough sources, e.g. [3]. And you won't find the phrase "clicker RPG" anywhere. [4] also divides games into all these sub-genres. Solidest (talk) 18:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- To summarize, these articles say that idle and clicker games are incremental games, but not that they are different genres, only that idle games are not necessarily clicker games and vice versa, but often are and incremental games are both. I understand the articles to mean that idle and clicker games are a type of incremental game, but are not fundamentally different.
- In particular:
- envanto tuts+ only talks about one genre. Idle and clicker are expressions according to the article.
- Game Rant says that incremental games encompass both idle and clicker games and refers to them together as the idle/incremental genre.
- Android Authority speaks of incremental idle games, merge games and idle clicker games, but not of different genres.
- and in Almost Idle it is also not clear that there is a clear distinction between idle, clicker and incremental.
- I'm sorry... Kim Kelting (talk) 20:23, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- > incremental games encompass both idle and clicker games and refers to them together as the idle/incremental genre
Yes, this is the sort of thing when you have a genre that includes sub-genres that focus on different mechanics. That's basically what UVL and PCGamingWiki say in their descriptions and these refs. Sub-genres inherit the characteristics of the parent genre, and are therefore the parent genre in a broader sense; every clicker is an incremental game, but not every incremental game is a clicker, as non-clicker idle games are also incremental games, which is what these links say. And in this case, it's enough that these terms are treated as separate concepts (3/4 sub-genres exist on WD in this way). It is ok to create idle game separately as a sub-genre as well, for the same focus on separate mechanics and for example, Candy Box (Q13048275) will be a non-clicker idle game (idle RPG actually), as will most 2000s games in the genre. And this can already be backed up with listed references, but I personally go with existing external IDs when creating new genres. Solidest (talk) 20:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]- But UVL and PCGamingWiki are user-generated and envanto tuts+, Game Rant, Android Authority and Almost Idle did not prove that they are sub-generes. Only that clicker and idler are incremental games. And UVL has many games in both categories, as does Steam. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And the concept or principle of clicker and idler is the same. I can't recognize any different genres. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- When I've given you links where the two different key mechanics for the two concepts are specified in plain text (tutsplus), as well as the categories forming thousands of games based on these two concepts SEPARATELY (with a difference of 1,000+), and you say you 'can't recognise different genres', then I'm afraid I'm hardly going to help you figure it out anymore, sorry.. Solidest (talk) 21:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The concept of both games is the same and envanto tuts+ only talks about ONE genre! Kim Kelting (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Read "Idling or Clicking?" section. It describes concepts of idle and clicker. Concepts that are two different categories based on three external identifiers. Solidest (talk) 21:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- This section talks about mechanics, but not about different genres. And still: The article talks about ONE genre. It says nothing about subgenres. Kim Kelting (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- They explain the difference between concepts. The fact that they are specific genres for games is explained by other refs. Solidest (talk) 22:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that's not true. The section describes the mechanics and not two different concepts. I do not see any criterion according to Wikidata:Notability met. The concept is the same: incremental game. Kim Kelting (talk) 22:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- What gives it notability is that the refs describe them as different concepts, which can be deployed separately and independently. And it seems enough references have told you that idle and clicker are different things. And incremental is a synthesis of them (or some use just one of the mechanics). Game Rant says so directly: ‘Clicker games require clicking, while idle games automate actions. Incremental games encompass both’. tutsplus says the same thing, but they describe it as two mechanics within an incremental game, which is essentially no different. On WD this is now done as a generalised genre ‘incremental game’ (implying idle game as well), and its separate subtype - clicker game, for which external IDs exist. And the fact that large bases sort them in two categories separately - also confirms it as two separate genres. Here are, for example, two more links, where at the bottom there is a detailed description mentioning the occasional intersections [5] + [6]. Solidest (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Clicker Game isn't a seperate subtype and tutsplus says, that is ONE genre not Two different. Kim Kelting (talk) 23:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, but now read 90% of the rest of my post. Solidest (talk) 23:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I read everything. Kim Kelting (talk) 23:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It's doubtful. Because you keep ignoring most of what I write, but keep repeating the same answer about one ref. Solidest (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You also ignore what I write about the sources and what the sources write. Kim Kelting (talk) 23:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Otherwise you would change your mind. Here's another source that only talks about one genre: [7] Kim Kelting (talk) 23:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And what is that supposed to prove to me if the article doesn't use ‘clicker’ (outside of the title game) or ‘incremental game’ phrases? Solidest (talk) 23:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It proves that the terms are used interchangeably and outside of any for-profit and user-generated websites, there is no difference between these terms. It is ONE genre it follows THE SAME concept and idle is a key factor in all of these games. Kim Kelting (talk) 00:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Why can't it be clicker + idle, since this game has both mechanics? I wrote about it already above: ‘every clicker is an incremental game, but not every incremental game is a clicker’.
And stop constantly addressing to Wikipedia policy here. There is no mention of the quality of commercial sources anywhere in the Wikidata rules. There are literally properties here dedicated to store categories from commercial sites. Solidest (talk) 00:11, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]- As I remember Exponential Idle (Q113501446) is clicker + idle :) Infovarius (talk) 12:13, 15 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Why can't it be clicker + idle, since this game has both mechanics? I wrote about it already above: ‘every clicker is an incremental game, but not every incremental game is a clicker’.
- It proves that the terms are used interchangeably and outside of any for-profit and user-generated websites, there is no difference between these terms. It is ONE genre it follows THE SAME concept and idle is a key factor in all of these games. Kim Kelting (talk) 00:03, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And what is that supposed to prove to me if the article doesn't use ‘clicker’ (outside of the title game) or ‘incremental game’ phrases? Solidest (talk) 23:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Otherwise you would change your mind. Here's another source that only talks about one genre: [7] Kim Kelting (talk) 23:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- You also ignore what I write about the sources and what the sources write. Kim Kelting (talk) 23:43, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- It's doubtful. Because you keep ignoring most of what I write, but keep repeating the same answer about one ref. Solidest (talk) 23:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I read everything. Kim Kelting (talk) 23:34, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Anyway, I'm tired of this waste of time. It seems to me that you still don't understand Wikidata nature. I was trying to argue with you about the essence of these genres for some reason. But I should have stopped at the point where I simply said that genres have different external identifiers in the 3 existing properties, and added links where the three terms are defined differently in the same sentence on Gamerant. So, clicker is identified by the sources as an independent concept, which is what WD:N requires to create a separate entity. The conditions for a separate entry are met, and I have nothing further to discuss here. Solidest (talk) 00:15, 14 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Ok, but now read 90% of the rest of my post. Solidest (talk) 23:30, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Clicker Game isn't a seperate subtype and tutsplus says, that is ONE genre not Two different. Kim Kelting (talk) 23:16, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- What gives it notability is that the refs describe them as different concepts, which can be deployed separately and independently. And it seems enough references have told you that idle and clicker are different things. And incremental is a synthesis of them (or some use just one of the mechanics). Game Rant says so directly: ‘Clicker games require clicking, while idle games automate actions. Incremental games encompass both’. tutsplus says the same thing, but they describe it as two mechanics within an incremental game, which is essentially no different. On WD this is now done as a generalised genre ‘incremental game’ (implying idle game as well), and its separate subtype - clicker game, for which external IDs exist. And the fact that large bases sort them in two categories separately - also confirms it as two separate genres. Here are, for example, two more links, where at the bottom there is a detailed description mentioning the occasional intersections [5] + [6]. Solidest (talk) 22:52, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- No, that's not true. The section describes the mechanics and not two different concepts. I do not see any criterion according to Wikidata:Notability met. The concept is the same: incremental game. Kim Kelting (talk) 22:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- They explain the difference between concepts. The fact that they are specific genres for games is explained by other refs. Solidest (talk) 22:08, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- This section talks about mechanics, but not about different genres. And still: The article talks about ONE genre. It says nothing about subgenres. Kim Kelting (talk) 22:02, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Read "Idling or Clicking?" section. It describes concepts of idle and clicker. Concepts that are two different categories based on three external identifiers. Solidest (talk) 21:50, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- The concept of both games is the same and envanto tuts+ only talks about ONE genre! Kim Kelting (talk) 21:46, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- When I've given you links where the two different key mechanics for the two concepts are specified in plain text (tutsplus), as well as the categories forming thousands of games based on these two concepts SEPARATELY (with a difference of 1,000+), and you say you 'can't recognise different genres', then I'm afraid I'm hardly going to help you figure it out anymore, sorry.. Solidest (talk) 21:39, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- UVL is almost 30yo database, it's "serious and publicly available references" within video game sphere. That's what WD rules requires.
> did not prove that they are sub-generes. Only that clicker and idler are incremental games
(B = A) and (C = A) while (B =/= C). That means B & C are subtypes of A in the ontology, i.e. the are subgenres in WD context. You don't need to find exact phrase "x is subgenre of y", unlike Wikipedia. The logic just works in topology. Solidest (talk) 21:31, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]- But it is still not proven that clicker and idler are each a separate genre, only that they belong to the “incremental games” genre, so they are not subgenres either. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- they are a subset of incremental games. incremental game is a genre. a subset of a genre is a genre. Solidest (talk) 21:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Not necessarily Kim Kelting (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- I guess you should read up on the principle of inheritance in hierarchies, since you don't seem to understand the basis of WD. Solidest (talk) 21:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- How many subs in subgenres are there? I think at some point, as in this example, it becomes absurd to talk about subgenres just because two games differ minimally from each other but the basic concept remains the same. If there are too many subgenres, you can no longer tell the difference. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:56, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- This is something that has already been discussed at Wikidata:WikiProject Video games sometime ago. The mere existence of a detailed ontological structure of genres does not force you to use every genre that exists. I think about 20% of video game genres will always remain unused on WD. Some people use only the ten major genres, others make imports from different sites where genres exist differently and are used in different proportions. That's not a problem. And it's certainly not a reason to merge different concepts (that pass the WD notability criteria) into one - that goes against the basic principles of WD. Solidest (talk) 22:05, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Not necessarily Kim Kelting (talk) 21:49, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- they are a subset of incremental games. incremental game is a genre. a subset of a genre is a genre. Solidest (talk) 21:47, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- But it is still not proven that clicker and idler are each a separate genre, only that they belong to the “incremental games” genre, so they are not subgenres either. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:44, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- And the concept or principle of clicker and idler is the same. I can't recognize any different genres. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:27, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- But UVL and PCGamingWiki are user-generated and envanto tuts+, Game Rant, Android Authority and Almost Idle did not prove that they are sub-generes. Only that clicker and idler are incremental games. And UVL has many games in both categories, as does Steam. Kim Kelting (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- > incremental games encompass both idle and clicker games and refers to them together as the idle/incremental genre
- It's odd to call me biased when I point out an obvious difference to you, but you pretend not to have noticed it and offer no counterarguments to that. Not to mention that UVL is reason enough for a separate entry, since it is a non-user-generated and non-commercial database. But okay, here's a source that describes the difference between the concepts in depth from a technical point of view: [1] or for example in this list [2] they even separate idle game from both, describing incremental as something that combines both idle and clicker, and also mention idle RPG, for which there are also enough sources, e.g. [3]. And you won't find the phrase "clicker RPG" anywhere. [4] also divides games into all these sub-genres. Solidest (talk) 18:58, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Maybe you are the one who is biased. You're basing your argument on Universal Videogame List and PCGamingWiki, which contains user-generated content, and Steam, which consists of content from a for-profit company and the respective developers, who are also for-profit. And now please prove to me with a non-user-generated source and a non-e-commerce source why these should be 2 different genres. Kim Kelting (talk) 17:26, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia is a separate project from Wikidata, which sometimes has messy articles and does not have the detailing capabilities we have in Wikidata. And is definitely not a model for organising things on Wikidata, but can only guide in some cases (it's literally spelled out in the Wikidata rules). Wikidata has its own relevance criteria and is much freer than Wikipedia to create a detailed hierarchy of concepts. And external IDs are one of the reasons for that. When you say "hardly possible", you are obviously biased. Because it's not hard to distinguish between a game where clicks are part of your progress, and one where your progress is simply due to the passage of time. And generally regarding video game genres - having two identifiers on one site for one genre on WD is more of a rare exception when that site has duplicates or similar issues. Here, however, 3 separate external sites have both ids, two with different descriptions and Steam has 3186 vs 2211 games tagged under these two genres. That's enough to separate them on WD. Solidest (talk) 16:36, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Wikipedia (e.g. English, Spanish, French, and German) uses these words synonymously. The words describe the same games. On Steam and UVL, some of the same games are listed under the two terms. It's hardly possible to separate the two terms. And Wikidata isn't a dictionary. Kim Kelting (talk) 15:54, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Notified participants of WikiProject Duplicates- I wonder what the WikiProject Duplicates has to say about this. Kim Kelting (talk) 22:35, 13 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Правда не видите разницы между стилем и оформлением? Infovarius (talk) 18:47, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Смотрите не на названия (с ними частые несоотвествия), а на наполнение и сообщения которые указаны текстом в этих категориях, и заодно проверяйте код шаблонов, которые их наполняют - что я и делал. Solidest (talk) 18:50, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]
- Кстати и исходя из одних заголовков - категории отсылают к en:Wikipedia:Manual of Style и ru:Википедия:Оформление статей. Думаете их нужно разъединить, т.к. есть разница? Solidest (talk) 18:54, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]