User talk:JackSparrow Ninja/Source reliability

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[edit] Land of the Legend -linked by

As there has been a bit of a discussion going on about lotl, I did some research and after spending just 10 minutes, found a great number of big websites linking to this source.

The problem there is that the only sources I've ever heard of are insidegamer and IGN. Plus, IGN's is a message board, even though it is an employee. The only sites I consider reliable sources as far as Zelda goes are sites that belong to Nintendo, or sites that have interviewed Nintendo officials. If Land of the Legend has interviewed Nintendo officials, than I will consider it a reliable source, as long as its claims are backed by legitimate research or statements. -- Mellesime 22:39, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Hey

I don't know if this is where you, Jack, wanted me to answer you or not... but I figured I'd go ahead and give my two cents. Being that this is your personal page, that's all I'm going to do, as I don't want to overstep my bounds. First thing -- I work at EB Games in my town, and I would like you to know that, though retailers often overemphasize certain aspects of up-and-coming releases to get preorders, we do not "randomly generate" release dates. The release dates we give are all in a system that Gamestop gives us, which is based on the manufacturer's or producer's date given directly to Gamestop (Barnes & Noble owns Gamestop, which kind of owns EB Games, in case you didn't know). The actual numbers we give customers, such as release dates and projected inventory, is what dorporate tells us. For instance, corporate was telling us that we'd be getting 16 PS3s until a week or so before launch when they told us we'd only be getting 8. Now, we had take 16 reserves -- not because we wanted 16 reserves, but because that's how many we were ALLOWED to take. We weren't ALLOWED to take anymore. As for the release dates, like I said, we are reading them off a screen. I do agree, however, that retailers are not reliable sources, because we have no sources for which to base any speculation on. Everything we know is generally already known and has a more reliable source. Plus, you can't really cite an interview with a retailer on an online encyclopedia. Second -- I don't really want to be a part of the whole anti-TSA thing, as I think it's a little childish. BUT, I will say that reputation has a lot to do with how credible the source is considered. Therefor, I would say that ANYONE whose reputation of honesty is in question should not be used as a source unless, like the TP article, it is linking to something within the questionable source's website that IS reliable, such as a magazine scan.

Of course, I will never really condone using fan sites as sources, no matter how prestigious. The only sources I condone as far as Zelda goes (just as an example) are Nintendo and official Nintendo publications (strategy guides, magazines, et cetera). Also, I must say that, in situations like Twilight Princess, there is way too much opinion. Like the stuff linking it to Ocarina of Time. I feel like, unless Nintendo says explicitly that the Lakebed Temple is the Water Temple, then any speculation should be considered... well... speculation. If speculation MUST be in an article, make a SPECULATION section. I think that's all I have to say. -- Mellesime 22:35, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Retrieved from "http://en.wikipedia.org../../../j/a/c/User_talk%7EJackSparrow_Ninja_Source_reliability_6f72.html"