FANDOM


Leaked content Edit

Should we really be making articles for content that is leaked? Reddyredcp (talk) 21:10, May 9, 2018 (UTC)

  • I didn't make the article 5:30 PM; May 9, 2018 User:Ghost of LucasArts
    • I wasn't specifically addressing you but the wiki community as a whole. Reddyredcp (talk) 21:48, May 9, 2018 (UTC)

It depends on whether the source is primary or secondary, as well as the situation. Game files or developer comments are primary because they seldom change (more so the former). Secondary would be the way your more traditional leaks are delivered, such as cryptic messages, cropped pictures, blurry videos, etc. The General Grievous page can stay because evidence has been found in the game files of him being developed. The more recent Grievous leaks, such as him supposedly coming in August, would not be included in the article because they are from secondary sources (some unidentifiable guy from DICE told me that he saw/heard this). Ideally, the wiki would have its own guys who can delve into the game files and export unreleased models, pictures, stats, etc., allowing us to not have to rely on outside leakers, but until then we have to be careful creating speculative articles and including dubious information. Lamosq1027 (talk) 23:05, May 9, 2018 (UTC)

Community content is available under CC-BY-SA unless otherwise noted.