Talk:Collective Shout: Difference between revisions
| (5 intermediate revisions by 3 users not shown) | |||
| Line 42: | Line 42: | ||
:#All of Itch.io's NSFW tagged games were deindexed as a result of Collective Shout's actions [https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content] | :#All of Itch.io's NSFW tagged games were deindexed as a result of Collective Shout's actions [https://itch.io/updates/update-on-nsfw-content] | ||
:#Said games did not violate Steam and Itch.io's terms prior to the incident | :#Said games did not violate Steam and Itch.io's terms prior to the incident | ||
:#Like @[[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] mentioned before, their campaign against GTA V [https://www.collectiveshout.org/win_target_and_kmart_remove_r18_game_from_stores] was heavily misguided (as killing women isn't required in the storyline or to progress in the game). | :#Like @[[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] mentioned before, their campaign against GTA V [https://www.collectiveshout.org/win_target_and_kmart_remove_r18_game_from_stores] was heavily misguided (as killing women isn't required in the storyline or to progress in the game). | ||
:#The wider impact this incident can have on consumer's rights in the future. | :#The wider impact this incident can have on consumer's rights in the future. | ||
:We appreciate your bringing this up in the talk page, as not many users wish to share their opinions on existing articles. [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 16:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | :We appreciate your bringing this up in the talk page, as not many users wish to share their opinions on existing articles. [[User:Mr Pollo|Mr Pollo]] ([[User talk:Mr Pollo|talk]]) 16:03, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | ||
::I think part of the issue here is that, if we took such a definition of anti-consumer, there could be a lot of very conusmer-relevant things that we may not end up talking about, despite them being very relevant/important. I do think that this article has grown beyond where it needs to be, and might need to be pared back however. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:13, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | |||
:::I may have misunderstood your point @[[User:DzLamme|DzLamme]] (thinking that you were arguing for the article's non-inclusion, rather than commenting on the use of the term 'anti-consumer'). in any case, I'll replace the deletion notice with a relevancy discussion notice, as i don't think there's a good reason for the article to be deleted in short order. [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:15, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | |||
==Propose reversion to prev. version== | |||
it looks like since revision https://consumerrights.wiki/index.php?title=Collective_Shout&oldid=23853 - the article has both ballooned in size, and has also lost a lot of its citations. It seemed to be in a reasonable place at that point, so might it be best for us to revert it to that state? (minus the deletion notice, i don't think that was necessary as of the mentioned revision) [[User:Keith|Keith]] ([[User talk:Keith|talk]]) 16:24, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I think the "Methods and Campaigns" section is still relevant as a header, but could be condensed into a paragraph or two. It shows the the tactics they use and why they were so effective in their aggressive activism. NPOV is key [[User:Beanie Bo|Beanie Bo]] ([[User talk:Beanie Bo|talk]]) 16:42, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I agree. There is also the fact that the current version repeats itself a lot. [[User:Lowspeedguy|Lowspeedguy]] ([[User talk:Lowspeedguy|talk]]) 18:37, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | |||
:I agree. More context can be added where needed, but the wiki should strive for conciseness in articles. As it is I believe the article wades too much into the weeds. — [[User:Sojourna|Sojourna]] ([[User talk:Sojourna|talk]]) 20:48, 8 September 2025 (UTC) | |||