_"BIG_GOMEZ".svg)
Hello,
I’d like to raise some concerns regarding the current state of the Super Woden GP article, as I believe it does not meet Wikipedia's standards for neutrality and balance.
Possible bias: The tone in some sections, particularly in the former “Development” and gameplay segments, seemed disproportionately negative or speculative, especially for an indie game with generally positive reviews. Certain statements editorialize the creator’s decisions (e.g., the removal of Woden GP from Steam), assigning motivations or framing it in a pejorative tone without supporting evidence from reliable sources. There is a repeated comparison to Circuit Superstars, despite no reliable sources making that link directly. This introduces original research or editorial bias.
Suggested improvements:
Focus on verifiable information backed by reliable sources such as Traxion.gg, Vandal, MeriStation, or Nintendo Life, which provide reviews and gameplay insight. Avoid speculation or interpretations that cannot be attributed to a cited source. Ensure balance by summarizing both strengths and criticisms as covered in multiple reviews. I invite other editors to collaborate in restoring a more balanced version of the article. I'm open to consensus and neutral editing, but I do believe the current state reflects a strong editorial slant. Thank you. 83.37.217.138 (talk) 19:34, 1 June 2025 (UTC)
- "Certain statements editorialize the creator’s decisions (e.g., the removal of Woden GP from Steam)"
- No it doesn't, it's taken from the Vandal article: "Woden GP, que no hace mucho retiró de Steam "porque creo que, a día de hoy, no me representa la marca que se ha creado", dice." Google translation: "Woden GP, which recently removed itself from Steam "because I believe that, as of today, it doesn't represent the brand that was created," he says."
- "repeated comparison to Circuit Superstars"
- One comparison taken directly from the review: "nicht so schick und feinpoliert aus wie etwa Circuit Superstars". Google translation: "not as chic and finely polished as Circuit Superstars".
Those are enough, I'm not going to waste anymore time to debunk your lies. --Mika1h (talk) 10:11, 2 June 2025 (UTC)
- I was wrong about that last bit. I'm sorry I disagree with you on other points, but I don't think the last sentence was necessary. Just to clarify: I also posted the 1st message before creating this account without any intention of causing any discomfort. GhostSmith (talk) 07:09, 3 June 2025 (UTC)