Talk:List of Dragon Age: Inquisition downloadable content

Redirect

@Haleth: - With all three narrative packs having their own articles, having this here is quite pointless. The other DLCs are not notable, barely have any in-depth coverage, and they can be easily covered in the parent article (the main Dragon Age Inquisition article). The promotional content stuff proably falls right into WP:GAMECRUFT#17, because that part is essentially a list documenting what is in the Deluxe Edition.

The main problem for me is that "Dragon Age Inquisition DLC" is simply not a notable topic on its own. For this list to stay as a standalone list, you may have to merge back the three narrative packs here because most if not all coverage about the topic "Dragon Age Inquisition DLC" are about the three narrative packs. If they are not merged back here, then we need to demonstrate that there are significant coverage for "The Black Emporium", "Spoils of the Avvar" "Spoils of the Qunari" and "Destruction" and "Dragonslayer". Given that the coverage for these packs are mostly routine mentions, they can be easily handled in the main parent article. OceanHok (talk) 18:41, 12 February 2021 (UTC)

• Per WP:LISTN, "The entirety of the list does not need to be documented in sources for notability, only that the grouping or set in general has been." The existence of this list article is not contingent on whether each of its components are notable or have significant coverage. It does not make sense for any of the DLC's to be merged back into this list as you have suggested, where previously they have always only had a one sentence mention. I made the decision to spin them off because all three have had specific review coverage and sufficient development info, and it isn't appropriate to do a full blown reception section for each of them at the bottom of a list article. If anything, all three DLC's were long overdue to be spun off into standalone articles. Since we are not working within the constraints of a paper encyclopedia, there is no practical or logical limit as to how many pages Inquisition-related topics should have, only that there are adequate relevant sources to support each proposed topic.

I drafted this list article by referencing List of Mass Effect 2 downloadable content, and List of Mass Effect 3 downloadable content, which predated my recent active involvement in the VG space on Wikipedia. You might notice that they both lack reception sections, which is useful but not mandatory to demonstrate notability. On this talk page, I have just added multiple other sources which do not specifically cover the three main DLC packs in proper reviews; rather, some of them discussed BioWare's handling of their DLC release schedule with timed exclusivity and their decision to abruptly shut off support for 7th gen consoles. In my opinion, that already demonstrate the notability of a general topic on DLC for Inquisition. I also found a review from Windows Central for the Dragonslayer DLC, an IGN article commenting on DLC and cross-buy fuctionality, a feature article for the Black Emporium, and another one discussing the Golden Nug. I am of the opinion that the main article should contain reception, controversy and/or legacy and cultural impact stemming from the main game and there's plenty of it to be covered, so all general commentary about DLC content should come under this list or any of the standalone pages. So, unlike the other DLC list articles I've seen, this one will soon have a reception section.

As for your opinion that the promotional stuff tied to the editions does not comply with the MOS under WP:GAMECRUFT, if that is true, it simply recommends that the promotional stuff be written out in prose but not listed in table format. It doesn't mean it shouldn't be covered or omitted. Again, I noted that previous editors have included promotional items bundled with game editions in the table for List of Mass Effect 3 downloadable content, and there are more active experienced editors in the Mass Effect space so I reasoned that they would've objected if it doesn't comply with MOS guidelines. On a related note, I don't believe that it is necessary to specifically mention that a different division developed The Descent on the main Inquisition article since it is effectively the same company, much like the prose for downloadable content seen in Mass Effect 3. though it is information which is relevant to the standalone The Descent article.

If you still feel that this topic should not have a standalone article, I suggest a compromise and have the main article's reception section cover reactions to BioWare's handling of the DLC release schedule as well as commentary about the other minor DLC packs. Since you are currently the primary contributor for getting the main article to GA status, you have the prerogative to decide how you want to present the information. Haleth (talk) 01:46, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

While there is no technical constraint to how many pages a topic can have, having three subpages for a subpage is simply a bit ridiculous. I would say the same about the DLC articles for Mass Effect 2 and Mass Effect 3 as well. I don't think the sources listed in refideas are adequate, because most of them are still routine mentions, and they are not significant enough to justify a standalone list. (Refideas#1 and 2 should go to the DLC sub-articles, #3, 5, 6, 8 are routine mentions that can be covered in the main parent article, and #7 feels like a game guide. For me #5 is the only usable one but that review only said crafting is improved and dragons are cool and the review itself is quite barebone.) OceanHok (talk) 04:08, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Technically, the individual DLC articles are all subpages of the main article (which, if interpreted in this manner, is itself a subpage of the Dragon Age franchise article), not of this list article. I don't believe it is a WP:REDUNDANTFORK issue since it is always meant to mention the three main DLC's in passing, just like the main article, and its scope of coverage is different being a list article of all available DLC and the others going into more detail for developmental and reception info. I disagree with your assessments of the refideas as none of them are what I would consider mere routine mentions of release announcements, and they are not events which the concept of routine on Wikipedia is primarily concerned with; the closest one might be the PC Gamer article, which actually gave some commentary on gameplay issues the author expects the then-upcoming DLC to address, so that is a form of critical reception I would say. Haleth (talk) 08:26, 13 February 2021 (UTC)

Merge discussion

Since not many people is following this discussion, I have decided to tag this as a merge discussion. I am proposing to have this article merged back to the parent Dragon Age: Inquisition article because (1) the main narrative packs all have their own pages, and most major content are adequate covered there (see WP:MERGE#2) and (2) the concept of "Dragon Age Inquisition downloadable content" is not really that notable or worthy of discussion on its own, and the routine mentions can be adequately covered in the parent article. OceanHok (talk) 13:43, 23 March 2021 (UTC)

• Support. Looking at this, it seems like just a bunch of updates. It could be combined, even in prose form, to the parent article. Minecraft handles this by listing out a timeline of notable updates. Panini^🥪 13:58, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
  • Comment. I don't think the main Minecraft article is a good example, as I noticed the clean up tag as soon as I arrived in the article, and the nature of the game itself consists of regular updates through editions or patches; the DLC's for Inquisition are standalone and optional content. I have already expressed my view about keeping it as a standalone article, but if consensus is for a merge, my request is that it isn't a blanket redirect, but for the prose in the main Inquisition article to be significantly expanded for the inclusion of miscellaneous information about the DLC's well as reception to the DLC release schedule as a whole. My position is supported by the sources I have located and placed at the top of this talk page. Haleth (talk) 15:39, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support This is mostly just cosmetic DLC, the ones that aren't have their own articles. This information can easily be mentioned in the main article without requiring its own page._{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 14:59, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
• Support, this dlc article is quite short and doesn't need to be separate from the game article. enjoyer|talk 12:00, 24 March 2021 (UTC)