Talk:Poetry for Neanderthals

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Rjjiii talk 01:26, 25 August 2024 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the creators of Poetry for Neanderthals faced difficulties during its release because they needed a way to manufacture inflatable clubs?

• Source: Gagne, Yasmine (2020-07-20). "Inside Exploding Kittens' new hit game that lets you bonk your partners on the head". Fast Company. Retrieved 2024-08-06. It was hard get the inflatable clubs manufactured, because inflatables are all made in China, which was dealing with the coronavirus so everything was shut down.

• ALT1: ... that Poetry for Neanderthals was included in the gift bags at the 93rd Academy Awards? Source: Chmielewski, Dawn (2021-04-22). "Inside The $205,000 Oscar 2021 Gift Bag: From A Spa Retreat To 'Poetry For Neanderthals'". Forbes. Retrieved 2024-08-06. Among the more eclectic gifts: [...]; the Poetry for Neanderthals game from Exploding Kittens (which comes with its own 2-foot inflatable club for bashing opponents)
• ALT2: ... that Poetry for Neanderthals has a not-safe-for-work edition? Source: Eubanks, Madison (2022-05-24). "Spank the Competition in Exploding Kittens' Poetry for Neanderthals: NSFW Edition". Pop Insider. Retrieved 2024-08-06.
• Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Tina and Milo

Moved to mainspace by Bsoyka (talk). Number of QPQs required: 1. Nominator has 22 past nominations.

Bsoyka (t • c • g) 18:06, 7 August 2024 (UTC).

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: @Bsoyka: Good work on the article! I prefer ALT0 over the rest of the hooks. I do have the board game, so hopefully I don't have a COI :p ~ Tails Wx 02:41, 12 August 2024 (UTC)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Poetry for Neanderthals/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Bsoyka (talk · contribs) 21:58, 7 August 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk · contribs) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	"with a dedicated deck" It might be worth explaining what a dedicated deck is as the average reader may not know this. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "The original idea was brought by a group of Lee's friends" I feel like this could be worded better. For example "the game was inspired by Lee's friends". CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "Because of the design of the game, it is also able to be played by groups using videoconferencing software such as Zoom, which permitted the growth of the game while people faced lockdowns." The wording here sounds a bit odd. maybe reword it to something like "The game is designed so that it can also be played using videoconferencing software which boosted the game's popularity during lockdowns". CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "Players form two teams and sit around a table, arranged by alternating teams." This sentence is a bit confusing. Are the teams chosen by other teams? This doesn't make sense. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "When a player is named the Poet, a player next to them (from the other team) is named the Judge." Should poet and judge be capitalized in this setting? CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "If a team correctly guesses a one-point word, they earn that point and the Poet can choose to continue with the three-point word. Players cannot score more than three points for a single card." So if they get both the 1 point word and 3 point word correct what happens? CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "the Poet Point Slate and the Team Point Slate" Do these words need to be capitalized? CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) "inflatable club being renamed the Spank Stick" Does "Spank Stick" need to be capitalized? CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	The lede could be expanded a bit more. Specifically with who the game is intended for and other editions. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	"...describe experiences like passing a driving test..." The driving test part isn't supported by the source. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC) "similar to other guessing games such as Taboo and Celebrity." Neither of the sources backs up the claim that it is similar to Celebrity. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC) "In addition to the standard Poetry for Neanderthals game, Exploding Kittens has released other versions." This is a small thing but because this sentence is a stand alone sentence it needs to be sourced. This is easily fixed by just adding the sources you used in the next paragraph to this sentence. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC) "Exploding Kittens also offers a "Grab & Game" edition of the game, which is intended to be travel-friendly and only contains sixty cards." The source you have linked here is currently a dead link and none of the archived versions were working either. Is there a different source you could use here? CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
	2c. it contains no original research.	Per above reasons. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	All content was put into the writers own words. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	"When a player is named the Poet, a player next to them (from the other team) is named the Judge." Who decides which player is the poet? CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC) After reading the manual I feel like you could have included a bit more information on the gameplay. For example the names of teams (using the team names would also make the gameplay section easier to understand). I suggest you go over the manual again and see what information you could include. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC) "The NSFW edition uses different graphics and designs in line with its adult theme, such as the inflatable club being renamed the Spank Stick, but gameplay functions the same as the standard edition" I would also add that the NSFW version includes inappropriate words. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 22:32, 22 August 2024 (UTC)
	7. Overall assessment.	On hold until @Bsoyka: can address the issues above. There are a couple of things that I feel could be expanded on. I also feel the wording is a bit awkward at times. There are a couple of words that I'm not sure should be capitalized however I could be wrong about those so I will have to look into that more. The lede could be a bit longer as well. Some of the sources don't fully back up what is said in the article. One of the sources is also a dead link but I'm not sure if that disqualifies it from being a GA. Overall the article is good it just needs a few tweaks. CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath (talk) 02:18, 23 August 2024 (UTC)

Passing observations

@CursedWithTheAbilityToDoTheMath and Bsoyka: I looked at the article when it appeared at DYK and started some discussion at WP:ERRORS. It is an entertaining topic but I consider it somewhat less than good for the following reasons:

1. It has no independent reviews or reception section
2. It has no sales statistics
3. Its sources include two press releases
4. It has prominent links to tutorial videos which seem contrary to WP:NOTHOWTO
5. It has no pictures of the game being played
6. Overall, it comes across as rather basic and somewhat promotional.

Me, I'm now working up a Wikipedia live-action variant for use at Wikimeets, where you can trout people literally. I have taken delivery of a large fish today and hope to try it out on Sunday.

Andrew🐉(talk) 10:31, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry if this comes off rude or harsh as that is not my intent here but I'm failing to understand how any of this is relevant to my GA review.

Regarding points 1, 2, and 5 these are all explained by the game not being super popular and/or being released during Covid. Regarding a reception section, the article does talk about the intial reception in the history section but I don't think there are other sources avaible to create a reception section however I will take a further look. Regarding point 4, I will have to look into this as I'm not familiar with the policies on external links and how they correlate with existing policies. Regarding point 6 I personally didn't find the article to be promotional however I'll re-read it with that in mind. Also regarding point 6, some articles will be basic no matter how much effort someone puts in as there just isn't much info avaible on the topic, however that is out of the scope of GA reviews. IntentionallyDense (talk) 11:32, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

My comments are directed more at the article than the GA review and we should be pushing in the same direction. My expectations are informed by guidance such as WP:MOSVG in which a reception section is expected as a standard element. That's because, if there aren't any independent reviews then the notability of the topic is doubtful as we're supposed to write from secondary sources, not press-releases. Me, I looked to see what Tom Vasel made of it. The game was better than he expected and so his was a positive review. Andrew🐉(talk) 17:16, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Considering your comments are more related to the page itself have you considered mentioning these comments on the talk page or relevant wikiprojects? IntentionallyDense (talk) 18:10, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

The GA review is transcluded on the main talk page. Appending a sub-section here seemed like the best place as the process is currently in progress. I am surprised at the hostile reception but so it goes on Wikipedia. <bonk> :) Andrew🐉(talk) 18:47, 3 September 2024 (UTC)

Sorry which hostile reception are you referring to? I haven’t seen any myself. IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:39, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

Notwithstanding what's going on above me...

@IntentionallyDense: an FYI that Soyka has not edited since August and this should likely be failed. Thanks, Charlotte (Queen of Hearts • talk) 20:17, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

@Queen of Hearts They did contact me via discord saying they were just busy at the moment. Should I close regardless? IntentionallyDense (talk) 21:40, 9 September 2024 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Failing due to nominators inactivity. IntentionallyDense (talk) 22:51, 9 September 2024 (UTC)