Wikipedia

Talk:Persona 3 Reload#Proposed merge of Femc Reloaded Project

Feedback from New Page Review process

[edit]

I left the following feedback for the creator/future reviewers while reviewing this article: Article demonstrates notability adequately and is well-written.

Cukie Gherkin (talk) 21:05, 26 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Source

[edit]

Proposed merge of Femc Reloaded Project

[edit]

The Persona 3 Reload game mod Femc Reloaded Project does not seem to me to warrant a standalone article per WP:PAGEDECIDE. It has not received much WP:SUSTAINED coverage, and the coverage it has received mostly boils down to "well it sucks that Reload didn't have the female protagonist, but at least this mod exists, so that's cool". It would be better covered, in my opinion, as a sentence (or at best, a subsection) within the Reception section of this article. silviaASH (inquire within) 00:53, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. There's really not much there. It should be consolidated into a paragraph at Reload. Sergecross73 msg me 01:01, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose The article passes WP:GNG and WP:SUSTAINED (it was mentioned in this article and this article long after its release was covered in the gaming press. There's also no obvious merge target - Kotone is from Persona 3 Portable, but the mod is for Persona 3 Reload, so WP:MERGEREASON is essentially moot. While there could be a section about the omission of Kotone, that might be undue weight for something that is literally not in the game and wasn't even in the original. It would feel like a trivial fan grievance, so it makes more sense to keep this its own article and be more about the mod's successes than the fan reaction itself. Due to all of these things, I strongly oppose a merge on OVERLAP grounds. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 03:46, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Regarding the assertion that there is no obvious merge target, the title of the page refers to the mod, not the character. If the title referred to both, there could be some dispute, but Kotone Shiomi already redirects to Protagonist (Persona 3). And since the mod is for Reload, and not Portable, Reload is the most obvious merge target, no? I'm just not sure I understand the logic there.
    In any case, I would argue that WP:MERGEREASON #3 and #5 apply, since the Femc Reloaded article is very short and unlikely to see much expansion, and the context for its existence is better supplied within the article on Reload. I don't think it would be WP:UNDUE to do it that way, either; it could be done very briefly and without much fuss. If anything, having the standalone article essentially saying "The female protagonist isn't in Persona 3 Reload and fans didn't like that so they made a mod" is more UNDUE. silviaASH (inquire within) 04:17, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Also worth noting that neither of those links are WP:SIGCOV. They both only mention the mod in passing. I would agree that, if the article is to be kept, it should be more about the mod itself and its development, but with the RS coverage we have I don't see how that could happen. silviaASH (inquire within) 04:49, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If it is redirected to Reload, there would need to be a section explaining Kotone's section of the game, which isn't even in Reload at all. This is a mod bringing P3P content to Reload, so it doesn't quite fit in P3P or Reload's article. While it could be shoehorned into one article or another, it becomes harder to say that is for the good of readers. I would also argue that MERGEREASON #3 is not applicable, because the article can be expanded. "The female protagonist isn't in Persona 3 Reload and fans didn't like that so they made a mod" heavily understates the effort involved in creating the project, implying it is something more like a simple protagonist swap and not - in the modders' words - "music, the UI, the animations, voiced battle lines, costumes", etc. To be clear, this is something Reload's developers stated would be too difficult for them to do, and fans did it purely on a volunteer basis.
    And no, the links aren't SIGCOV, but there's plenty noted in the article. SUSTAINED does not require the later articles to be SIGCOV, just that it's in the media's crosshairs for a sufficiently long period. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 05:28, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    If it is redirected to Reload, there would need to be a section explaining Kotone's section of the game, which isn't even in Reload at all.
    I disagree; it wouldn't require much explanation at all. We'd just say that there was a female protagonist, it was in a previous version of the game, and isn't in this version, and a mod to put it in this version is being developed. If the reader wants more details about the female protagonist in Portable, that's what links are for. Were I to put something to this effect in the article, I might write it a little like this:

    Reload was criticized by some players for omitting the female protagonist previously featured in Persona 3 Portable.[1] Kazuhisa Wada, Reload's producer, cited time and budgetary constraints as the reason for the omission.[2] A game mod aiming to implement the female protagonist into Reload, the Femc Reloaded Project, was developed by fans.[3]

    And that would be about it. Maybe add a sentence noting that game journalists praised the mod, but I'd say this is about all that needs to be said. silviaASH (inquire within) 06:15, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Simply saying "the female protagonist" is omitting a lot of information. Readers would rightly be confused: is this female protagonist a gender-swap of the male protagonist, or an entirely separate character? (She is not a gender-swap). Does the game's content change depending on the protagonist? (It does). And nothing is described of the mod besides the fact that it exists, including whether it actually implements said things and how deeply. This is not helping the reader, but removing information you deem useless, which is not a good argument either in AfD or merging, especially after it has been shown to be notable. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 07:14, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not saying it's totally useless information, but we also don't need to spell it all out here per WP:NOTGUIDE. And, again, those details are already covered at the Persona 3 Portable section of the main Persona 3 page, and on the Protagonist (Persona 3) page. If readers feel the need to know more, they can follow the links to those articles. Like I said, this is what links are for.
    If there really needs to be a bit more clarification in this article, it's just a matter of adding a few words. "the female protagonist and additional content associated with her route", or something. It can be workshopped easily. silviaASH (inquire within) 08:48, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose cuz, at a glance, it seems to pass GNG. Sources don't seem dinky and has been covered in the larger gaming press ☩ (Babysharkboss2) 15:36, 7 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ Colbert, Isaiah (2023-06-12). "Persona 3 Fans Upset As Remake Cuts Female Protagonist". Kotaku. Archived from the original on 2023-07-16. Retrieved 2024-12-16.
  2. ^ Byll, Brett (2024-08-15). "Persona 3 Reload Producer Has Bad News For Fans". Game Rant. Archived from the original on 2024-08-15. Retrieved 2024-12-16.
  3. ^ Cryer, Hirun (2024-02-19). "Persona 3 Reload finally gets Portable's beloved and missing female protagonist thanks to some very dedicated modders". GamesRadar+. Archived from the original on 2024-08-11. Retrieved 2024-12-16.
  • Support. I find that the argument that it couldn't very comfortably fit into Persona 3 Reload, or that Reload is not an obvious merge target, to not be strong. You can and should cover the disappointment over Kotone's absence, as well as the reason why. The only thing unique to the first paragraph is the second paragraph, which could be easily summarized to say "A fan-made mod was created to include Kotone, her music, exclusive Social Links, and the character Theodore, a replacement for Elizabeth." It was published on February 19, 2024, 17 days after the game's release, and continues to receive updates. It was received well for its speedy creation and its quality." I don't think that a mod of a game that can be adequately summed up in three sentences needs to be separate from the article of the game it's modded. The argument of demonstrating notability is also shaky for me; looking at the four sources cited, one is a Valnet source (not disqualifying but not a top-tier game source), and none of them have much to say about it. They all pretty much write the same articles with short comments on the mod's quality, hence why the article is only two paragraphs aside from the lead and the preamble. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 03:40, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
I completely agree with this. The idea that the mod project couldn't be accurately portrayed in Reload is preposterous. It wouldn't even particularly be a challenging merge. Sergecross73 msg me 13:06, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. Only notability is its appeasement towards fans' complaints, so a brief subsection about it describing its nature, release and added content is enough without bloat. Go D. Usopp (talk) 08:08, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. Since it has passed GNG, and there is no satisfying place to merge it to, I would advise leave it be. Even though it's a mod of Persona 3 Reload, merging it into Kotone's article would also be a decent choice, and so is Persona 3 Portable. SuperGrey (talk) 15:32, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Do you have any particular arguments to make as to why Persona 3 Reload isn't a suitable merge target in your opinion? silviaASH (inquire within) 15:49, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You may want to phrase that as more of a suggestion than a direct question, as it comes off as bludgeoning demanding something of anyone who disagrees. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 16:55, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Sorry, that wasn't my intention. I just thought prompting them for a little bit more detail about where they disagree and hopefully initiating a dialogue about it would be more helpful than simply reiterating the arguments that I and other editors in the merge camp have already trotted out. I'm trying to see if a compromise can be reached, not force others to agree with me. silviaASH (inquire within) 21:12, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    You're not bludgeoning, that was a valid question. Sergecross73 msg me 23:58, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I can't imagine what the merged version would be like without a structure change on the page. Currently, the coverage in the page are only 3 lines in "Post-release critical reception" -- which are well-summarized. If the mod is merged into it, how might it be balanced? Do we need to elaborate more on the lack of FeMC? Do we plan to let it have its own section? Anyway, if the "merge camp" can come up with a draft version, that would be very helpful. SuperGrey (talk) 21:32, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I don't think it needs its own section, no; the coverage on it is pretty sparse so it really just needs a few sentences. It's also worth noting that (although I missed this initially) the details about the developers not adding the female protagonist are already covered in the "Development" and "Downloadable content" sections. I've created a draft showing how I'd merge the details from the article at User:SilviaASH/sandbox/Persona 3 Reload Merge Draft. I think what I would do is just BLAR the Femc Reloaded Project article to this version, and point it to the {{vanchor}} I've placed there. silviaASH (inquire within) 23:02, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    (Anyone else is welcome to make edits to this sandbox draft page, by the way.) silviaASH (inquire within) 23:03, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm fine with this draft. Still, it is very condensed, so I'd like to know if others also prefer this version. SuperGrey (talk) 23:13, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    The draft is good - to have in addition to this article, not as a replacement for it. I think it should certainly be added to Reload's article post haste, but the current article still does not run afoul of WP:MERGEREASON, with sufficient notability and no apparent overlap. The original merge rationale is just untrue, so I will be unlikely to change my base opinion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 23:28, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
    Alright, in that case I've gone ahead and added those details to the article. silviaASH (inquire within) 23:48, 8 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]
Support. The current article is BARELY an article to begin with, and the sentence about the features like Theodore and the soundtrack are not backed up by any of the existing sources. Cut that, along with the sources about the lack of FeMC in Reload (which are already cited in the main Reload article and aren't directly about the mod), and all you have left is...a release date and some positive reception. So basically, everything already said about the mod in the main article right now. I could see a split down the line if the mod continues to grow and receive coverage, but right now, it's just not there. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 00:21, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]