Talk:Deadmau5

Video game appearances

Dadmau5 is featured in the 2021 metaverse-game The Sandbox.

References

Deadmau5 recently did a collaboration with World of Tanks Blitz — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2601:147:C482:1570:6993:7521:D451:649D (talk) 02:44, 27 November 2024 (UTC)

Video game appearance

deadmau5 has an unique decoration on his skin in Minecraft (Java Edition). Source: https://www.reddit.com/r/Minecraft/comments/ig28jx/fun_fact_deadmau5_has_mau5_ears_on_his_player/ 91.232.238.6 (talk) 21:22, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Interesting, but unfortunately Reddit is not an RS. Primefac (talk) 13:58, 4 July 2022 (UTC)

Well, it is astonishingly hard to find a good WP-compatible source for that. The "real" source would be the Minecraft client itself (which contains special code for his ears), but as "redistribution" of the source code is forbidden, that cannot be directly used/linked. And I would not rate the "blank" technical documentation (JavaDoc) for the responsible function as self-explanatory.

The Minecraft Wiki entry also cites no sources, as it is directly based on the decompiled client (https://minecraft.wiki/w/Easter_eggs#deadmau5's_ears) and a wiki does not comply with WP:RS.

If anything, I would suggest this recent article on the death of technoblade, mentioning the special decoration of deadmau5:

A few community members are calling for Minecraft’s developers to do something more concrete to show their appreciation for Technoblade’s impact on the community. The idea floated was to add some kind of cosmetic to the game in honor of him, specifically a crown.
While a crown would be a wonderful nod to the internet star, it is unlikely, as there is currently only one Minecraft account with a unique headpiece, Deadmau5’s. However, it might make sense for Mojang to add a custom cape reminiscent of Techno’s, as they are already in the game, and his is quite iconic.
— https://www.sportskeeda.com/minecraft/minecraft-team-tweets-mourning-technoblade-community

Would that suffice as RS?

Thanks, Xilef6000 (talk) 23:11, 8 July 2022 (UTC)

I will add this Explodingtnt30 (talk) 01:54, 18 December 2023 (UTC)

"Kx5" listed at Redirects for discussion

An editor has identified a potential problem with the redirect Kx5 and has thus listed it for discussion. This discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 January 22 § Kx5 until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. — Ceso femmuin mbolgaig mbung, mellohi! (投稿) 04:30, 22 January 2023 (UTC)

Controversy Section

9 hours ago, Thebiguglyalien placed a criticism template to the body of the "controversies" section. Normally, I would completely commit to reorganizing information like this into the career body, but it seems like some information would be better suited to remove if it could not be included in the section. I think that the Disney lawsuit should largely remain where it is, but the other information that should be included (and how) is up to consensus.

Also, question for Thebiguglyalien; what content gave you the leaning that there is undue weight therein? ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 11:57, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

It really depends on what type of coverage there is and how it affected the subject. My reading of policy is that is it was just a fleeting comment or isolated incident, then it doesn't need to be covered as part of the person's biography. WP:BALASP says a description of isolated events, quotes, criticisms, or news reports related to one subject may be verifiable and impartial, but still disproportionate to their overall significance to the article topic. The "offensive remarks" section is what stands out most immediately. I would only include this sort of thing if it had a lasting effect on his career or if it's something he's become known for and is often referenced in coverage of him. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 23:46, 5 May 2025 (UTC)

Thank you for your interpretation of policy here and guidance, I have removed some vast sections of the body text. I hope that this moves us closer remedying the situation. ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 11:58, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Alright, I'm a little frustrated with the feeling of getting tagged like that, trying to help, being reverted and than having been failed in a few lines after having tried for about a fourth of this year, all without any other significant content revisions from other editors. I think I am through with this for a while. ~ GoatLordServant^(Talk) 14:16, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

Drmies, would you care to weigh in? This seems like the exact type of recency-cruft that's discouraged by WP:BALASP and the aptly-named WP:FART. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 🛸 20:42, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

GA review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Deadmau5/GA3. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: GoatLordServant (talk · contribs) 15:49, 9 December 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Drmies (talk · contribs) 14:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I'm going to give this a quick fail: this has been open for months, and the article is undergoing constant revision, and there is some dispute in the history. At any rate it's simply not good enough now in terms of sourcing, formatting, and structure, before we even get to the writing. Hint: start weeding out poor sources, standardize all citations with the proper templates. Drmies (talk) 14:09, 6 May 2025 (UTC)

I don't know, User:Thebiguglyalien--which bit are we talking about? In the chunk that I restored I think there's some relevant/encyclopedic material (and I want you to know that I'm partly responsible for FART, haha), but that editor has so many edits here that I don't know exactly what we're talking about. You saw I quick-failed the GA nomination, of course, precisely for those reasons. Thanks, Drmies (talk) 21:03, 6 May 2025 (UTC)