This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
If I provide the related material it will reveal sensitive information, such as address, Mother and fathers names and potential phone numbers. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
OnWelfare (
talk •
contribs)
23:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Not done: Not relevant enough for inclusion, external links usually only go to official sites of the person/IMDb pages etc — IVORKTalk05:39, 14 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Accessible edits that contain personal information
Those edits that contain Asmongold's personal information are somehow still accessible, and I don't know why. They've been accessible for months, and I don't know why they haven't been removed yet.
L33tm4n (
talk)
21:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2022
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The Hyperlink for the game “New world” in the info box directs to the page for the name given to the Americas and the Caribbean instead of the video game “New world”
This article is full-protected for 10 days due to a content dispute. Work it out on the talk page. You can make edit requests for noncontroversial changes. ~
Anachronist (
talk)
04:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)reply
The page is getting vandalized again with one user in particular posting the same information. Could the page be protected again or somebody reach a conclusion based on the below discussion?
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
21:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
It's a recent article and could have used the Wikipedia information as a source, as at the time the name was available (article is dated February 18 and name was posted to wiki on February 18 using the old source). Asmongold has historically been very outspoken about wanting to be private and not wanting his personal information be shared online, and other than his first name Zack, no information has been made public. Unless we know where this information came from, it shouldn't be used in order not to doxx the person, especially since the person clearly does not want this information be public.
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
16:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)—
SturmFernmelder (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Whether the source is reliable or unreliable, Asmongold has always been a very private individual and is very intentional about not wanting his last name and other personal identifiers to be accessible. We're trying to uphold his desire for privacy by keeping relevant information off this wiki.
MageTea (
talk)
16:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC) —
MageTea (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
I'm not aware of an Wikipedia policy that allows for subjects of articles to dictate what information is or isn't included within the article. There are plenty of articles where the subject would prefer information not shared, especially those which cause controversy, but their personal feelings on the matter don't have an impact. As long as there is a
reliable source for the information and it's relevant to the article, it can be added.Skipple☎19:51, 27 February 2023 (UTC)reply
The name has been used without Asmon's permission, it's not in the public's interest to know his last name, he has not made his last name publicly available, the last name is not relevant to the story as he only goes by his username and first name and that the use of the full name is unwarranted and will have chances of causing harm to him. Multiple news sites, including Dexerto have been contacted and they have edited to remove the name as they realized the name is not relevant to the story and that it will cause more harm than good. Additionally, there is currently not a reliable source that is showing his name and none that has acknowledged how they have obtained the name. Doxxing is a serious matter and not something that should be dealt lightly with, especially if said "news" article use Wikipedia as their source and simply create a circular reference.
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
20:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Posthumously I would agree with you. However, when speaking of a live subject there are potential real life consequences to having information such as a full name readily accessible on the internet.
In official capacity on behalf of Asmongold, He has not publicly shared what his last name is and desires for it to remain private. Below I have linked to two areas in Wikipedia policy that that would imply they would respect the personal wishes of a living person that an article exists for. We have also direct him to
Wikipedia:Requests for oversight so hopefully this will not come up again in the future.
[redacted] are both Twitch and
Reddit Mods for Asmongold.
It is obvious they have a vested interest protecting Asmongold from any controversies, but Asmongold's personal name (redact) has been shared by many articles internationally, these are only a few of the most reputable I could find:
Dotesports is a reliable source per
WP:VG/RS. This should satisfy any concerns about reliability of this information. This information is now public and any feelings the subject has on this should bring it up with the publishing site. The name of an individual does not violate
WP:BLP and is basic information about the subject. Skipple☎02:33, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
So do you feel that even with what is stated in the Wikipedia policy, linked below, and with considering that Asmongold does not want his full name public, that his objection is not enough to omit this information? The policy calls for it to be reasonably inferred that the subject does not object to the inclusion of information such as a full name. I do not believe this can be reasonably inferred.
I believe you are referring to the following statement:
Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public.
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on this statement, but it would appear to me that dotesports reference would satisfy the former part of that statement is it is published by a reliable source thus making the subject's objection to be irrelevant, but there certainly could be other interpretations. I believe looping in
WP:BLP might be the best course of action at this point as they might have a better understanding of standards for this case.Skipple☎04:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
You missed the key word "widely". One source is not sufficient. Notch being Marcus Pearson is widely published, as an example.
Masem (
t)
21:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
This is not an easy one. The relevant word is "widely" reported. I think there is no question his first name is public. There is no attempt to hide it. As to the last name, dotesports initially had this as a slam-dunk to include. It's an interview with a profile. However, the birthday is listed as unknown, which implies he did not provide the information in the profile. As a Google search of only subject's name does not make the connection obvious, I would say exclude for now. Anyone wanting the real name can find it, but the burden here is "widely available" and that has not been met nor any evidence provided they have released the information themselves.
Slywriter (
talk)
04:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
While if Asmongold were just a random person, he would be able to say that his name should not be mentioned on Wikipedia citing
WP:BLPNAME, he is considered a very clear
WP:PUBLICFIGURE, not a random person. Because of this, I do not believe he can say any longer that his name is irrelevant for the purposes of the article. If the name appears in a
WP:RS, then it is "fair game" to put in the article - articles simply report what reliable sources say without
censorship. While privacy is of course important, if someone really wanted to find Asmongold's name, a simple Google search will lead them to DotEsports regardless, so the cat's out of the bag.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
06:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I suggest re-reading and maybe exploring
WP:BLPN as that is decidedly not how the community interprets. We do not include a name just because a single reliable source says it. That's not widely. And the Google search takes effort. Someone who knows him privately may have no clue of his online identity and a simple search wouldn't reveal the online identity to them. BLP is one area where
WP:NOTCENSORED is not a counter. The community knows BLP policies engage in censorship and accepts as a necessary evil.
Slywriter (
talk)
00:01, 8 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I'd also have to !vote exclude here for now. I agree with
Slywriter above, that the key term is "widely." In searching both of the reliable custom search and the situational one, the only article that comes up with his full name is the Dot Esports piece. There's nothing else. Books refer to him by his username even in sentences where other people are identified by name (
[1]).
Nomader (
talk)
07:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
This is from a Forbes staff member, so is not
WP:FORBESCON. Combined with the
Dot eSports article linked above, this suggests that there are now multiple reliable sources which treat this as basic information.
"When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it."
I think the spirit of Wikipedia's policy on privacy of personal information supports the exclusion of a person's alleged name that has never used it and only goes by an alias for privacy reasons. The sources used to show what his name are not reliable. They are not anything but cookie cutter articles that have sourced that name from probably here on Wikipedia and other similar unreliable sources. There seems to be an effort here to dox this individual who has never once shared his full name.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.18.235.243 (
talk)
19:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Both the Forbes article and the DotEsports articles appear to be
reliable sources per Wikipedia's definition.
Doxing is not my intent. Generally, readers of an encyclopedia article are going to want to know someone's name. While streamers often use pseudonyms, it's very unusual for someone know as a reputable business owner to use a pseudonym. As the co-owner of Starforge Systems and One True King, this is starting to become a matter of public interest for business reasons.
Well, there's no urgency, and I'm fine leaving it out for now. If more reliable sources mention this it will probably end up here sooner or later.
Grayfell (
talk)
04:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I think there have been some overly defensive edits being made about the name here.
There are at least two valid, reliable sources that have published his name (Dot eSports and Forbes staff). Worse still, his name is public record as a shareholder in multiple companies (OTK, Starforge). Being that he is very openly an owner of both, and both articles are considered from reliable sources, I'm not entirely sure that any of this is a valid discussion any more. I understand that Asmon/Zack is generally private about his personal life, but when you've pushed yourself as a public figure for this long, and have state and federal information freely available via FOIP requests, it's kind of a mooted point. His information is publicly available from sources, any removal of the name at this point is defensive editing. Worse still, while I certainly can't prove it, and accusations without proof are exactly that, I can't help but think that the people so vehemently against this are biased fans.
I recognize the desire for privacy, but quite unfortunately, if you've chosen a job as a public figure, you have to accept that some of your basic details are going to be publicly available. In fact, I'd argue that as the owner or co-owner of multiple companies that trade with the public, his details SHOULD be available.
I've done some more research, and here are more articles from sources considered reliable, per
Wikipedia:VG/RS
Not convinced this needs to be an argument. There needs to be a balance between privacy and public knowledge. I'm personally of the opinion that when Zack/Asmon went from being "just" a streamer to also being a business owner, his information should be more available.
Whether or not somebody's information is public record is irrelevant, just like property tax records or vehicle records which are also public record, cannot be used as sources or an argument for inclusion.
Additionally, "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public." Considering the amount of news being publishes about Asmongold, this is nowhere near "widely"
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
18:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Legacy section is not neutral
The legacy section is written in a biased and adulatory manner that reads like an advertisement for Asmongold rather than an encyclopedia article. Claims about Asmongold's "willingness and dedication" to World of Warcraft, as well as his "passion and extensive knowledge", seem to be the opinions of the writer and are not specifically sourced. The opinions that are present in the Dexerto and Game Rant sources are not clarified as opinions in this article, and are instead taken to be matter of fact. I think the legacy section should either be rewritten in a neutral format or removed entirely.
Sickfit (
talk)
15:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Praising vs. describing
I'm noticing in the "Career" :
"His unique style, in-depth knowledge of the game, and entertaining commentary earned him a dedicated fanbase and his dedication to the game and candid personality resonated with viewers"
Not backed up on how Asmongold's "style" is supposedly "unique" (the word "style" being itself quite ambiguous. What are we talking about here?), these words have quite a feeling of praising on these words' writer self-perception of the person than an actual factual description.
Comparing to the following words "in-depth knowledge of the game and entertaining commentary [...]" that can be more clearly backed-up and agreed upon.
Same with "[...] candid personality resonated with viewers", again that sounds like more of an opinion than facts.
Having taken notice the comment "Legacy section is not neutral" of 15:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC) already pointing out some writing in "adulatory manner that reads like an advertisement". It seems to me that words like "His unique style" (without further elaboration) are some remnant of advertising-like writing.
2A01:E0A:58:F640:A8DC:EEC7:D439:92D6 (
talk)
14:53, 21 November 2023 (UTC)reply
also no mention of his entanglements with the alt-right scene and connections to alt-right streaming and youtube accounts he maintains
84.176.56.155 (
talk)
11:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Should the bounty placed on him also be mentioned. Seem to be in jest, but placing literal wanted poster on person is, even as a joke, still a death threat.
94.57.142.18 (
talk)
08:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Whether or not it is a death threat is for
reliable sources to decide, and we can report what those sources say. The same applies to his alt-right entanglements. Per
WP:BLP, reliable sources are not optional.
Grayfell (
talk)
05:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply
This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or
poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially
libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to
this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to
join the project and
contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the
documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet culture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
internet culture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Internet cultureWikipedia:WikiProject Internet cultureTemplate:WikiProject Internet cultureInternet culture articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
If I provide the related material it will reveal sensitive information, such as address, Mother and fathers names and potential phone numbers. — Preceding
unsigned comment added by
OnWelfare (
talk •
contribs)
23:59, 20 April 2021 (UTC)reply
Not done: Not relevant enough for inclusion, external links usually only go to official sites of the person/IMDb pages etc — IVORKTalk05:39, 14 July 2021 (UTC)reply
Accessible edits that contain personal information
Those edits that contain Asmongold's personal information are somehow still accessible, and I don't know why. They've been accessible for months, and I don't know why they haven't been removed yet.
L33tm4n (
talk)
21:29, 8 August 2022 (UTC)reply
Semi-protected edit request on 28 August 2022
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request.
The Hyperlink for the game “New world” in the info box directs to the page for the name given to the Americas and the Caribbean instead of the video game “New world”
This article is full-protected for 10 days due to a content dispute. Work it out on the talk page. You can make edit requests for noncontroversial changes. ~
Anachronist (
talk)
04:17, 24 February 2023 (UTC)reply
The page is getting vandalized again with one user in particular posting the same information. Could the page be protected again or somebody reach a conclusion based on the below discussion?
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
21:12, 6 March 2023 (UTC)reply
It's a recent article and could have used the Wikipedia information as a source, as at the time the name was available (article is dated February 18 and name was posted to wiki on February 18 using the old source). Asmongold has historically been very outspoken about wanting to be private and not wanting his personal information be shared online, and other than his first name Zack, no information has been made public. Unless we know where this information came from, it shouldn't be used in order not to doxx the person, especially since the person clearly does not want this information be public.
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
16:05, 24 February 2023 (UTC)—
SturmFernmelder (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
Whether the source is reliable or unreliable, Asmongold has always been a very private individual and is very intentional about not wanting his last name and other personal identifiers to be accessible. We're trying to uphold his desire for privacy by keeping relevant information off this wiki.
MageTea (
talk)
16:06, 24 February 2023 (UTC) —
MageTea (
talk •
contribs) has made
few or no other edits outside this topic. reply
I'm not aware of an Wikipedia policy that allows for subjects of articles to dictate what information is or isn't included within the article. There are plenty of articles where the subject would prefer information not shared, especially those which cause controversy, but their personal feelings on the matter don't have an impact. As long as there is a
reliable source for the information and it's relevant to the article, it can be added.Skipple☎19:51, 27 February 2023 (UTC)reply
The name has been used without Asmon's permission, it's not in the public's interest to know his last name, he has not made his last name publicly available, the last name is not relevant to the story as he only goes by his username and first name and that the use of the full name is unwarranted and will have chances of causing harm to him. Multiple news sites, including Dexerto have been contacted and they have edited to remove the name as they realized the name is not relevant to the story and that it will cause more harm than good. Additionally, there is currently not a reliable source that is showing his name and none that has acknowledged how they have obtained the name. Doxxing is a serious matter and not something that should be dealt lightly with, especially if said "news" article use Wikipedia as their source and simply create a circular reference.
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
20:24, 27 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Posthumously I would agree with you. However, when speaking of a live subject there are potential real life consequences to having information such as a full name readily accessible on the internet.
In official capacity on behalf of Asmongold, He has not publicly shared what his last name is and desires for it to remain private. Below I have linked to two areas in Wikipedia policy that that would imply they would respect the personal wishes of a living person that an article exists for. We have also direct him to
Wikipedia:Requests for oversight so hopefully this will not come up again in the future.
[redacted] are both Twitch and
Reddit Mods for Asmongold.
It is obvious they have a vested interest protecting Asmongold from any controversies, but Asmongold's personal name (redact) has been shared by many articles internationally, these are only a few of the most reputable I could find:
Dotesports is a reliable source per
WP:VG/RS. This should satisfy any concerns about reliability of this information. This information is now public and any feelings the subject has on this should bring it up with the publishing site. The name of an individual does not violate
WP:BLP and is basic information about the subject. Skipple☎02:33, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
So do you feel that even with what is stated in the Wikipedia policy, linked below, and with considering that Asmongold does not want his full name public, that his objection is not enough to omit this information? The policy calls for it to be reasonably inferred that the subject does not object to the inclusion of information such as a full name. I do not believe this can be reasonably inferred.
I believe you are referring to the following statement:
Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public.
I'm not going to pretend to be an expert on this statement, but it would appear to me that dotesports reference would satisfy the former part of that statement is it is published by a reliable source thus making the subject's objection to be irrelevant, but there certainly could be other interpretations. I believe looping in
WP:BLP might be the best course of action at this point as they might have a better understanding of standards for this case.Skipple☎04:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
You missed the key word "widely". One source is not sufficient. Notch being Marcus Pearson is widely published, as an example.
Masem (
t)
21:11, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
This is not an easy one. The relevant word is "widely" reported. I think there is no question his first name is public. There is no attempt to hide it. As to the last name, dotesports initially had this as a slam-dunk to include. It's an interview with a profile. However, the birthday is listed as unknown, which implies he did not provide the information in the profile. As a Google search of only subject's name does not make the connection obvious, I would say exclude for now. Anyone wanting the real name can find it, but the burden here is "widely available" and that has not been met nor any evidence provided they have released the information themselves.
Slywriter (
talk)
04:43, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
While if Asmongold were just a random person, he would be able to say that his name should not be mentioned on Wikipedia citing
WP:BLPNAME, he is considered a very clear
WP:PUBLICFIGURE, not a random person. Because of this, I do not believe he can say any longer that his name is irrelevant for the purposes of the article. If the name appears in a
WP:RS, then it is "fair game" to put in the article - articles simply report what reliable sources say without
censorship. While privacy is of course important, if someone really wanted to find Asmongold's name, a simple Google search will lead them to DotEsports regardless, so the cat's out of the bag.
ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (
ᴛ)
06:14, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I suggest re-reading and maybe exploring
WP:BLPN as that is decidedly not how the community interprets. We do not include a name just because a single reliable source says it. That's not widely. And the Google search takes effort. Someone who knows him privately may have no clue of his online identity and a simple search wouldn't reveal the online identity to them. BLP is one area where
WP:NOTCENSORED is not a counter. The community knows BLP policies engage in censorship and accepts as a necessary evil.
Slywriter (
talk)
00:01, 8 March 2023 (UTC)reply
I'd also have to !vote exclude here for now. I agree with
Slywriter above, that the key term is "widely." In searching both of the reliable custom search and the situational one, the only article that comes up with his full name is the Dot Esports piece. There's nothing else. Books refer to him by his username even in sentences where other people are identified by name (
[1]).
Nomader (
talk)
07:22, 7 March 2023 (UTC)reply
This is from a Forbes staff member, so is not
WP:FORBESCON. Combined with the
Dot eSports article linked above, this suggests that there are now multiple reliable sources which treat this as basic information.
"When the name of a private individual has not been widely disseminated or has been intentionally concealed, such as in certain court cases or occupations, it is often preferable to omit it."
I think the spirit of Wikipedia's policy on privacy of personal information supports the exclusion of a person's alleged name that has never used it and only goes by an alias for privacy reasons. The sources used to show what his name are not reliable. They are not anything but cookie cutter articles that have sourced that name from probably here on Wikipedia and other similar unreliable sources. There seems to be an effort here to dox this individual who has never once shared his full name.— Preceding
unsigned comment added by
24.18.235.243 (
talk)
19:19, 12 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Both the Forbes article and the DotEsports articles appear to be
reliable sources per Wikipedia's definition.
Doxing is not my intent. Generally, readers of an encyclopedia article are going to want to know someone's name. While streamers often use pseudonyms, it's very unusual for someone know as a reputable business owner to use a pseudonym. As the co-owner of Starforge Systems and One True King, this is starting to become a matter of public interest for business reasons.
Well, there's no urgency, and I'm fine leaving it out for now. If more reliable sources mention this it will probably end up here sooner or later.
Grayfell (
talk)
04:33, 15 May 2024 (UTC)reply
I think there have been some overly defensive edits being made about the name here.
There are at least two valid, reliable sources that have published his name (Dot eSports and Forbes staff). Worse still, his name is public record as a shareholder in multiple companies (OTK, Starforge). Being that he is very openly an owner of both, and both articles are considered from reliable sources, I'm not entirely sure that any of this is a valid discussion any more. I understand that Asmon/Zack is generally private about his personal life, but when you've pushed yourself as a public figure for this long, and have state and federal information freely available via FOIP requests, it's kind of a mooted point. His information is publicly available from sources, any removal of the name at this point is defensive editing. Worse still, while I certainly can't prove it, and accusations without proof are exactly that, I can't help but think that the people so vehemently against this are biased fans.
I recognize the desire for privacy, but quite unfortunately, if you've chosen a job as a public figure, you have to accept that some of your basic details are going to be publicly available. In fact, I'd argue that as the owner or co-owner of multiple companies that trade with the public, his details SHOULD be available.
I've done some more research, and here are more articles from sources considered reliable, per
Wikipedia:VG/RS
Not convinced this needs to be an argument. There needs to be a balance between privacy and public knowledge. I'm personally of the opinion that when Zack/Asmon went from being "just" a streamer to also being a business owner, his information should be more available.
Whether or not somebody's information is public record is irrelevant, just like property tax records or vehicle records which are also public record, cannot be used as sources or an argument for inclusion.
Additionally, "Wikipedia includes full names and dates of birth that have been widely published by reliable sources, or by sources linked to the subject such that it may reasonably be inferred that the subject does not object to the details being made public." Considering the amount of news being publishes about Asmongold, this is nowhere near "widely"
SturmFernmelder (
talk)
18:15, 25 June 2024 (UTC)reply
Legacy section is not neutral
The legacy section is written in a biased and adulatory manner that reads like an advertisement for Asmongold rather than an encyclopedia article. Claims about Asmongold's "willingness and dedication" to World of Warcraft, as well as his "passion and extensive knowledge", seem to be the opinions of the writer and are not specifically sourced. The opinions that are present in the Dexerto and Game Rant sources are not clarified as opinions in this article, and are instead taken to be matter of fact. I think the legacy section should either be rewritten in a neutral format or removed entirely.
Sickfit (
talk)
15:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC)reply
Praising vs. describing
I'm noticing in the "Career" :
"His unique style, in-depth knowledge of the game, and entertaining commentary earned him a dedicated fanbase and his dedication to the game and candid personality resonated with viewers"
Not backed up on how Asmongold's "style" is supposedly "unique" (the word "style" being itself quite ambiguous. What are we talking about here?), these words have quite a feeling of praising on these words' writer self-perception of the person than an actual factual description.
Comparing to the following words "in-depth knowledge of the game and entertaining commentary [...]" that can be more clearly backed-up and agreed upon.
Same with "[...] candid personality resonated with viewers", again that sounds like more of an opinion than facts.
Having taken notice the comment "Legacy section is not neutral" of 15:11, 1 April 2023 (UTC) already pointing out some writing in "adulatory manner that reads like an advertisement". It seems to me that words like "His unique style" (without further elaboration) are some remnant of advertising-like writing.
2A01:E0A:58:F640:A8DC:EEC7:D439:92D6 (
talk)
14:53, 21 November 2023 (UTC)reply
also no mention of his entanglements with the alt-right scene and connections to alt-right streaming and youtube accounts he maintains
84.176.56.155 (
talk)
11:24, 3 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Should the bounty placed on him also be mentioned. Seem to be in jest, but placing literal wanted poster on person is, even as a joke, still a death threat.
94.57.142.18 (
talk)
08:29, 9 May 2024 (UTC)reply
Whether or not it is a death threat is for
reliable sources to decide, and we can report what those sources say. The same applies to his alt-right entanglements. Per
WP:BLP, reliable sources are not optional.
Grayfell (
talk)
05:25, 10 June 2024 (UTC)reply