Talk:Grand Theft Auto VI/Archive 1

Archive 1

Spelling of GB

Shouldn't it be "3 gigabytes" rather than "3 GB" for the first mention of it? Unspectrogram (talk) 07:58, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

A Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page or its Wikidata item has been nominated for speedy deletion:

• GTAVI Leak Statement.jpg

You can see the reason for deletion at the file description page linked above. —Community Tech bot (talk) 17:52, 19 September 2022 (UTC)

Seventeenth Instalment

This game is due to be the 17th title in the series, as Grand Theft Auto Online is treated by as it's own separate product and a separate registered trademark by Take Two Interactive, Rockstar Games, and Rockstar North since it's debut in 2013, as Leslie Benzies himself confirmed in many CVG interviews from back in the day, and even refer to GTA V as just a "launching point" for Grand Theft Auto Online. Also, in every Take Two Interactive's Virtual Annual Shareholder Meetings to this day, they refer to the game as a "stand-alone multiplayer title that comes for free with the purchase of Grand Theft Auto V". The same goes to Red Dead Online, they even have their own separate logos. However, other previous multiplayers released until 2012 are considered to be "online multiplayer features" to the main games (e.g. Grand Theft Auto IV, Max Payne 3, Red Dead Redemption). Absynthe17 (talk) 12:46, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

References

Infobox

Presently, this article's infobox makes use of three parameters, two of which target the same page. With no other information in there that the lead can't already summarise, I'd say it's entirely superfluous and should be commented out until a later date. See MOS:INFOBOXUSE. — CR4ZE (T • C) 14:46, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd been considering this too, so commenting it out is fine with me. Considering how commonplace the infobox is for VG articles, it's easy to overlook how useless this one is until you take a second look and realise how little information we currently possess. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 15:00, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Alright, I'm pulling the trigger on this early. If anybody else protests, feel free to revert and/or discuss here. — CR4ZE (T • C) 15:10, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

Requested move 21 September 2022

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: Not moved. (non-admin closure) Natg 19 (talk) 21:35, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

---

Untitled Grand Theft Auto game → 2022 Grand Theft Auto content leak – Even though GTA 6 is to be the next game in the series, this article talks more about the GTA 6 leaks than anything regarding GTA 6 at all. Therefore, a move to 2022 Grand Theft Auto content leak would make more sense than a game that besides the leak has barely any info in regards to development, setting, and more. -- PanchamBro (talk • contributions) 17:05, 21 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose – Only half of the article is currently about the leak as it also covers other aspects of the game's pre-release coverage. Naturally, more (non-leak) content will be added over time and the article would inevitably be moved back, at the latest when the game is formally announced. IceWelder [✉] 17:14, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose – The title of the article will eventually be changed to that of the game, when it's announced. The current page isn't also solely about the content, so the proposed title would be limiting.Ayıntaplı (talk) 18:38, 21 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per IceWelder and Ayıntaplı. There's a lot of information about the leak, but ultimately the article is still about the game—and, as IceWelder says, it would inevitably be moved back before long anyway. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:45, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose per above and add that the proposed title wouldn't make sense as only about half the article covers the leak itself. — CR4ZE (T • C) 02:08, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose Out of scope for the page. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 10:38, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
• Oppose. It describes far more than just the leak. RodRabelo7 (talk) 10:46, 22 September 2022 (UTC)
• Comment: This article is still about the game and will eventually come to be filled out with officially released information, rendering such a move pointless. That being said, because the leak has received a significant amount of media coverage for its unprecedented nature, I propose splitting the content about the leak to a new page, BUT only if it continues to be discussed in reliable sources long after the fact per WP:RECENT. ToQ100gou (talk) 06:31, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

• I would oppose this motion as well, for several reasons; this would be an inappropriate application of WHENSPLIT likely to lead to a POVFORK. There's no reason to split this off at present as it's well within the scope of the article's subject. — CR4ZE (T • C) 06:54, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

• Oppose moving but I support splitting the Leak section into its own article. Skyshifter ^talk 16:08, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

  Yeah I think the leak should be its own article. Timur9008 (talk) 19:17, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

I oppose splitting the leak into a separate article. There's not enough content on its own to warrant having it be split. Jay Coop · Talk · Contributions 20:07, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

I also oppose splitting the leak into a separate article. Axem Titanium (talk) 18:09, 27 September 2022 (UTC)

• Move to Grand Theft Auto VI, per WP:COMMONNAME (and the fact that Schreier's reported it's in fact the official name as well). JOEBRO⁶⁴ 20:24, 23 September 2022 (UTC)

A leak from a reporter ≠ official announcement from Rockstar. Article title should remain as is and be moved to VI when the game is properly unveiled. This was the status quo with the "Untitled Breath of the Wild sequel" (Tears of the Kingdom) for several years. — CR4ZE (T • C) 02:52, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

Tears of the Kingdom didn't have an obvious WP:COMMONNAME. It's not really comparable to this, which is widely known as GTA VI. JOEBRO⁶⁴ 03:04, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I'd argue that Breath of the Wild 2 was the pretty obvious WP:COMMONNAME for several years, so it seems fairly comparable to me. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:56, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

I edited the page, read my notes for more info. But in short; A Quote on quote "LEAK" is NOT the same as a quote on quote "Hack" Piraatje6 (talk) 12:45, 24 September 2022 (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.

British English

Why should this article be written in British English? It has strong ties to the US due to Rockstar being based in the US. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:07, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

All Grand Theft Auto articles are written in British English, since the series developer is based in Scotland. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 15:12, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Huh.. I did not know that. I thought it would be written in American English since the main company Rockstar is based in New York. Honestly, I thought Rockstar North was just the official name for Rockstar. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 15:18, 7 October 2022 (UTC)

Well, that I can see, there never was any clearly established consensus with respect to WP:TIES. Since there are none (or nobody has made a strong enough argument that there are), we WP:RETAIN for consistency's sake. — CR4ZE (T • C) 12:44, 9 October 2022 (UTC)

@CR4ZE You could argue that all Games take place in the US, so the whole franchise is very US focused. XenogenesisX2 (talk) 22:59, 27 October 2022 (UTC)

But I'm not making that argument. The original developer was UK based but most games are set in the US. I don't think either fact gives greater weight with respect to TIES, so the relevant guidance would be to RETAIN and have consistency between the different articles. — CR4ZE (T • C) 03:24, 28 October 2022 (UTC)

This article and its title are ridiculous.

How can a few vague predictions possibly warrant two huge paragraphs? How are these vague predictions relevant to the game’s development, no less? This is WP:PROPORTION and WP:SPECULATION gone mad. Absolutely ridiculous excessive coverage. How are Leslie Benzies’s and Strauss Zelnick’s vague statements related to the game’s development? There’s nothing to suggest that their comments are notable or covered by reliable sources. WP:VNOT Asperthrow (talk) 11:14, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

The article primarily draws its notability from the leak, which was very widely reported on (more than enough to pass GNG). However, there is additional information that you would find in other games' development sections, thus the article scope is not limited to just that leak. The article title is the result of the game having no official name yet. The article contains no speculation or original research, and all statements from involved parties were reported by reliable sources. IceWelder [✉] 14:39, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

A list of WP:CRYSTALBALL predictions and claims is a sorry excuse for a Development section.

I refer you to WP:GAMECRUFT section 9, stating “Speculation about future games, rumors about content within a game, or changes in video game developers and publishers should not be included, even if these rumors emerge or are re-reported from reliable sources. Discussion of well-reported, industry-wide rumors from a historical standpoint, well after the time they had or should have happened, may be appropriate to help provide context for a topic.”

Are these from a historical standpoint and is the coverage warranted? I’d like to talk about this here with anyone interested. Asperthrow (talk) 22:23, 7 November 2022 (UTC)

If you think this article should be deleted feel free to AFD it. ― Blaze Wolf^Talk_{Blaze Wolf#6545} 00:13, 8 November 2022 (UTC)

Installment is spelled incorrectly

It's installment, not instalment Vlady290 (talk) 21:09, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

The article is written in British English, in which there is only one "L". Prefall 21:30, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

why would you use British English spelling for an American game made by an American based company? Vlady290 (talk) 21:49, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

On a website that run out of the US and is US based Vlady290 (talk) 21:53, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto are British games made by a British-based company. Wikipedia's headquarters are irrelevant—this is English Wikipedia, not American English Wikipedia; see MOS:ENGVAR. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 23:45, 10 May 2023 (UTC)

February 2022 has not happened yet

How can rockstar have confirmed the game in February 2022 if it is currently September 2022? Perhaps this is when they intended to announce it, or maybe the date is just wrong, either way this should be changed. 69.222.187.203 (talk) 01:55, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Rockstar confirmed the game's development in February 2022. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 01:59, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

it appears I have confused February for December and thought that February was in the future. (Not sure if this is formatted correctly this is my first time doing this) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.222.187.203 (talk) 02:07, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

Lmao. Neocorelight (Talk) 14:02, 20 September 2022 (UTC)

yeah 2A01:CB1C:DE9:1300:140A:77AF:ECE6:CA0A (talk) 20:32, 1 June 2023 (UTC)

Including the hacker's name?

Now that the hacker's name is known, should it be included within the "Leak" section? 2A02:A020:86:180B:91A5:C50D:7F8F:9640 (talk) 22:40, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

No, per WP:BLPNAME: "Caution should be applied when identifying individuals who are discussed primarily in terms of a single event". – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:43, 16 July 2023 (UTC)

Ah, ok! Quite interesting after reading the rule/clause. I bet the circumstance would be different if he was some sort of world-class international hacker. To this day, it still astonishes me that a 16-17 year old had done this. 2A02:A020:86:180B:91A5:C50D:7F8F:9640 (talk) 06:25, 17 July 2023 (UTC)

Question

Was this article included in the “In the news” section of the main page when it was leaked? 2600:6C52:7200:F80D:D4E2:5E1D:57CA:C135 (talk) 13:40, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

No, nor does it appear to have been nominated—but it was on the front page in the DYK section. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 13:52, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Oh ok. I’m new to this website but I suppose it isn’t notable enough for “in the news”. Cool that they had it in the DYK section though 2600:6C52:7200:F80D:D4E2:5E1D:57CA:C135 (talk) 13:55, 26 August 2023 (UTC)

Edit notice

for info: I've added the engvar edit notice to this article. Same one as GTA V - X201 (talk) 11:42, 30 August 2023 (UTC)

Rename

I think we should rename this to GTA 6 until we know what its official title is. Thoughts? Eg224 (talk) 22:55, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

The fact that we don't have an official title is the exact reason this shouldn't be renamed. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 22:57, 17 September 2023 (UTC)

Redirects for discussion

"Jason and Lucia" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Jason and Lucia has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Jason and Lucia until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:04, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

"Arion Kurtaj" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Arion Kurtaj has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Arion Kurtaj until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:07, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

"Alexandra Echavarri" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Alexandra Echavarri has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 October 6 § Alexandra Echavarri until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 01:14, 6 October 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 22 October 2023

Edit Untitled Grand Theft Auto game to Grand Theft Auto 6 (GTA 6) Moondeve (talk) 00:11, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: please provide reliable sources that support the change you want to be made. RudolfRed (talk) 01:59, 22 October 2023 (UTC)

please link the page with the italian page, thank you

I can't add the linking between languages because I don't have permission, maybe because the page is protected, the italian page is this: Videogioco senza titolo della serie 𝘎𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘛𝘩𝘦𝘧𝘵 𝘈𝘶𝘵𝘰 - Wikipedia Mario4736 (talk) 05:02, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

 Done on Wikidata. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 05:38, 23 October 2023 (UTC)

Infobox

Since the game is apparently about to be (re)announced, should the infobox be unhidden once the name (likely to be GTA VI) is revealed? RodRabelo7 (talk) 04:40, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

We'll just have to wait and see exactly what is announced. The name alone isn't enough to justify the infobox, in my opinion, but we may learn more than that. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:42, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 9 November 2023

Add either a subsection or section detailing the current events ongoing with Rockstar Games announcing the plans to rollout the trailer for the next Grand Theft Auto in December of 2023. Planeman77 (talk) 04:32, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

 Not done: The information is already in the article. An additional subsection for a single sentence is unnecessary. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 04:33, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Grand Theft Auto VI/6

I think this page should be moved to a new page called Grand Theft Auto VI/6 in early December since it's official that the game trailer will be announced next month in early December. WrestleLuxury Wiki (talk) 15:13, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

Game Trailer has been announced, but the name of the game hasn't. SRG372 (Talk • Edits) 17:16, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

We should wait until the trailer releases. Lostfan333 (talk) 19:53, 8 November 2023 (UTC)

i mean it's obviously gonna be gta 6 lol, but i agree with y'all we should wait till December, what if the game actually turns out to be gta chinatown wars 2 or gta 5 toaster edition lmao WrestleLuxury Wiki (talk) 16:59, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

For one, we do not know whether they will call the game "Grand Theft Auto VI" or "Grand Theft Auto 6". Maybe it will be a Red Dead Redemption 2 situation where a Roman numeral is on the cover but all texts use the Arabic one. Maybe they will give it a more unique subtitle. Even if the game will likely not end up being called "gta chinatown wars 2 or gta 5 toaster edition lmao", we are in no rush to give the article a name the product does not yet have. IceWelder [✉] 17:27, 9 November 2023 (UTC)

Most liked video game tweet

Rockstar announcement tweet is apparently the most liked video game tweet ever to date. In my opinion, this should be included in the article, though I have only found a WP:METRO source stating this and it ain’t considered reliable as far as I can tell. Is Eurogamer considered reliable? It seems very serious to me. 2804:14D:5C32:4673:F749:2FC4:FA8F:6F1B (talk) 06:18, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

For a huge list of which video game sources are, and aren't, reliable, see Wikipedia:VG/RS - X201 (talk) 08:16, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

 Done with some additional references—definitely seems notable enough for at least a brief mention. – Rhain ☔ (he/him) 06:38, 10 November 2023 (UTC)

I can already tell this game will break records. 81.169.0.200 (talk) 07:20, 10 November 2023 (UTC)