Talk:Space Empires 4X

	Games portal This article is part of WikiProject Board and table games, an attempt to better organize information in articles related to board games and tabletop games. If you would like to participate, you can edit the article attached to this page, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.Board and table gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Board and table gamesTemplate:WikiProject Board and table gamesboard and table game articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

No colon in the title[edit]

While some places, including BGG, use colon in the title (Space Empires: 4X), it seems to be an error. Neither the game box nor the rulebook feature such a usage. The game tends to refer to itself as just "Space Empires", and sometimes as "Space Empires 4X". See also the official page at https://www.gmtgames.com/p-762-space-empires-4th-printing.aspx which uses either "Space Empires" or "Space Empires 4X" and never "Space Empires: 4X". _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 07:14, 23 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

BGG rating[edit]

@VickKiang Why remove this? It's a helpful piece of detail. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:17, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Update I've temporarily restored the BGG link, but it's now placed at the end. I've also added a ^{[unreliable source?]} tag. VickKiang (talk) 09:26, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus::Do you think it should be kept? IMO BGG is very helpful but IMDB like, though I'd be happy to reinstate it. VickKiang (talk) 09:18, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I've also seen this discussion with no consensus on whether BGG should be included. One editor seem to weakly favour it, whereas two others might weakly oppose it. Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 09:21, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Best to revive that discussion. I think it is as reliable as other user scores (metacritic or IMDB rating) and we do report them. I think it's useful and not OR to tell the reader that a game is/was in Top 100 of best board games or recognized subtypes. It's also is some indication of notability. _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 09:45, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your reply, IMHO could you start a discussion there? IMO if a game is top 50/100 in the BGG, BGG ranking is mentioned sometimes in FiveThirtyEight, 1, 2. Personally, I don't think it contributes to notability, although a discussion for at least 3O would be better. Many thanks! VickKiang (talk) 09:52, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

VickKiang, I am honestly iffy on how it contributes to notability. My point is that there is no reason not to mention it. Is it worth discussing until someone mass removes the few mentions we have (I've added a few but not many)? _{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here} 10:44, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

IMHO it doesn't contribute to notability (but might be included in the article, though IMO ^{[unreliable source?]} and ^{[better source needed]} tags are needed, unless it's like in the top 50 or so games. If so, the game probably has enough RS to stand on its own. VickKiang (talk) 10:47, 3 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]