<em>Duke Nukem Forever</em> has gone gold

<em>Duke Nukem Forever</em> is actually, really and truly, honestly... coming out. The game has gone gold, so there's no turning back now. Now what are we going to use for easy jokes?

<a href='http://meincmagazine.com/gaming/news/2011/05/duke-nukem-forever-has-gone-gold.ars'>Read the whole story</a>

 

[ronelson]

Is it an Aurich masterwork (rather than an official publicity shot, which I wouldn't put past them)?

Nope, that is from 3D Realms, erm, Gearbox. I have no idea why Ars refused to put their sources out there: http://twitter.com/#!/GearboxSoftware/s ... 1902939136

 

[ronelson]

It doesn't need to be sourced, it's an official asset that was designed to be used in articles such as this.

I meant sourcing the news that it went gold, not the image. Ars is HORRIBLE at referencing their sources.

Since the source your pointing out is just a tweet and doesn't include a quote from someone at Gearbox, I dont think it's Ben's original source either.

That would be amazingly lame. Even leaving aside the fact that the twitter link was provided hours prior in the forums, or that the image came from the twitter post, text similar to "(per Gearbox/2K Press Release)" would have sufficed if that was actually where it came from.

 

[ronelson]

We don't typically search out and link up press releases, nor do we host court documents we obtain and the like. That's a far cry from being "horrible at referring" to sources. We link all non-PR sources otherwise.

Ben should have linked the Twitter account if he found the news from there, but they also sent out a full PR.

Caesar, I understand what you are saying, but you guys are pretty inconsistent about sources provided, especially in Opposable Thumbs. I am not asking you to host source material, just point to it and not just to other Ars articles (that is part of what makes it look bad, much less so when there is simply no links in the article). This article had no source, the "PSP Remaster" program has no sources (it is especially noticeable now that the YT video was yanked), and then the Oregon Trail and L.A. Noire articles have sources. The Xperia Play article only references other Ars articles, same with Gotham City Imposters.

It irks me more than anything else. And credit where credit it due: Sources are being provided far more often now. Especially with the science articles, I find them far more accessible. Thanks!

 

[ronelson]

I'm not sure what to do about press releases in this context, because unless we host them ourselves there is no easy way to include them in the post or link to them as a source.

You could say that you got it from a press release. If it comes from a personal tip, "a source familiar with the subject" is the phrase most sites use.

In the six years or so I've been doing this, this is maybe the second or third complaint we've gotten about not linking press releases, as they're rarely linked when used as a source for a story.

Oh, I am pretty sure the "where did this come from?" questions arise fairly quickly. You must not be looking too hard.

* viewtopic.php?p=21608881#p21608881
* viewtopic.php?p=21539514#p21539514
* viewtopic.php?p=20715606#p20715606

Those are all within the last year. There were plenty before that, but as I said it has improved, so why bother? And remember, I am not asking for every source to have a link, but for you to provide your source. Mentioning that it came from a personal contact is helpful, and it will stop people from spending their time trying to find your source through google.

 

[ronelson]

There's also the small detail that I only wrote one of those stories.

You said "we", not "I". There are more complaints, I just found it tedious to search the News & Discussion forum for "link to source" and see the same thing quoted a dozen times. The points were, it happens and way more than 2nd or 3rd complaint in 6 years, and citing a source is important even if you cannot link to the source.