This page is for discussing a policy related to the Mass Effect Wiki that may or may not be passed by the community. The Form below serves to describe the Policy and what it is about, or what it will modify.

Policy: Using IMDb as a Source

Other Notes

I've noticed this Wiki is particularly hard to IMDb and citing voice actors for miscellaneous characters. While the distrust for IMDb is understandable, I'd like to bring attention on a fact that lets me believe, as least where Mass Effect 1 is concerned, that IMDb's Mass Effect page was edited or made by someone who had insider knowledge of the game.

For a long time, IMDb listed Mass Effect characters that no one had ever heard of, like Robin Atkin Downes as Sebastian Van Heerden, or Gideon Emery as Jered Salenta. Salenta's name has since been removed from the IMDb page, though Van Heerden's still is, and Google will show you many websites that copied that information. Thanks to my data-mining, I've now realized that Van Heerden and Salenta are actually characters cut from ME1. While there are no audio files in English remaining to confirm that Downes voiced Van Heerden, they do exist in the case of Salenta and I've confirmed it is Emery (I had actually recognized his voice before confirming it with the now-removed IMDb data).

This leads me to think that the IMDb information should be reliable as far as Mass Effect 1 is concerned. It is impossible that anyone not working at Bioware could have known Sebastian Van Heerden and Jered Salenta were characters in the game. You may say: "maybe it was someone who data-mined the game like you". The timeline confirms it's not possible: before the release of the Legendary Edition, the only version of ME1 that had the leftover files that contain any information regarding Van Heerden and Salenta was the PS3 version of ME1, which only released in 2012. But you'll be able to confirm through Google that people had noticed the mentions of Van Heerden as early as 2010. Back then, there would have been no trace available of those two characters within the game files.

This brings me to my main point: I think we should be willing to rely on IMDb to some extent to associate voice actors to characters.

• First off, IMDb is also used in a professional capacity and its staff does interact with many actors, and may have insider knowledge (like above, possibly).
• "Anyone can edit IMDb" works both ways. Actors, or people related to them, who see incorrect information on IMDb may come to rectify it.
• Despite its editing policies, IMDb is probably the most reliable general website when it comes to production, development and casting. No other website on the internet has nearly as much information and detail, and knows actors so well in general.

Now while I understand the manic need to confirm information, I think a little risk in the case of IMDb is warranted. After all, if IMDb claims a certain character is voiced by a certain actor, and it does sound like that person, why shouldn't that be valid enough?

If the evidence fits the theory, is that not a safe enough assumption? After all, it's not a strictly one-sided unverifiable information: players can also recognize actors' voices and confirm. Though as you'll no doubt remark, that alone can be unreliable.

In any case, I'd still rather put up a little warning stating that IMDb's information may not always be accurate than simply not having that information at all. It doesn't do any good to anyone when people have to look up this information elsewhere. If it's shown here with a warning, it gives everyone what they want, and they'll know to be cautious.--Loadingue (talk) 19:44, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Comments

In a way I'm kind of with you on IMDb, it's a fairly reputable, known, and policed site, but the policy against using it as valid corroboration long predates me and gets some benefit of the doubt as longstanding precedent which I'm sure others may point out the value of (even if the US Supreme Court would not). As for the conclusions about ME1 IMDb entries specifically being trustworthy, that's very intriguing, but two problems I see: (1) we'd be relying on your word for some of that unless you can get a second person with the same knowledge of game files as you to corroborate and (2) it's still a conclusion based on circumstantial, not hard evidence. The Wiki prefers the latter, and always has. Neo89515 (talk) 22:32, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Anyone who has the Legendary Edition can confirm the presence of the files that point to those two characters: in the Mass Effect Legendary Edition\Game\ME1\BioGame\Content\Packages\ISACT folder, gbl01_jered.isb contains audio files in English which clearly say the speaker's name is Jered Salenta; in the same folder, Van Heerden's name is dropped several times within the foreign audiobanks starting in lav20_jasonharrah, among others (details available if required). Both can be opened using the Legendary Explorer's Sound Explorer tool.--Loadingue (talk) 22:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

One other thing: many of the BioWare Devs are aware of the Wiki too, and if they ever wanted to confirm certain voice actor roles all they would have to do is get a confirmed account here and make an edit, or let us know. For example, Dusty Everman not too long ago left some interesting behind-the-scenes on Kelly Chambers (check the history). Neo89515 (talk) 22:36, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Similarly, it's hard to doubt Bioware people or actors wouldn't be aware of IMDb and haven't ensured that the information there is correct, which is a point I already mentioned. You'll also agree that in that specific field of actors, they'd be more likely to turn to IMDb than to this Wiki to set the record straight (like everyone else too, given the circumstances; though I apologize for the snarky comment).

The ideal situation would be for someone at Bioware to confirm that the information on IMDb is correct or has been monitored. But until then, IMDb is the only source. If they've ever been wrong about Mass Effect, I'd like to know for clarity's sake.--Loadingue (talk) 22:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I'd also like to reiterate that it's downright silly not to take a website's word for it when there's a 1% chance it could be wrong when that website exclusively holds information we need. The responsible thing is not to dismiss the information, but to include it with a warning if you think it's warranted. Readers might think the Wiki is outdated or poorly informed otherwise if it's simply missing.--Loadingue (talk) 22:56, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

I agree with not allowing the perfect to be the enemy of the good enough as a general principle, and I haven't completely made up my mind yet on where I stand on your suggestion to be clear. However, one word of caution based on how you phrased this: " exclusively holds information we need" [emphasis yours]. I want to counter-emphasize that while it would certainly be nice to finally have confirmed voice actor information for some characters lacking it currently, it's hardly some kind of urgent requirement. Also, there are other things to consider about crediting a particular actor for a role on an oft-viewed site like this, which is that we're talking about real people here. There may be some unknown professional or personal reason why an actor wanted a credit removed from IMDb, even if it was accurate. This is an important consideration, and I would argue much more important than simply satisfying our personal obsession with getting complete information. Neo89515 (talk) 23:05, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

As far as I know, that's a completely remote and hypothetical situation that shouldn't have bearing here. Also I'd argue, and it should be verifiable, that IMDb's Mass Effect page gets more traffic than this Wiki (edit: dismiss that, Google Trends seems to deny it).--Loadingue (talk) 23:13, 26 June 2022 (UTC)

Just wanted to leave another comment here before any potential voting happens to clarify where I stand. I have to admit even though I claimed neutrality, I was against this proposal from the get-go for the very simple reason that IMDb, no matter how accurate or reliable it might be generally considered nowadays, is still not a primary source, it is a secondary source. This Wiki has always had high standards for information sourcing, requiring either primary sources or direct, corroborated observations. We haven't ever been, nor should we ever become, merely a proxy for other sites. If people are truly hankering for more details about who played what roles in the ME games, they are free to choose IMDb as a resource instead of this Wiki and trust what they read at their own discretion, but I see no need for us to compromise our longstanding standards for expediency. While it's true that we do cite outside sources like Wikipedia or even IMDb in places like Trivia sections, that has never been to prove concrete facts about the ME games themselves, but merely as a way to point users to explanations for general concepts or to a site whose purpose it is to explain details about a non-game related thing, e.g. a reference to a particular movie or TV show. Concrete info about the game itself, such as who played which roles, is something we can't rely on another secondary source for. The only compromise I can offer you is that if you truly want there to be some record of the conclusions you've drawn about who played what roles, this Forum post can remain that record, or you can leave what you've found on a Talk page, other forum, or even another site for the curious to come across in the future and draw their own conclusion. Neo89515 (talk) 17:45, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

I strongly disagree with this last comment and am disappointed you seem to have rescinded your support for the change. The biggest mistake in your comment is to claim IMDb is not a primary source. If it is a secondary source which copies information from other sources, then where from? As far as I know, no other website has the complete cast of the Mass Effect games. Therefore, it is a primary source. Moreover, the aforementioned discussion regarding Salenta and Van Heerden further cement that it is a primary source (thank you for clarifying the term for it). Eventually, and I apologize for sounding so venomous, but your last comment helps cementing the opposite idea of what you were trying to say.--Loadingue (talk) 21:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

In any case, I will soon detail a few concrete propositions on how to address the issue. As I've implied before, the real problem is not relying on IMDb, it is completely forgoing their (should I add verifiable) information in the name of a small chance of error. I'd like an appropriate warning to be present.

Another important thing to consider is that the Mass Effect games are not all new already and they get older with time. People who worked on them (direct sources) get noticeably less reliable with time. If Mass Effect 1 had released last year, maybe someone could have asked Gideon Emery on Twitter if he also played a cut character named Jered Salenta. There is no chance that he'd be able to remember such a thing after 15 years.

As time goes on, all works that need to be analyzed and explained will increasingly, unavoidably rely on unofficial sources and assumptions made by experts or the audience. I think it's time for this Wiki to realize that and work on adapting to that idea. Information sources can have a different level of scrutiny when the next Mass Effect game comes, but for the original trilogy that is over 10 years old, these methods should change.--Loadingue (talk) 21:22, 30 June 2022 (UTC)

the presented sources are TRUST ME BRO. was hoping for something concrete, instead there are no publicly viewable logs, no independent corroboration, no links, all circumstantial observations and assumptions.

the mechanisms for verification are already there and to an extent justifiably fair. if nobody from verified sources wants to talk or can't because they forgot, so be it. it's lamentable, but it's beyond the scope of this site. i'd really like a complete backup of the old BSN forums for (re)verifying things other than these but we don't always get what we want.

if you really really really want imdb sourcing admittance, or at least for those bits of information you think are reliable, spread awareness of it elsewhere as some things are simply beyond the scope and function of this wiki. maybe a gaming journalist even picks the issue up, arranges interviews with the involved persons, gets confirmation on the cut roles, and gets it published (third-party corroboration). the issue then shifts if the publishing outlet is trustworthy or not (they can be sued for libel if not, right? wrong random joes on the internet though, good luck with that). T̴̴͕̲̞̳̖̼̱͒͛̎͒ͫ̃ͧeͩ̈̽̈҉͓̝̰̼̦̫̤̀͠m̫̪̪̯̻͎̫̅̇̓̇͌̚p̸̙̝̓̓͌ͨ͆ͣͥ̂̕o͒̽͐̽͏̞̬̻͕͔͕͚̰͍͠͞ṙ̢̞͚͈̹̰ͨ̓ͭ̈́̌ạ̢̧̪̹̺̺̣̹̲͂͆̏ͪͨ͒ͭř̹͈͜͠y̷͍̻̜̹̼̾̽̈́e̵̹̼̟̦͚͐̈́͌͘d͉̲̣̻͉̱͗̅ḭ̷̻̆͋̆̓̔͝t̨͍̦̫̗͂̅̍̋̆ͩ͝ộ̫̟̬̳̝̲̾ͫ̒̿ͮ̑̚rͯ̎ͨͭ̄̿̽͛҉̠̫̱̠̘̘̲́ͅ7̩̻ͤͩͨ͝͡8̜̣̙͇̻ͨ͛͛̆͒̆̽̒͐͜͡ ͥ̍̉̃̇ͥ̓ͨ͏̕҉̥̹͓̗̤̠̖̤ (talk) 00:05, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I also deeply regret that IMDb does not have an edit history or mention its sources. But I do think it is well within the scope of this Wiki to present this information. I don't see the reporter thing happening and I don't see it being reliable either, as over time, actors or developers will simply remember less and less, and relevant documents get lost. I'm not asking to trust IMDb blindly though, simply to cautiously rely on it for the actors because there's literally no other source anywhere available. A little warning label would be enough. I could personally confirm/identify the actors for several characters, but how much would my word be worth compared to publicly available and contestable information that has been untouched on a heavy-traffic, actor-focused website for 10 years?--Loadingue (talk) 10:57, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Adding in disclaimers that say, "Warning: this information could be bullshit" is really not something a Wiki should be doing as a matter of principle, especially when it comes to asserting something about a real person's professional credits. Like I already said, if people want to trust IMDb on something they can, it's a well-known enough site, they don't need us to advertise for them. Neo89515 (talk) 15:33, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

Let me remind you of how IMDb information works. It's not "it could be bullshit", and it's not "trust me bro". They don't pick random actors and assign them to random characters. Here's how it works: IMDb users look at uncredited characters. They look at the official actor list. And then they, either individually or collectively, agree on who voiced who. It's a sound scientific process that Bioware forces us to go through if they hadn't been too lazy to properly credit each character.

With that, I'll detail the different proposals I have on how to resolve this issue. And for me, it remains a grave issue that characters don't have information about voice actors, which I believe is a crucial part of any character article. So here's how I propose to illustrate what we have within the character table.

1°

| Voice Actor Nolan North <ref>[IMDb page link]</ref>

2°

| Voice Actor Nolan North <ref>Caution: IMDb information may be unsourced and contestable. [IMDb page link]</ref>

3°

| Voice Actor Nolan North (unconfirmed) <ref>[IMDb page link]</ref>

4°

| Voice Actor Nolan North <ref>See [Mass Effect Voice Actors].</ref>

The [Mass Effect Voice Actors] page would contain information about each confirmed character and actor, and unconfirmed role assignments, and how the information was confirmed or remains unconfirmed. For instance: "Confirmed through game credits" for the main characters; "Confirmed by actor", or "Claimed by IMDb". The article would of course reiterate that IMDb can possibly be mistaken. This method would allow to direct all conversation, speculation and explanation to one place where the reader can better understand why voice actors in the series are such a difficult topic.

5°

| Voice Actor Nolan North <ref>Claimed by IMDb [link], actor is present in credits and voice matches comparison with (other Mass Effect character or Dragon Age character voiced by the same actor)</ref>

Once again, I call to reason and insist that ignoring such important information is not the mature thing to do. The responsible thing, especially for a Wiki that precisely insists on rules as much as this one, is to present the information within the context necessary for the reader to understand and evaluate its value. That is the mature thing to do, if I can be so presumptuous.--Loadingue (talk) 18:24, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

I feel like I'm starting to repeat myself, so I promise this is my last word. IMDb can work how it wants to work. We don't work that way. Nor do we outsource our duty to information integrity to 3rd parties like them. People can check IMDb if they want an idea of who voiced some minor character. If we want to complete the voice actor information on THIS site, we do it our way. Your proposal is not minor -- it is demanding a fundamental change to how information is sourced here. If we adopt this, where does it end? Can we just start sticking disclaimers after reported bugs? Anything else people want to claim? Some might support that, but I've made clear that I do not. If you only want this change applied to voice actor information alone, that's even worse, because there's no real justification for why that area merits an exception. You can go on and on about how "important" this information is, but frankly, I don't see the urgency you do on this. As we've said, if you feel this strongly about this issue, there are other places and other ways it can be pursued. Neo89515 (talk) 19:38, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

You've made your point, though there's no use saying "that's how we do things" or "these are the rules", because that's what this whole discussion is about: changing those rules. But if no one will support me on this, so be it. I believe this is a grave mistake that's only a symptom of the overbearing policies that has become detrimental to this Wiki's value and popularity.--Loadingue (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

If no one has anything else to add, I'll leave this proposal alone for the time being.--Loadingue (talk) 19:54, 1 July 2022 (UTC)

---

Let's bring a conclusion to this proposal. Since it was apparently the only thing left to do, I took the initiative of trying to contact BioWare about getting a complete list of ME1's actor credits.

1. I first noticed that a company called Tikiman Castings had taken part in the game, so I went ahead and contacted them through their email address. Its manager, Chris Borders, directly replied to me and said the characters he helped cast and voice were unnamed in his notes. He advised me to contact Shauna Perry as she oversaw the whole process.
2. Unfortunately, Shauna Perry left BioWare almost a decade ago. I nonetheless tracked her down to a catering/brewing company and managed to get in touch. She regretably was also unable to help me, but was kind enough to put me in contact with Galea Marci, an EA representative.
3. After letting Miss Marci know of this issue, I received a reply months later to tell me that she couldn't help me as "all Mass Effect credits had been attributed" to her knowledge, meaning she didn't have any additional information.
4. I then turned toward Jay Ingram, community manager at BioWare and EA. Maybe because he was about to change posts, I never received a reply.
5. In a desperate last-ditch attempt, I attempted to contact Caroline Livingstone, another voice-over director, who unfortunately also left BioWare several years ago but is currently working alongside Casey Hudson (ME trilogy's director) on a new sci-fi game at Humanoid Studios. I received a reply saying that my mail would be relayed to her, but I never got any other reply.

I think this is as far as anyone can get short of knocking down BioWare's front door. The trilogy was made 15 years ago, and every passing year, this kind of miscellaneous information becomes more and more unlikely to be confirmed from a direct source. Not to mention the fact that almost everyone who worked on the trilogy has left BioWare by now. That is why I once again urge this Wiki to accept other sources.--Loadingue (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Why IMDB Should Be Trusted (at Least for the Trilogy)

Ever since each game of the trilogy released, their IMDB page has been unusually complete. Let's not forget that BioWare and other developers use IMDB too. With the proof I presented earlier regarding Gideon Emery (which is NOT circumstantial), there is no doubt that whoever wrote the IMDB credits for the trilogy is someone who had the original, complete records. To remind you, Gideon Emery was listed on IMDB as having voiced Jered Salenta, who was later found out to be a cut character. No data-mining evidence of this character could have possibly been unveiled until long after the IMDB credits were made, thus proving that the page was written by someone at BioWare who mistakenly included a cut character. Andromeda is another matter; its page doesn't look as thorough as the trilogy's, and was possibly done without any particular insider knowledge. Thus that one I exempt from this suggestion for reliability.

Another argument for IMDB's reliability is that as far as anyone can tell in the trilogy's case, IMDB has never been wrong. I would notably like, as further proof, to bring evidence of the situation surrounding the actress Vanessa Marshall. Since the release of ME1, IMDB has claimed that Vanessa Marshall, who is NOT present at all in the game's end credits, played the role of "Saphyria" (the embassy greeter) and "Businesswoman" (in the Port Hanshan lounge). A single cast member being completely absent from official credits is suspicious, and yet, it was later confirmed in an interview. This, in addition to everything else, clearly establishes IMDB as reliable.--Loadingue (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Further Assessing Accuracy

If somehow IMDB alone doesn't seem reliable enough to you, then I will propose a simple peer review system. After all, peer review is how any Wiki operates: a user makes a claim and other users assess its relevance and validity. And we can apply this to voice actors too.

Voices are recognizable and identifiable. Just the same as an editor can recognize a certain model or texture with their eyes, so too can they recognize sounds. The idea seems hinky at first because an image can be easily shared and ascertained among people, and thus peer-reviewed; but I have great news about that: I have the entirety of the trilogy's voicelines extracted on my PC, and I can share audio samples of any character at any time with anyone. I myself have an excellent knack at recognizing voice actors (after all, I did recognize that Salenta, a human with a British accent, had the same actor as the gruff turian Chellick) but it doesn't have to be just me. Just like any other conclusion subject to debate, several people can listen to samples and decide if a character is indeed voiced by a certain actor. I could provide samples of another character voiced by the same actor for comparison, one which is confirmed through official credits or what not. This is far more efficient than you might originally believe; between an actor's actual voice, their accent, and their tone (which is also individually recognizable), voice actors can be easy to ascertain in most situations.

This method is assuredly the best, most reliable, and most Wiki-compliant way to ascertain a character's voice actor. I urge you to give this idea due consideration, for the betterment of the Wiki.--Loadingue (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Why Voice Actors Are Important on the Wiki

IMDB's specialization may be actors, not us, that's true. However, when it comes to Mass Effect characters, this website is without any doubt the number one resource on the internet. Voice actors are inherently crucial to any character, and this is especially true in Mass Effect's case where great care was always given to voice acting. Mass Effect is often considered one of the franchises where the actors are used to the best effect. Thus, it is not only disrespectful to the voice actors themselves, but also to the players and to BioWare themselves who went to great lengths in that domain, to dismiss the importance of voice actors so easily. I believe BioWare would appreciate this.

Concrete Policy Proposal and Conclusion

1. Move IMDB from "Invalid Sources" to "Conditionally Valid Sources" (if it is decided to enforce peer-review for actor confirmation) or "Valid Sources" (if peer-review is deemed unnecessary).
2. If peer-review is to be enforced, then the policy would be the following:

Actor confirmation requires two of the following, to be established on the related talk page:

• A source on IMDB which must point to a clearly-identifiable character.
• Consensus between editors regarding a comparison between the subject character and a character whose voice actor was officially confirmed to be the same, using voice samples shared via upload or existing YouTube videos (for instance: comparing a hanar's voice with Mark Meer as Shepard by providing samples of both). For transparency's sake, the samples' source in data should be explained extensively if needed.
• Approval by a senior editor or higher rank of the aforementioned sample comparison.

I hope you will take all my arguments into consideration, and help reconsider the Wiki's policy. Thank you.--Loadingue (talk) 12:23, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

While it is good that you made the effort to try and get any kind of official sourcing, it didn't pan out -- so basically, nothing has really changed. What would have been best is if you could get direct confirmation that the developers had used IMDB, even if you couldn't get confirmation of who actually played what parts; I would have asked that question as well of anyone you spoke to. While it does seem probable from the information you present that someone at BioWare had to have been creating IMBD records based on the timelines, this is still a conclusion made from circumstantial evidence. I may be open to allowing IMBD to be a conditionally valid source, if such a circumstantial conclusion about the likelihood of the IMDB records having come from a source at BioWare can be made, but I would not likely be open to blanket approving IMDb as a valid source no questions asked. If there is anyone out there such as yourself that is really that determined to know who acted which bit parts in a 15 year old game, they WILL go to IMDb to satisfy their curiosity just as you have done. I simply don't share your conviction about the absolute vital importance of crediting every voice role, especially when it comes to cut characters -- nor do I share the conviction that this Wiki must make all such attributions. No Wiki has 100% complete information on everything, that's just reality. Chasing such a goal where it isn't warranted is a waste of time at best. Neo89515 (talk) 18:41, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I did ask every time if someone could confirm that the IMDB information is correct or if they knew the person who put it there, but I never got an answer to that. Again, we're talking about events from 15 years ago.

"but I would not likely be open to blanket approving IMDb as a valid source no questions asked."

That's precisely why my proposal suggests to make it mandatory for a talk page discussion to occur so it can be validated by more than one person. To ask questions.

"No Wiki has 100% complete information on everything, that's just reality."

Every Wiki should try to achieve that goal. And as far as characters go, actors is pretty basic and essential information that no Wiki would do without. Except this one, somehow.

Again, I urge you to understand my reasoning that the IMDB credits' reliability is not circumstantial evidence, there is more than enough proof to reasonably assume it is accurate. Direct confirmation will only get you so far, especially after so many years. And 15 years is a very generous amount of time after which to start looking for alternatives.--Loadingue (talk) 18:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

You've certainly made your case, and I appreciate the effort you've put in, though unfortunately we couldn't get anything official. I have made my general feelings clear. If others agree that the evidence is strong that BioWare had to be behind some of the IMDb sourcing, then I think we could possibly get agreement on that being a conditional validity. Possibly. Neo89515 (talk) 19:11, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for your understanding and candor, even though I can't quite manage to convince you. I hope to hear other opinions soon.--Loadingue (talk) 19:21, 8 September 2023 (UTC)

I would like to bring a new piece of evidence towards IMDB's reliability, which is that user-submitted contributions to the website are more strict than people might be inclined to believe at first glance. Check this page for details, but here are some important takeaways:

• Unlike most Wikis or Wikipedia, user-submitted contributions must be validated by staff before becoming public.
• The user is required to provide clear evidence for the listing.
• Without sufficient evidence, submissions are rejected.

So, this makes it clear that IMDB does not, as one put it earlier, function as "trust me bro."--Loadingue (talk) 09:16, 9 September 2023 (UTC)

If this policy was in place at the time of the Mass Effect attributions, have you tried reaching out to IMBd to see if someone can tell you why staff validated those listings? There may be some record of the approval process, and perhaps, the true source if it came from BioWare. Neo89515 (talk) 15:20, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

I just tried several times to reach them, but it's like talking to a wall. They keep repeating it's not their policy to disclose any information regarding contributors, even when I asked them if I could just get the date the precise listings were added. However I do believe the policy was already in place at the time of the trilogy.--Loadingue (talk) 15:23, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

So to put it another way, it DOES come down to "trust me bro". This demonstrates exactly why we don't use other non-BioWare sites as unconditionally valid sources for these things. To do so would destroy what sets this Wiki apart from them in terms of accuracy and transparency. Neo89515 (talk) 15:39, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

Debatable claims that this Wiki is "special" in terms of accuracy and transparency notwithstanding, I've brought more than enough evidence to the table that IMDB not providing their source is not that important, their pages must have been made or curated by BioWare.--Loadingue (talk) 15:46, 10 September 2023 (UTC)

The recent case of Roger L. Jackson being confirmed as Urdnot Wreav further reinforces the fact that IMDB is right. Jackson's IMDB summary has mentioned that Jackson voiced Wreav for years. Other than IMDB, the only other reference to Jackson voicing Wreav was on a random Steam post from 2017 where the poster claimed to have got in touch with BioWare and confirmed it. Sounds awfully like a case of "trust me bro"? And yet it's now confirmed to be perfectly correct. How much more evidence do you need to believe IMDB is reliable?--Loadingue (talk) 12:45, 9 October 2023 (UTC)

This will likely be a disappointment, but I have very little to add to what Neo et al. have expressed. You've convinced me personally (and possibly others) that IMDb is probably accurate, but the wiki reports information based on specific sources – not based what seems most legit out of available third-party records. While your findings have turned up a requirement of "clear evidence" by the secretive IMDb staff, the criteria for what constitutes "clear evidence" – and, crucially, the link to BioWare – unfortunately remain unknown.

In my view, it is no bad thing to have a diverse set of outlets, each with their own principles and resources for reporting information. We accept that there may be other outlets which broadcast "insider" information that is in fact correct. As long as the link to BioWare isn't completely transparent, however, we don't rebroadcast it on the wiki, as that would shift our function from BioWare-documentation to exclusive, consensus-based reporting that rests on the knowledge and views of particular individuals. This, to me, is not what a responsible wiki does. Elseweyr (talk) 19:18, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

You twist the issue into a problem of ethics that seems personal to you, and I am saddened to hear that despite all the BioWare contacts I've talked to and all the supporting evidence I've brought, your subjective views of what the Wiki "should" stand for still surpass reason. I believe when (if?) more editors come to the Wiki, it will be easy to convince them, but until then, I know this proposal is currently doomed and I consider it closed.--Loadingue (talk) 19:26, 29 October 2023 (UTC)

But you haven't actually brought any evidence at all--all you learned from "all the BioWare contacts" was that (a) all Mass Effect credits had already been attributed to their knowledge and (b) apart from that they didn't have anything else to add. I can't help but notice that whenever you find out that others disagree with you it doesn't take you long to accuse them of various forms of bad faith, to whine about "all the work" you've done (even though we all gift our work to the community without expectation of receiving anything in return, and to the extent we add our voice to the wiki we do it through consensus and working well with others and within the ground rules of evidence and sourcing) and then you proceed to threaten them with outvoting them or whatever (though to my knowledge you have so far never brought a single proposal to a vote of any kind since we began talking about content well over a year ago).

Given that throughout the fifteen or sixteen months we've been talking about your sundry proposals the recurring theme has been that you aren't willing to work within the sourcing policies and guidelines that were agreed to back when the Mass Effect series was much younger and our community was therefore much larger, and that in spite of over a year of going on about it you don't seem to have convinced even a single senior/active member of the community that those policies should be changed, I'd like you to reflect on the possibility that This May Not Be The Right Community For You. You don't seem very happy here, and you don't seem to like us very much except when you're trying to wheedle us into doing things your way. I strongly suggest that you either learn to work within the rules and customs of the community and do so for considerable time before resuming your attempts to radically reshape it, or else go find or create a different community that is more to your liking elsewhere. Meanwhile, since you've stated you're abandoning this proposal, I will simplify our lives by closing it out. Cattlesquat (talk) 01:58, 30 October 2023 (UTC)