Talk:New Game+

Request for verification
[ new game+ ]

Can anyone cite it? Equinox ◑ 22:48, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Chrono Trigger, 1995, SquareSoft. CyberSkull 23:43, 19 April 2009 (UTC)


 * We need something meeting WT:CFI: probably three such separate citations. Equinox ◑ 23:50, 19 April 2009 (UTC)
 * CyberSkull 01:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * CyberSkull 01:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * CyberSkull 01:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)
 * CyberSkull 01:31, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Wikipedia does not now and has never counted for attestation. DCDuring TALK 10:59, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * There are some books using the term "new game+", but not enough. -- Prince Kassad 12:13, 20 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I wasn't pointing to Wikipedia, I was citing the games themselves. CyberSkull 04:14, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * Cited. If others worry about the non-independence of the citations from November 2006 and October 2007 (both of which quote the magazine GameAxis Unwired), then consulting Google Groups Search shows that there are clearly enough examples of use for this term to satisfy the CFI. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 19:08, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * I wouldn't say I was worried about the independence. It's the same author, so they're outright not independent. Another citation as you mentioned would be good. DAVilla 11:59, 14 May 2009 (UTC)


 * I've moved it to New Game+ --Jackofclubs 13:23, 22 April 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, but, FWIW, is more common than  on Google Groups, and, , , and  also exist as spelling variants; they probably all deserve entries. †  ﴾(u):Raifʻhār (t):Doremítzwr﴿ 19:50, 23 April 2009 (UTC)

RFV failed, [[New Game+]] deleted. (Citations at [[Citations:new game+]].) However, as Doremítzwr suggests, does seem to be citeable from Usenet. (Anyone wishing to do is advised to make sure they get citations from different sources referring to different video games. Best would be citations referring to video games that don't have this feature, or that have a different name for it.) —Ruakh TALK 17:40, 5 December 2009 (UTC)