How a game gets catalogued

The About page compresses this into three words: surveyed, catalogued, maintained. Worth unpacking, because the compressed version makes it sound more automatic than it is.

Surveyed

A game doesn’t get a wiki because someone on the team likes it. It gets one because there’s measured search demand for information the game itself doesn’t provide — a mechanic it doesn’t explain, a calculator nobody’s built, patch notes scattered across three different places. That research happens before a single page is written. If the demand isn’t there, the game doesn’t get a site, no matter how good it is.

This is also why the network skews toward games with systems worth documenting — crafting loops, build math, quest branches with real consequences — over games that are already well served by their own in-game tutorials or an existing dominant wiki. Duplicating a good wiki that already exists helps no one.

Catalogued

Once a site is actually live at its own subdomain, it gets an entry here: a genre, a status, a one-line description written in the site’s own voice rather than marketing copy. That’s the entry you see on the index — one card per world, filterable by genre bucket.

Entries without a site yet still show up, marked “in survey,” so the catalog stays honest about what’s actually live versus what’s still being researched. No entry links anywhere until there’s somewhere real to send a reader.

Maintained

Cataloguing isn’t the end of the work. Games patch, mechanics change, release dates move. Every site in the network gets periodically re-checked for broken links, stale release information, and guides that a patch has quietly made wrong. An entry that goes stale and unmaintained is worse than no entry at all, so this is the stage that actually repeats.

Suggesting a game

If there’s a game you think deserves this treatment, the fastest way to get it considered is to be specific: which game, what’s missing from existing coverage, and what you’d actually want to look up that you currently can’t. General enthusiasm is nice but doesn’t tell us much — tell us the gap instead.