Board Thread:Editing Discussions/@comment-4666155-20160102200152/@comment-6697950-20160102211813

We usually refrain from using games as a source for naming, aside from things and people introduced in said games. It's not solely because the games are not canon (though that is a factor), but because we don't know how reliable they are. And it would be problematic:
 * We don't know if the author gave his consent for the name or someone just decided to add it in on a whim, so even if we do decide to change the name:
 * Do we call it official or not? If we still treat it as "unconfirmed" because of non-canon status of the games, would we still categorise it under unofficial names, or make a new category for it?
 * And there's also the problem that people might be confused that the name is official if we change it, since not many people take a look at the categories.
 * We can't be sure that it's the same weapon or just a weapon with the same model. In other words, this would lead to the question whether the price of the sword, its stats, special abilities etc., are the same as in canon material.
 * Another problem is that we need the Japanese version of the game, as the English version is even more unreliable (for example, Yuld was written as Yrd in the anime). And we require Japanese terminology for official names on articles.

So basically, we currently ignore naming in the games because we have no system in place for how such names should be handled. If someone were to tweet the author to confirm whether the name is canon, we could avoid most of these issues by using the author's tweet as a source for the naming, rather than a game adaptation.

As for images, official game images are allowed on the wiki, but they must be sourced and categorised appropriately, just like any other image on the wiki (see Image Guideline for more details).