I personally see no vitriol in my first comment, but I guess that is besides the point. We have different opinions and I appreciate that.

But, he is actually trying to pass off potentially false info as fact, imo. Actual quote from article:

The ambitious space game No Man’s Sky has been delayed, two sources tell Kotaku. We don’t know exactly what the new release date is—and it may not be finalized yet—but we’re hearing it’s been bumped until at least July or August.

So, it's been delayed according to two sources, we don't know the new release date, and we are going to speculate that it is July/August. It goes on:

A reliable Kotaku source was the first to inform us of the delay. A second source, who works at GameStop, said they received marketing materials today for No Man’s Sky with the original June 21 release date. However, stores were informed that the release date is no longer correct and that they should cover it up with a “Coming Soon” label

So we have a unnamed reliable source and a GS employee. The unnamed source says it's delayed. The GS employee and marketing materials actually say the date has been changed. Those are not the same thing. So why report it as "delayed" in the main title of the article when your only two sources are saying different things? Last line:

Sony and Hello Games did not respond to requests for comment by publication time.

There you go. Nowhere in the article does it caution the reader that this is speculation.

There is no

"According to two of our sources, there is a possibility that No Man's Sky has been delayed."

Instead there is

The ambitious space game No Man’s Sky has been delayed, two sources tell Kotaku.

Has been delayed. That seems pretty definitive even though there are contradictions within the article itself, e.g., one source saying delayed and the other saying changed. I don't care if it's right or wrong, but I just can't stand this kind of click-baity, jump the gun journalism.

Edit: quote positioning