Jump to content

Talk:Kingdom Rush

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment

[edit]

This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 3 September 2021 and 16 December 2021. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): JWmelrow.

Above undated message substituted from Template:Dashboard.wikiedu.org assignment by PrimeBOT (talk) 23:41, 17 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

[edit]
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.
The result of this discussion was procedural close. Request violates WP:NOTMERGE reason #3, as both pages are topics warranting their own articles. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:49, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Formal request has been received to merge: Kingdom Rush: Origins into Kingdom Rush; dated: February 1, 2023. Proposer's Rationale: it isn't notable enough for its own article, all unique info (like reviews) is on the Kingdom Rush article for the other games in the series. — Sir Magnus. Discuss here. GenQuest "scribble" 19:34, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose. I don't see how WP:MERGEREASON applies here. All five reviews talk about the game distinctly from the first Kingdom Rush and gave different critical opinions (i.e. superior level design). The game even has some development information [1]. WP:NOTMERGE says that merging should be avoided if both are distinct topics and meet the WP:GNG (even if both are related). The Night Watch (talk) 20:05, 7 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Comment. I also find that the article for Kingdom Rush has a bit of an inconsistent tone between the first game and the series as a whole. If this Merger proposal is declined, there appears to be sufficient material to create articles that talk about each of the titles individually. The Night Watch (talk) 00:43, 8 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA Review

[edit]
Passed. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 00:03, 29 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Kingdom Rush/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 01:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]


I'll have a review written for this within the next day or two. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 01:04, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The Night Watch, very well-written overall. Just a few minor notes before promoting it to GA. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:08, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Well-written
  • The gameplay section doesn't need to start by telling us the plot, especially since it's repeated in the plot section below.
Removed
  • and features its own distinct abilities – Is it possible to elaborate on this?
The article doesn't really elaborate on the abilities that the heroes have, and there weren't really any sources that reported on the specific abilities that I could find.
  • "General" is lowercase in some places but uppercase in others.
  • intending to use it for his own ends. – Does the scene explicitly say this?
  • It's okay to name the specific reviewers (for example, "Justin Davis of IGN" rather than just "IGN"). That way you can use their names instead of using "the reviewer".
Video game FAs do not always mention the names of the reviewers, and I tend not to include them because they sometimes end up becoming confusing (a large amount of names makes it tricky to see which publication said which).
  • On the other hand – This is a little informal
Removed
Verifiable with no original research

All sources appear reliable.

Spot checks:

  • [1] Andrew (2011):
    • This doesn't really support much where it lists the tower types.
The Pocket Gamer source lists the tower types, and the IGN source lists what each of the types does (e.g. artillery are better against groups, archers are better against flying monsters)
    • I don't get the sense that this review finds the difficulty "discouraging".
  • [2] Campbell (2011):
    • Where does it support said that none of the challenges were frustrating
    • This source mentions the lack of a fast-forward button as unusual for a tower defense game, which might be worth noting
  • [4] Raposa (2011):
    • I don't see anything about hero units.
The material on heroes was bundled in the 5th source from Pocket Gamer, I moved it up a sentence to make it more visible.
    • This source says that there are twelve maps. That seems pertinent.
  • [6] Davis (2012):
    • Don't see where it supports gold, number of upgrades per tower, lightning, or earth elemental. It would be better for text-source integrity if it was clearer what citation supported what.
All the material is in the Eurogamer source immediately after Davis.
    • I don't see anything about stars or special challenges.
Also in the Eurogamer source
  • [12] Miller (2013) Green tickY
  • [22] Gillam (2018):
    • I only see it supporting a total of sixteen towers, not seventeen new ones.
That was an addition error on my part, thanks for catching that.
The Night Watch, one thing left: is it accurate to say the addition of sixteen different tower types, or is it an addition of twelve tower types for a total of sixteen (keeping the four from the original)? It's hard to tell from the source. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
All of the towers are completely different from the original ones, so I would say sixteen new ones in total. The Night Watch (talk) 23:57, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Broad in its coverage

The main elements of the game and its development are included. If there's any desire to expand it further, it might be worth checking whether there's info on its promotion or marketing, or more specifics on how its popularity grew so quickly.

Neutral

No ideas are given undue weight. The article does not use subjective language.

Stable

No recent disputes.

Illustrated

Both images have valid non-free use rationales and adequate captions.

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Vaticidalprophet (talk) 09:59, 8 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

(
)

Improved to Good Article status by The Night Watch (talk). Self-nominated at 14:59, 1 September 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/Kingdom Rush; consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: @The Night Watch: Good article. Onegreatjoke (talk) 02:44, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Kingdom Rush: Frontiers and Kingdom Rush: Vengeance need their own entries

[edit]

This is a popular franchise, I am sure all of those games have stand-alone notability. Kingdom Rush: Origins has its own entry already. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:48, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Piotrus Vengeance may not have enough reviews last time I checked, but Frontiers certainly has enough if you want to create it. The Night Watch (talk) 05:52, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@The Night Watch I'd expect both to have enough but starting with Frontiers makes sense. Whether I'll do it anytime soon, hmmm. I am a bit eclectic with what I create, since there are zillions of topics I am interested in :) Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 05:56, 19 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I attempted to make Kingdom Rush 5: Alliance however, I don't know if it would last. I do believe all 6 games should get an article. I also think there should be one for Kingdom Rush (series). LuxembourgLover (talk) 22:27, 30 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LuxembourgLover @The Night Watch Well, upcoming games are the least notable. I'd recommend working on the older titles first, they likely have some reviews etc. Upcoming titles often have just marketing buzz and fail WP:NSOFT. Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| reply here 01:00, 31 March 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Kingdom_Rush&oldid=1216441107"