Talk:Lego Racers (video game)

Fair use rationale for Image:Legoracers.jpg

Image:Legoracers.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 23:19, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Platforms

The article stated that LEGO Racers was released on the 3DO, Virtual Boy, and Sega Saturn. I was unable to find any reference at all from Google searching to back up this statement, so I have deleted it from the article. It seems unlikely that it would have been released on these systems considering their age and relative lack of popularity anyway. 98.202.163.146 (talk) 15:46, 23 December 2009 (UTC)

Evidently, this was a series of vandalism strecthed across a couple month by 24.67.21.126: [1]. Lordtobi (✉) 21:59, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

LEGO Racers Mobile

In 2006, a game called LEGO Racers was released for Nokia mobile phones. It was developed by Kiloo. Despite sharing the same name, it has little to do with the LEGO Racers game this article is about. Perhaps a section for it should be created, or maybe a new article? I can provide screenshots and details about gameplay and such, as I own the game and have completed it. I think it should have it's own article as it has nearly no resemblance to the 1999 game this article is about, but I wanted to get some other opinions on this before starting. Here is some gameplay so you can see what it is like: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rcVER1yTCgU Jamesster.LEGO (talk) 14:53, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

The video link appears to be dead. To be precise: The game was announced in January 2007 and released in June 2008. It is now (seven years after your message) included under the "Sequels" section. Lordtobi (✉) 21:52, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Regarding sound credit in infobox

I have credited Eric Nofsinger for sound as he is listed as the lead sound engineer on Metacritic. BlookerG ^talk 21:59, 19 February 2015 (UTC)

Yes, as far as my research goes, he was responsible for the music, wherefore this is correct. Lordtobi (✉) 21:53, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

Reassessment

Coming here via the reassessment request tag on the talk page; bumping this up to B-class. I see you have a peer review up, and this article should be about ready for GAN. Some points I saw when skimming through the article:

• per MOS:QUOTE, don't put periods/punctuation inside a quote at the end of a sentence unless you're quoting an entire sentence, e.g. it should be 'and stated that the racing is "awful".', not 'and stated that the racing is "awful."'
• On that note, try to limit the number of single-word quotes you use; they come across as scare quotes and are easily paraphrase-able.
• Consensus for review tables for GameRankings is to round to whole percents, as hundredths of a percent is pretty meaningless.
• "mixed to positive reviews" is a vague statement that could mean many things; better to say something to the effect that the game got a wide range of scores, with the releases on all three platforms getting a mix of high and low scoring reviews. The averages may be 63-75%, but that's coming from scores as low as 40% and as high as 90%, it's a huge range.
• Next Generation should be italicized in the reception text
• It's not generally necessary to cite the release dates in the infobox, especially if you're only doing some of them
• I notice that the article is almost entirely sourced off of IGN (other than the manual)- make sure that you've found all the sources you can use.
• If the author isn't stated, it's implied to be staff- so there's no reason the list the author as "IGN staff" (or "Staff, IGN")
• You missed the links on ref 28, and your ref 34 is messed up because you're using cite book instead of cite magazine- switch to that, and instead of saying the book edition is issue 26, you can say issue=126
• You strangely have an escaped unicode character on reception- "& #8217;"; this should be replaced with a regular apostrophe.
• Speaking of apostrophes, you can fix the bad grammar in the "get's irritating rather quickly" quote- "get's" is not a word
• --PresN 19:48, 16 March 2015 (UTC)

Release dates

If this article is GA-class, the release dates need sources...  czar 21:38, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Also the years in the lede need trailing commas (year parenthetical needs comma per MOS:COMMA) czar 21:39, 12 October 2015 (UTC)

Trailing commas added, still on the hunt for specific release date news (found a couple outlining the month, or a time frame withing that month, though). Lordtobi (✉) 21:55, 2 August 2017 (UTC)

PDF manual citations broken

The site that had the Racers N64 manual used in several citations apparently took it down. I found other uploads but I don't know if it's quite the same thing, or what sites are acceptable to link to. --Jessietail (talk) 04:44, 6 April 2018 (UTC)

• The upside here is that we are really citing the physical, printed manual itself, with the PDF just being a helpful tool to check the manual - so even if we don't replace the links, the citations are still valid and the article is still backed up by sources. It is of course good if we can replace them, but I don't know what sites are acceptable to link to either.--Alexandra IDV^talk 08:41, 6 April 2018 (UTC)
  • Update: Turns out the PDFs linked are available through the Wayback Machine, so it's fixed now.--Alexandra IDV^talk 08:43, 6 April 2018 (UTC)