Talk:Rugrats: Search for Reptar/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: CrowzRSA 23:23, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What's up with ref 2, "Some information taken from the Rugrats: Search for Reptar manual". This is not a proper citation for a manual, but I'm guessing it's like citing album-notes or something. This should be fixed. CrowzRSA 23:34, 4 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 05:34, 7 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is the rest of the review coming soon? Wizardman _{Operation Big Bear} 16:15, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

i just added a reception box and a rating from Allgame, the ELSPA rating, and I suggest to use some quotes from allgame's review of the game in the reception and sales section; so are any more improvements needed to make this an everyday good article?SCB '92 (talk) 19:04, 2 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sure that there are; I'm not very good with prose or wording, so I'm guessing that there exists some problems there. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:54, 7 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think this is ready to be a good article; I did fix some minor things, and we all agree thst this is written in American English (even though I'm British); I guess some more information would be better for the gameplay and premise section: looking at Allgame's overview of the game, the article could put more information into the gameplay and premise, and I suggest to include: ~~the names of the characters that are playable; that there are 12 pieces of the Reptar puzzle; that there's 14 levels that can be played in any order;~~ the three difficulty levels: easy, medium and hard; how the tasks are different from each other; ~~bonus levels with Reptar bars; training and activities modes; and multiplayer.~~

Some of these might be spoilers of the game for the article, but some of them could be included into the gameplay and premise section, which should definitely make it a good article after thatSCB '92 (talk) 16:44, 8 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Character lists for games like this are usually not accepted, unless it is just a couple characters in which you can just mention that in prose. The other stuff you mentioned might be ok to mention without going into WP:GAMEGUIDE. As for spoilers, Wikipedia does not censor content, and if the spoilers help understand the subject, then it is appropriate to include it. _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 14:47, 10 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with Blake. I think this is ready to be a good article. But the Gameplay section may need expansion. I would disagree with the character lists, though. (TheLoverofLove (talk) 19:03, 10 July 2011 (UTC))[reply]

I'll work on fixing th eproblems listed in the next few days. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:20, 13 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, forget about the character lists; I expanded the gameplay section a bit by putting some of my suggestions in, as well as showing the Electric Playground score on the reception box; I don't think the game was criticised (I'm British) for its gameplay (children will enjoy it, remember!); it was criticised mostly for the camera and controls, so this should be fixed in the lead and caption of the screenshot; I could fix it myself, unless contributors say otherwise-SCB '92 (talk) 20:40, 15 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]