Talk:List of Castlevania media

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Featured listList of Castlevania media is a featured list, which means it has been identified as one of the best lists produced by the Wikipedia community. If you can update or improve it, please do so.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
February 5, 2008Featured list candidatePromoted
April 5, 2013Featured list removal candidateKept
Current status: Featured list

New title[edit]

I just read about this, just wondered if this is enough to get this mentioned on here yet. Here is the site address from IGN about the new game. http://wireless.ign.com/objects/958/958506.html —Preceding unsigned comment added by 208.31.45.49 (talk) 23:56, 19 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

That's probably enough to add it here. I'm a bit busy with the KH articles right now, so I may not get to it right away. If someone else has the time, go for it. Thanks for the info. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:49, 20 September 2007 (UTC))[reply]

This article needs work![edit]

There is so much missing information and inaccurate info that I think I'm going to puke! Buzda 02:57, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then be bold and change it. There's nothing stopping you. That said, much of the information is sourced now, and I doubt that the veracity of those sources is anything but genuine. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 03:03, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
To be quite honest, the reason some info is still unsourced is that I've found conflicting release dates of some titles. IGN said one thing, GameSpot said another. Also since I'm not that familiar with the most of the Castlevania series, I had some questions about some titles as well. I was hoping to get this to Featured List, but ran into the above problems. Any help would be appreciated. (Guyinblack25 talk 06:10, 12 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I'll see what I can do then. Best of luck. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 06:42, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. If you or anyone else could help clear up some things I think it'll help organize the list.
  1. It's my assumption that Castlevania (video game), Vampire Killer, and Castlevania Chronicles are essentially the same game but on different systems. Is this correct or are the three different enough to be considered separate titles?
  2. Does WP:VG have a policy about conflicting release dates from two reliable sources?
  3. Sexy Parodius doesn't seem to have anything related to Castlevania. Does another game in the Parodius (series) have a connection?
Those were the most pressing issues I encountered. The rest is just referencing the info and finding some sources for some of the more obscure titles. (Guyinblack25 talk 06:55, 12 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
As to those concerns:
  1. I believe they are the same game, just on different systems. The first two are basically the same. Castlevania Chronicles is close enough that I would consider it roughly the same game.
  2. Not that I'm aware of. Bringing it up at WT:VG would perhaps be best.
  3. No idea. I never knew that it had a Castlevania parody when I saw this page.
And just FYI, that the base of my Castlevania knowledge is primarily in the more recent games (hence my writing of Characters in Castlevania: Sorrow series), with sparse knowledge of the older works. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 07:00, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, something I stumbled upon at GameSpot. This looks useful. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 07:08, 12 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Friggin sweat! I'll have to read through that in the morning. Thanks for the find. (Guyinblack25 talk 07:14, 12 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Here I go:
  1. Castlevania, Vampire Killer, Haunted Castle, Super Castlevania IV and Chronicles ARE NOT the same game. They are all essentially retellings of the original Castlevania, but COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAMES.
  2. I'll skip this one.
  3. The Castlevania reference in Sexy Parodius is found in Stage 3B (which is a castle inhabited with mice). The song "Vampire Killer" (BGM from CVs Stage 1) is played briefly at the beginning of the Stage 3B's BGM. The song "Poison Mind" (boss music from CV) is briefly played at the beginning of the Medusa boss' music at the end of the stage. Honestly, these CV references aren't really that important for this game to be mentioned on this page IMHO. Buzda 21:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, let's remove Sexy Parodius then. A quick question though, are Castlevania and Vampire Killer different enough, graphically and level design-wise, to be different games? Chronicles, Super, and Haunted Castle seem different enough, but the first two seem awfully similar to me. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:47, 18 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
While most of both games character/enemy sprites are identical, but re-colored, and each stage takes place in the same settings (usually with the same BGM) the gameplay is very much different. The MSX had scrolling limitations so instead of scrolling gameplay, each stage was played in single screen portions and Simon had to find a key in each area to advance in a stage. While some people would consider this simply the MSX version of Castlevania, which it pretty much is, Konami considers it a separate title. Akumajou Dracula X: Chi no Rondo wouldn't have the X (roman numeral for 10) if Vampire Killer was considered just a "port" or "the same game as Castlevania".

And while we're on the topic of ports and remakes, I think Chronicles and Dracula X Chronicles should be mentioned in their own sections in this article. They are considered major releases within the series, despite being enhanced remakes. Also, the people editing this article are considering Castlevania: Dracula X as a re-release of Akumajou Dracula X: Chi no Rondo when it is in fact a completely different game only re-using many of the sprites from Chi no Rondo. It's essentially a re-telling of Chi no Rondo's story but A COMPLETELY DIFFERENT GAME with COMPLETELY DIFFERENT STAGES. Even the Japanese title for the game, Akumjou Dracula XX, should give you a hint. Why are people with little CV knowledge even editing this article in the first place? Buzda 04:10, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

First, that is an entirely uncalled for personal attack on people who have been editing the article. You, in no way, shape, or form, own this article or are able to restrict the people who can edit this article. Civility is the cornerstone of our discussions here and will be maintained at all times. When dealing with people who are making entirely good faith edits to improve an article, treat them as such, and if their work needs correcting, then so be it. If you truly believe that there are factual errors in the article, or other problems, then be bold and correct them yourself. If your knowledge does indeed extend to this material, then use it towards constructive ends. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 05:13, 19 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
As Sephiroth already stated, there is no need for such behavior. We have already commented on our own lack of knowledge of the series, to continue to verbally bash us does the article or anybody no good. Now if you want me to respond in turn and find holes in the reasoning behind your argument I can, however that won't get us anywhere. You are obviously passionate and knowledgeable about these games and could be a great asset in improving this article to Featured List, but if you don't work with us I don't see how that will be possible. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
I agree I got out of line in the last sentence I typed, but it is just extremely annoying editing an article in this type of format with so many inaccuracies. I respect everyone who contributes to this great website and articles like this one, but please research and review what you submit before you submit it. It would make clean up so much easier. Buzda 02:41, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
It's ok. I understand the frustration that can come from editing on this website. But this list was split off from the main Castlevania article, and many of the original mistakes were carried over from there. Additional mistakes were made by me when I tried editing it without actually playing the games and finding conflicting information on the older games. But that is also were Wikipedia's weakness can be its strength. With the right editors we can get this thing cleaned up. As long as we assume good faith, we can work together quite well. (Guyinblack25 talk 03:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Game list[edit]

Let's get this sorted out and decide which titles should be listed as their own entry. I think we should also discuss sorting them; if they need to be sorted, not sure if they do or not. One possible idea that came to mind is having a "Console" section and a "Handheld/Mobile" section. Anyway, here is the current listing games. Do we need to modify it?

  • Castlevania
  • Vampire Killer
  • Castlevania II: Simon's Quest
  • Haunted Castle
  • Castlevania: The Adventure
  • Castlevania III: Dracula's Curse
  • Castlevania II: Belmont's Revenge
  • Super Castlevania IV
  • Akumajō Dracula (Chronicles)
  • Akumajō Dracula X: Chi no Rondo
  • Castlevania: Bloodlines
  • Castlevania: Dracula X
  • Castlevania: Symphony of the Night
  • Castlevania Legends
  • Castlevania (64)
  • Castlevania: Legacy of Darkness
  • Castlevania: Circle of the Moon
  • Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance
  • Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow
  • Castlevania: Lament of Innocence
  • Castlevania: Dawn of Sorrow
  • Castlevania: Curse of Darkness
  • Castlevania: Portrait of Ruin
  • Castlevania: Order of Shadows

Any thoughts? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:01, 19 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]

Castlevania Chronicles and Castlevania: The Dracula X Chronicles should really have their own separate spot in this article. While they are both enhanced remakes of older games, they are considered major Castlevania releases none-the-less and not just a simple port of another game to another system. Plus it makes the article much less confusing.Buzda 02:56, 20 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know. The more I look over these things, the more confused I get. The X Chronicles I understand. I added a separate section for those. But this whole Castlevania, Vampire Killer, Akumajou Dracula, and Chronicles thing is really starting to make my head hurt. I realize that they were released at different times and have gameplay and graphical differences, but the manner in which to organize them honestly escapes me. The thing that gets me is the similarities are there and apparent, but they each have varying levels of similarity between each other.
It's like the Famicom release, yes it was released in Japan for the first time on that system. But because the NES and Famicom are essentially the same system, the first NES release is more notable. That and the Famicom release was not the first Japanese release of the game. Let's see what Sephiroth says, cause my mind is a bit frazzled. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:18, 24 October 2007 (UTC))[reply]
Yeah, organizing the series and making it easy to comprehend for people unfamiliar to the series is no easy task. Hell, I'm very familiar with the series and I still get confused! You have ports, you have remakes that are practically completely different games (Vampire Killer, Haunted Castle, Super CV IV, Akumajou Dracula [X68000]), remakes that are remakes in one country but considered brand new sequels in another(Super CV IV is a sequel outside Japan), remakes that are a remake of a remake (Castlevania Chronicles), and that is just a few examples. Buzda 18:13, 25 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

PLEASE[edit]

Please talk about it in the article:

  • Dracula Battle New Classic Perfect Selection
  • Dracula Battle Perfect Selection
  • Dracula Battle Perfect Selection 2

Commentary[edit]

Could you elaborate more on those, I'm not exactly sure what those are. I googled them and found some soundtrack listings. Are these albums? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:59, 28 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Answer[edit]

I wrote that I was before.

Yes man! Castlevania has several CDs of songs, many, many even! Speak to the staff of the main article on Castlevania for them to make paragraphs in an article about this, because I can not because they do not speak English fluently, probably you may have noticed that this text was not very good, it is because I am a Brazilian and I using a translator to write and understand what you speak. Please write when you use simple words, because once the translation is easier and the errors are minor, okay?

The best sites on about it is this: Http://www.vgmuseum.com/mrp/multi/soundtracks.htm Http://castlevania.classicgaming.gamespy.com/media.html

What think?

MisterMario92 15h59min de 29 de Janeiro de 2008 (BR)

This article is a list of the Castlevania video games. A list of soundtracks would not be appropriate here. An appropriate article would be "Music of Castlevania" or "List of Castlevania soundtracks". I will try to see if that article can be created later. (Guyinblack25 talk 18:17, 29 January 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Ok man! Very good! MisterMario92 22h31min de 30 de Janeiro de 2008 (BR) —Preceding unsigned comment added by 200.226.64.223 (talk) 00:31, 31 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Heading titles[edit]

Let's discuss this instead of going back and forth. May I ask why you feel the first heading should be labeled "Titles"? (Guyinblack25 talk 15:38, 22 May 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Kid Dracula[edit]

Instead of reverting back and forth, let's discuss this. Why do you think Kid Dracula should be in the main list? (Guyinblack25 talk 20:01, 9 October 2008 (UTC))[reply]

TGS 2008 project[edit]

Isn't it Castlevania: Lords of Shadow? --MK (talk) 00:19, 5 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, that's what I though too, saying it was separate is simply based on a single teaser of an upcoming Castlevania game. They hid the Castlevania part of LOS to hide their changes, so then wouldn't it make sense that the teaser announcing only that a new Castlevania game would be made would reflect this misleading nature having been shown before the LOS announcement? All we know, is that a new Castlevania game and Lords of Shadow as not a Castlevania game were announced around the same time, shouldn't we assume that they're the same thing when LOS was revealed as a Castlevania game, b/c they had already announced 1, not 2, and now LOS is that 1. (173.66.175.33 (talk) 18:01, 10 January 2010 (UTC))[reply]

Dracula[edit]

Dracula is of course an English word, derived from the Romanian 'dracul' by Bram Stoker. Megata Sanshiro (talk) 08:44, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

"Dracula" is, of course, a name. And the discussion is going on there. Erigu (talk) 16:18, 19 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Dracula is a real Romanian word. It means "son of the dragon" as Dracul means "The Dragon". Vlad II was named Dracul since he was part of the order of Dragon which prevented Ottoman from entering directly to mainland Europe and his son Vlad III was given the title of Dracula. Vlad III might have used brutal methods against his enemies but this was due to him being captured by Ottomans and later the Hungarians and his father and brother being murdered. Vlad II was however a very noble and good man and so was his son before being captured by ottomans. TransVannian (talk) 08:58, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Can we resolve the edit war, sir. 92.14.232.201?[edit]

Don't make any sense Castlevania: The Adventure Rebirth (2009) after Lords of Shadow (2010)! MisterMario92 (talk) 17:16, 12 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

MangaUpdates as reliable source[edit]

(Discussion moved from User_talk:Brainy_J#MangaUpdates. — TransporterMan (TALK) 04:31, 14 June 2013 (UTC))[reply]

You removed MangaUpdates as a source in List of Castlevania media. You have said that it's unreliable and also have some copyright concerns. However you have not even mentioned a single reason why you think the source is unreliable nor you have mentioned which copyrights you think are being violated. A source can only be qualified as unreliable if there is definite proof for it's unreliability and the source has been properly checked. Unfortunately your edits seem incorrect to me. Unless you can give a valid reason for qualifying MangaUpdates as unreliable the source can be used. I think you should be given time to check whether it's reliable or not. If you cannot then I will have to reinsert the website as a source. Also I advice you to have a consensus on this matter with other editors and the administrators. Thank you. — Preceding unsigned comment added by KahnJohn27 (talk • contribs) 18:57, 11 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Unfortunately you seem to have it backwards. Sources are not automatically reliable until proven unreliable. This is especially true for sites that consist of user-generated content, which MangaUpdates is. Additionally, the copyright issues should be obvious: MangaUpdates, while not directly hosting infringing material, serves as a database to help users download copyrighted manga. If you believe the site should be linked despite these concerns, feel free to ask for a third opinion.-- Brainy J (previously Atlantima) ~✿~ (talk) 12:26, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Well despite that you seem to be forgetting that until there's solid proof there's no reason to qualify a source as unreliable or reliable. Until then there's no problem with using it as a source according to Wikipedia.policies atleast until it's proven unreliable. Besides that I don't see anything about it offering downloaded manga. Also you may want to know that there are hundreds of manga websites that offer naruto mangas. It's because all mangas have copyright only in Japan. Not in USA. Naruto mangas have no coyright in USA. Atleast not the Japanese version. The coyripyright laws do not apply outside Japan. Do you think they Shonen Jump(pulishers of Naruto manga) would have closed down all those sites which offfer the public to read the Naruto mangas online for free till now if those copyright laws were applicale everywhere? I think we should start a discussion about the reliability of this website. KahnJohn27 (talk) 12:42, 13 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Putting aside the copyright issue, which I still don't agree with you on, MangaUpdates is clearly user-generated. A quick look at their FAQ should make that obvious. This means that it is covered by the same rules as self-published sources, meaning it is unreliable. -- Brainy J (previously Atlantima) ~✿~ (talk) 01:32, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Response to Third Opinion Request:
Disclaimers: I am responding to a third opinion request made at WP:3O. I have made no previous edits on List of Castlevania media and have no known association with the editors involved in this discussion. The third opinion process (FAQ) is informal and I have no special powers or authority apart from being a fresh pair of eyes. Third opinions are not tiebreakers and should not be "counted" in determining whether or not consensus has been reached. My personal standards for issuing third opinions can be viewed here.

Opinion: MangaUpdates is clearly not a reliable source as defined by Wikipedia, since the information there is user generated. Reliability is not a matter to be determined by consensus because it is a matter of policy. Per the consensus policy policies "reflect established consensus". While there can be disagreements over the interpretation or application of policy which must be determined by consensus, when the interpretation or application is clear then no new consensus is needed, as consensus has already been established by the policy. There is no doubt that the information on MangaUpdates is user-generated and thus no doubt that policy says that it is not reliable. It may also be a doubtful site due to copyright issues, though that point is moot in light of its non-reliablity. (It is Wikipedia policy, by the way to honor Japanese copyright law. See Wikipedia:Non-U.S. copyrights, which sets out the rules.)

What's next: Once you've considered this opinion click here to see what happens next.—TransporterMan (TALK) 04:26, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]


Manga updates does not violate copyrights. Please read this page carefully( http://www.mangaupdates.com/faq.html?cid=7#item47).

In this FAQ Manga updates explictly mentions that they do not host mangas or offer mangas for download. While some users on it's forums might upload scans of some mangas which violates copyrights. But please note that it is not MangaUpdates which is violating copyrights. It is no fault of theirs. Also for proof please read this :-

MangaUpdates does not and never will host manga. It is against our rules/policies to ask for downloads on the forums.

There are many hands down no-questions asked internet websites who prefer the consumer over copyrights just like Torrentz. However note that Torrentz does not host even a single torrent but is just merely a search engine and does not violate any copyrights nor does it endorse copyright violations. Mangaupdates never violates any copyrights nor does it endorse any copyright violation. I don't think it will be correct to remove Mangaupdates just because it is a hands-down no questions asked website and nor is there any policy that states that even websites who actually do not violate copyrights since they prefer consumer over copyrights should be removed. KahnJohn27 (talk) 13:02, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The copyright issue isn't really relevant since MangaUpdates cannot be used as a source due to its unreliability unrelated to copyright. And I'm not saying that MU is a copyright infringer, but only that I have some unresolved concerns about how it relates to Wikipedia's copyright policy, most particularly WP:COPYLINK. Those concerns need not be resolved, however, since we cannot use it anyway. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 13:27, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'm sorry but I couldn't understand what you're saying TransporterMan. I request you to please explain carefully and be precise. Doesn't matter how long it is but please explain carefully especially what reasons you are listing for calling Baka Manga Updates unreliable? From what I can see that it's not user generated. It is not like Wikipedia where users provide information. The website is professional. But altleast you believe that it does not do copyright infrogment. Also somewhat unrelated but I'll like to ask why Wikipedia considers the copyrights of those works which have copyrights only in specific territories? For example mangas are only copyright protected in Japan and not in USA and the UK and the rest of the world. Please explain that too. Also like to say again please specify how is Manga Updates is unreliable? KahnJohn27 (talk) 15:02, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try, but I'm concerned that the language barrier is as much of a problem as anything.
The http://www.mangaupdates.com/faq.html?cid=3#item3 FAQ page says that after a free signup and upgrade any person can add or change "information for a release, group, series, author, publisher". That fact makes MangaUpdates contain self-published information. Sites which have self-published information are unreliable according to this policy. That policy says, "Anyone can create a personal web page or publish their own book, and also claim to be an expert in a certain field. For that reason, self-published media, such as books, patents, newsletters, personal websites, open wikis, personal or group blogs (as distinguished from newsblogs, above), Internet forum postings, and tweets, are largely not acceptable as sources." (Emphasis added.) The "largely" in that sentence is then explained to mean (a) certain self-published materials by well-established experts whose work has been published in other reliable sources and (b) limited information which people publish about themselves. Neither of those exceptions apply in this case and there are no other exceptions for self-published materials.
If you still do not understand, leave me a message on my talk page in which you state your cradle language and I'll see if I can find someone who can explain this to you in that language. Regards, TransporterMan (TALK) 16:30, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Additionly: Please understand that we are not using the term "reliable source" in its usual English-language meaning. "Reliable source" has a special meaning which is defined by Wikipedia policy. There are websites and other sources of information which are totally and utterly reliable in a general sense which cannot be used as a "reliable source" in Wikipedia because they do not meet Wikipedia's definition of "reliable source." Wikipedia's definition is in the verifiability policy, mainly here. When we say MangaUpdates is not reliable, we are not saying that it is not reliable in general, but only that it does not come within the Wikipedia definition of "reliable source." — TransporterMan (TALK) 16:40, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Wait so what you're basically saying is that MangaUpdates is just like Wikipedia? Any person can add, remove or modify any information on the website after signing up? KahnJohn27 (talk) 18:08, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
That's what their FAQ and their signup page says. — TransporterMan (TALK) 18:45, 14 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Yes you are right. I signed up on the website using a dummy Google account (sorry for that I've already deleted it though) and found out what you were saying is true. KahnJohn27 (talk) 05:53, 15 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Added a new source for Dracula X Nocturne in the Moonlight[edit]

Discussion moved here from my talk page. -- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 16:08, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've addded a new source for Dracula X Nocturne in the Moonlight. The source ia Push Square. It is a reliable source and does not violate any copyrights. It mentions that the manga was only available through pre-ordering Symphony of the Night and the game was released in 1997 and so was the manga along with game. You can check the source yourself if you want to.KahnJohn27 (talk) 06:22, 18 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Was there really any need at all to post this discussion here? KahnJohn27 (talk) 06:42, 19 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Was there any need to post it on my talk page? The paragraph you wrote above is entirely concerned with this article's sourcing and is no more relevant to me than to any other user who has edited this article. Thus I copied it here to the article talk page.-- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 11:55, 20 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
No more relevant? I posted that message on your talk page to ask for your advice. KahnJohn27 (talk) 20:57, 22 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]
If you post it here, then all users who edit the article can offer advice. I can't access the page at http://www.pushsquare.com/news/2012/09/feature_the_making_of_castlevania_symphony_of_the_night, but Push Square seems like a legit RS for this. -- Brainy J ~✿~ (talk) 04:39, 25 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-order bonuses in list of Castlevania media[edit]

I have doubt that pre-order bonuses like Dracula X: Nocturne in the Moonlight and Akumajō Dracula: Yami no Juin – Fukushū no Jokyoku deserve to be in the List of Castlevania media since they were only available through pre-order. I don't know whether pre-order bonuses should be included in list of media based on a franchise. List of Final Fantasy media does not contain any pre-order bonuses. However I'll like to take others' opinion on whether they should be kept or removed. KahnJohn27 (talk) 09:21, 28 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on List of Castlevania media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 02:28, 2 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of Castlevania media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:30, 17 May 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on List of Castlevania media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:38, 24 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 21 external links on List of Castlevania media. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 18 January 2022).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 01:50, 7 October 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Kid Dracula (1990 video game)[edit]

The first title under "Spin-Offs" should be the Famicom Kid Dracula (1990). Can someone add and link this please?

Thanks 4.2.234.42 (talk) 20:35, 10 January 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:List_of_Castlevania_media&oldid=1207475894"