Talk:Crash Boom Bang!
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Contents |
[edit] Villian or hero
Is the new character in Crash Boom Bang good or evil... [[User:SuperSaiyanCrash 20:11, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
- That hasn't been revealed yet, but judging from the plot synopsis, he (Viscount Devil) probably doesn't mean any harm to the characters. He is but the sponsor of a race for an ancient lost city and the Super Big Power Stone, and simply wants to use the contestants to discover both of their secrets. So it seems that Cortex is the main antagonist once again, seeing that he kinda stole Viscount's ancient map and all.
Cat's Tuxedo 21:06, 12 August 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Final installment
I heard a rumor that this could be the final installment in the Crash bandicoot series I wonder if this is true —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sonicrules2 (talk • contribs) 13:50, 13 March 2007 (UTC).
It is not true. Crash Online" is set to be released sometime later this year. Cat's Tuxedo 18:54, 13 March 2007 (UTC)
Crash of the Titans, perhaps? Michael Mad 13:13, 3 June 2007 (UTC)
Crash Online was vaporware. It may've even been a cover story for titans.88.109.179.70 16:06, 14 October 2007 (UTC)
[edit] No article?
Why isn't there an article for Crash Online? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 209.244.187.122 (talk) 21:08, 20 March 2007 (UTC).
Because not enough information about it has been released to be made into an article. We need stuff like the game cover, release dates around in USA, Europe, and Japan, who's making it... y'know, stuff like that. Cat's Tuxedo 21:23, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Successful good article nomination
I am glad to report that this article nomination for good article status has been promoted. This is how the article, as of May 22, 2008, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: This article has some great prose. Good job on this!
- 2. Factually accurate?: I don't see anything wrong. All sources seem reliable according to WP:V, but there are still some uncited sentences that need to be fixed if the FAC is a target
- 3. Broad in coverage?:
- 4. Neutral point of view?: There isn't anything controversial about this material anyways
- 5. Article stability? Very stable - no edits in a few days
- 6. Images?: All images pass
Great job on this article! Pass without having to go on hold...not many articles can achieve that. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to Good article reassessment. Thank you to all of the editors who worked hard to bring it to this status, and congratulations. — haha169 (talk) 05:54, 22 May 2008 (UTC)