Talk:The Typing of the Dead

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
B This article has been rated as B-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
VG To-do:
A fact from The Typing of the Dead appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know? column on 13 March 2008.
Wikipedia
The Typing of the Dead was a good article nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There are suggestions below for improving the article. Once these are addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Reviewed version: No date specified. To provide a date use: {{FailedGA|insert date in any format here}}

Contents

[edit] Arcade game roots

Was this really an arcade game at first? I've heard nothing of the sort personally. --Kizor 07:48, 21 July 2005 (UTC)

A Typing of the Dead arcade machine. --Dave2 17:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)
I've played it. I managed to score 1 hit. So um, yes, it's real. Dread Lord CyberSkull ✎☠ 11:17, 12 February 2006 (UTC)
Well then, how exactly does the whole two keyboards ordeal work? Mr a150 (talk) 22:38, 13 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Sega stub question

Is it really Sega-related stub? This game wasn't release on sega platform. --Akral 17:52, 21 December 2005 (UTC)

It's published by Sega, and was released on the Dreamcast, so yes. --Dave2 17:39, 22 December 2005 (UTC)

[edit] $150, huh?

Ebay's highest price for a sealed Dreamcast copy is $25. For the PC, it's $30. Unless those are Hong Kong dollars >_>

167.206.128.33 23:56, 16 May 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Contradiction

The game is categorized as a 1999 game but its infobox says 2000. Which is correct? Stifle (talk) 12:50, 12 July 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Version differences?

I've seen various versions floating around the net - US, Europe, Japan...
Apart from JPN having a trivia/quiz section, and EU requiring a serial number during installation, are the any gameplay differences (as in, different dictionary, censorship, etc)?
If you had 2 different versions side-by-side, which one would you pick? Theultramage (talk) 12:30, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:5. Judgment Screen.PNG

Image:5. Judgment Screen.PNG 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 lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 18:54, 13 February 2008 (UTC)


[edit] Failed "good article" nomination

Upon its review on March 23, 2008, this good article nomination was quick-failed because it:

contains cleanup banners including, but not limited to, {{cleanup}}, {{wikify}}, {{NPOV}}, {{unreferenced}}, etc, or large numbers of {{fact}}, {{clarifyme}}, {{huh}}, or similar tags

thus making it ineligible for good article consideration.

This article did not receive a thorough review, and may not meet other parts of the good article criteria. I encourage you to remedy this problem (and any others) and resubmit it for consideration. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— Epass (talk) 11:33, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Reasons for Rejection

The article has no information on development, this is a MUSt for any Good Article involving a video game.