Talk:Chick Chick Boom

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Chick Chick Boom article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find video game sources: "Chick Chick Boom" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk

Video games: Nintendo Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (6 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (2 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Article combination.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section.

The result was merge from Chick Chick BOOM. -- Crimsonseiko 13:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Unaware that two articles existed for the game, I did some major clean-up to the other article at Chick Chick Boom. Then I discovered this page. We need to combine the articles. Here are my suggestions.

First of all, this article needs clean-up; it isn't written in an encyclopedic style. It needs to be written more formally, not flowered up like a cute instruction manual or promotional ad. For example, no second-person "you." You're not talking to the reader. Reference "the player" instead.

There's also a lot of trivia but no sources to back them up, and that lowers the reliable of the article. (On that note, trivia needs to be incorporated into the article itself. Trivia sections are frowned upon.)

Also, can anyone confirm that the title is grammatically "Chick Chick BOOM" and not "Chick Chick Boom?" In every instance I've seen the title written, it is in all CAPS, so logically, it would be written "Chick Chick Boom." This is crucial in deciding which article is going to be deleted.

I'm going to clean this article up and combine it with my original information on the other article so that it may meet the quality standards, but in order to do so, I need help from you guys, mostly to cite the sources for a lot of their information (such as the programmers' names for the default chick names). Otherwise, that information is subject to deletion since it has no backing, and I'll remove it when I clean things up.

As a matter of fact... having given the article a closer examination, it doesn't seem like any of it is salvageable unless you can cite your sources for a large chunk of the information. A majority of the article is unnecessarily lengthy gameplay information that is covered much more concisely in the other article, and certain information like the specific level names, their features, and their rewards is not encyclopedic and doesn't warrant the kind of attention a table grants it. The only saving grace for this article are the bits of information such as production staff and other easter eggs, but since none of it is cited, it is too disputable to stay on the page. Again, unless anything can be cited, I suggest this article be purged and the other article be made primary. -Crimsonseiko 20:04, 26 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You could try emailing NoE to find out if it's Boom or BOOM. -MrDrake 13:33, 27 April 2007 (GMT)

Well the official site's title is "CHICK CHICK BOOM", but Wikipedia:Manual of Style (trademarks) says "Follow standard English text formatting and capitalization rules even if the trademark owner encourages special treatment", so the article should be called "Chick Chick Boom" Mattyatty 16:06, 27 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Is there an agreement on the merger then? If so, I'm going to go ahead and perform it. -Crimsonseiko 17:52, 28 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think there is any conceivable reason why not to. They are the same article under diferent names. Mattyatty

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.