Jump to content

Talk:Ironsword: Wizards & Warriors II

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleIronsword: Wizards & Warriors II has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 18, 2011Good article nomineeListed

Fair use rationale for Image:Ironsword 2.png

[edit]

Image:Ironsword 2.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Ironsword 1.png

[edit]

Image:Ironsword 1.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 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 uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 07:31, 5 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

What?

[edit]

"Although the game is slightly easier than its predecessor..." - Is that a joke? This game is notoriously harder than the first one. I can say this from playing both the first and this game, and i'm sure other people agree with me. 84.249.50.213 (talk) 22:49, 22 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

IronSword is substantially shorter than the first game, due in part to the lack of gem collecting. The player can freely rush through any given level without having to meet a gem quota before they're allowed to advance to the next level. So I would estimate an experienced player could complete IronSword in 15 - 20 minutes, or possibly even less.

I myself have finished the game in a single sitting without the use of continues or passwords. I don't frankly think it's possible to do the same with Wizards & Warriors I. 98.86.114.85 (talk) 17:13, 9 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Ironsword: Wizards & Warriors II/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 21:58, 19 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry for the late review; I'll get to this in a couple of days. I've just been busy with video games and other stuff lately. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 19:14, 10 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    The prose is fairly well-done. I have a couple of issues; in the gameplay, it sort of implies that from treasure chests, you can find weapon and armour upgrades. Now, do you get both in one chest, or in separate chests? Also, in the third paragraph where it is talking about "golden objects", are the things that follow the mention of these objects the objects in question? - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    I made a small addition for the first thing. As far as that other sentence is concerned, it's mentioning all the spells, which the familiar spell does not retrieve. The sentence structure there should be correct as far as I know. –MuZemike 22:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    I'm not sure if I would consider Twin Galaxies a reliable source. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed. –MuZemike 22:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    I really enjoyed the whole story about Fabio's use for the game. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 20:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Fixes made [1]. –MuZemike 22:03, 15 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems good. Nice job. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 03:59, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]
[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Ironsword: Wizards & Warriors II. 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: 5 June 2024).

  • 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) 03:12, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Ironsword:_Wizards_%26_Warriors_II&oldid=1202375818"