Talk:Ratchet & Clank

Rewrite Proposal II

This article is still in need of much improvement. I improved the "Game Section" and the intro, but a lot of the article is still overly detailed, lacking in sources and isn't laid out correctly. For instance, the merchandise section goes of on a long rant of bullet points, when a table would be more suited. I was wondering if anyone has any suggestions on how to better the layout of the entire article, and even improve certain sections like the "Gameplay Section" and the "Miscellaneous Media Section". Thanks - Jak Fisher (talk • contribs) 20:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

Oppose: Reverted because of an old revision used, which is very complicated for article editors and readers. I have checked this as well because there's no info in the Reception section and is therefore removed. 86.133.108.18 (talk) 11:34, 2 February 2014 (UTC)

Have you a particular reason to cite as these aren't valid and are very broad. And how is it difficult for users and editors if it is common practice and is in line with Wikipedia rules, they even provide the template for this. Plus no one has left comments on this page stating these concerns that you say everyone has. Otherwise the edit will be undone. Thanks - Jak Fisher (talk • contribs) 12:59, 02 February 2014 (UTC)

I take it since you haven't replied that there is none, and so I am therefore reverting the edit. - Jak Fisher (talk • contribs) 16:59, 03 February 2014 (UTC)

Character Image

Moved the image of Ratchet and Clank to the list of characters page. It is better suited there as it gives a clear view of who the two main characters are and is in keeping with the fair use policy, similar to the Jak and Daxter pages. - Jak Fisher (talk • contribs) 20:12, 24 January 2014 (UTC)

This article needs a diet.

I'll be copyediting grammar/syntax and removing excessive detail and in-universe writing in each section to trim 'er down a little. I feel like this article's severely lacking in sources and cites, but that being said, the WP:VG guidelines for articles makes it seem like they don't need sources for noncontentious information like plotsums... All the same, I can try hunting around for some usable sources for the article's general benefit and suggest them on the TP if it's needed. Not that it looks like the TP's been used much, heh. BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 13:21, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

There's a couple of sections I didn't touch much aside from copyediting due to the fact that I have little to no experience with these installments. I referenced what little non-puffery I could lift from the Into The Nexus article just for some very basic info on what gameplay elements that game introduced, but it would probably be better if someone familiar with that specific game OR with the ability to access any citable resources related to it (work computer filters spit in the face of IGN and their ilk unfortunately) could polish that bit of the article, without regurgitating the entire plot and labeling it an improvement. BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 15:51, 28 February 2015 (UTC)

Is the Merch section really all that notable/necessary?

I was just looking at other video game series articles (Metroid, Mario, and Pokemon to be precise), just for a reference point as to how this article should be modeled... NONE of them, not even Pokemon, probably the most heavily merch-soaked franchise Nintendo has, sports a merch section-- certainly not one as much of an unsourced regurgitation of bullet points like this one. I'd definitely opt to trim it down or even remove it, just to get this article down to a digestable size-- maybe there should be a separate Merch article for R&C, but as far as I can see, Pokemon doesn't even have one of those, either. Seems the majority agrees that merchandising isn't really notable enough to put into VG articles. I'll let my observations stand for a few days, and if no one on the TP has anything to say about it, I'll prune it down to a small paragraph or two talking about the kinds of merch the R&C franchise has circulated, but certainly not a breakdown of every single item they've made. BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 18:57, 2 March 2015 (UTC)

Welp, I waited for objections, so out come the pruning shears. BlusterBlaster^kablooie! 17:04, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

Ratchet and Clank page

I just recently created a page about a Ratchet and Clank character and I request that it be removed. Please delete the page as soon as possible. Jadzia Kira Dax (talk) 22:32, 15 January 2016 (UTC)

Consistently vs constantly

From the opening section, there's this part of a sentence that I have trouble with:

"...they travel through the universe, saving it from evil forces that consistently threaten it."

I feel like it should be "constantly" instead of "consistently". Please let me know if I'm right or wrong. (Note: Edited title of section to add -ly suffixes. Sorry about that.)--Thylacine24 (talk) 02:08, 23 August 2019 (UTC)

This may be old, very old in fact, but I think it relies on our judgement. I think either one would be good, seeing as villains like Dr. Nefarious "consistently" threatens the galaxy. It could however, be interpreted as, "constantly threaten the galaxy" because there are a multitude of villains in the galaxy. Leather Daddy Lenin (talk) 23:06, 16 February 2020 (UTC)

"Weapons from the Ratchet and Clank Series" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Weapons from the Ratchet and Clank Series. The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 20#Weapons from the Ratchet and Clank Series until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 03:21, 20 January 2021 (UTC)

"Devastator(Ratchet and Clank)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Devastator(Ratchet and Clank). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 23#Devastator(Ratchet and Clank) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 03:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

"Devastator (Ratchet and Clank)" listed at Redirects for discussion

A discussion is taking place to address the redirect Devastator (Ratchet and Clank). The discussion will occur at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2021 January 23#Devastator (Ratchet and Clank) until a consensus is reached, and readers of this page are welcome to contribute to the discussion. Regards, SONIC⁶⁷⁸ 03:16, 23 January 2021 (UTC)

"Qwarktastic!" listed at Redirects for discussion

The redirect Qwarktastic! has been listed at redirects for discussion to determine whether its use and function meets the redirect guidelines. Readers of this page are welcome to comment on this redirect at Wikipedia:Redirects for discussion/Log/2023 November 3 § Qwarktastic! until a consensus is reached. Utopes _{(talk / cont)} 16:25, 3 November 2023 (UTC)