Jump to content

Talk:Star Wars: TIE Fighter

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Former good article nomineeStar Wars: TIE Fighter was a Video games good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
June 28, 2006Good article nomineeNot listed

GA concerns

[edit]

Some comments/questions regarding this article's Good Article nomination:

  • The article could definitely benefit from some Copyediting.
  • There are no sources at all. One of the external links is nothing but a brief overview of the game's basic stats. The other explains how to get the game running on newer systems. Neither of these articles seems to have been used as a source.
  • Missing spoiler tags for important plot elements.
  • The lead paragraph mentions some the technological improvements this game had, but never mentions them again in the article.
  • Of the three images used in the article, two are incorrectly tagged as GFDL. Scans of copyrighted images are not eligible for this designation. All images used in the article appear to be copyrighted. They need to be tagged appropriately and have detailed fair use rationales.
  • Beware of sentences like While theoretically possible in the "real" Star Wars universe, that would also potentially compromise speed and protection. - they sound like original research.
  • Information concerning the development history of the game would be nice.
  • There are vague claims of popularity, such as was much lauded by players, but there are no sources cited for these claims. Was the game, in fact, popular? Are sales figures available? How about some press reviews?

--cholmes75 (chit chat) 21:36, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Failed

[edit]

For being on hold for a week.--SeizureDog 11:17, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed my cover scans' licenses a week ago. --Swaaye 18:54, 5 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • The game is extremely popular and regularly appears on 'best PC games of all time' lists, A reference for this would be required though
  • This article is desperately in need of editing, as it includes a number of incorrect statements, such as 'The briefings are also richer. Apart from the standard schematic map, the player has the ability to talk via a dialogue menu to both an Imperial officer and a "cloaked figure" - a Sith working for the Secret Order of the Emperor.' a fairly needless statement, and the "cloaked figure" is never mentioned as a sith, but is mentioned as an agent of the secret order of the emperor. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 94.168.46.225 (talk) 21:39, 2 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use rationale for Image:Swtiefightercd.jpg

[edit]

Image:Swtiefightercd.jpg 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 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 09:09, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Analog Audio Mode Needed

[edit]

I wasn't sure where to put this in the main article but it needs to be added somewhere. The in game music WILL NOT PLAY on newer laptops or desktops that lack the analog link between the CD-Rom drive and the sound card. There is no way to resolve this on lap tops and I am unsure if it can be resolved with desktops. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.24.111.54 (talk) 22:07, 2 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Heavy revisions, March 2013

[edit]

I made some significant revisions to the article today which I'll cover here. I expanded the reviews section with the scant (3) reviews of the game I could find online, reorganized the reception section to separate reviews from the numerous "best of" awards, and removed most of the trivial "best of" rankings (e.g. "53 in the 2007 list of best games of all time" or what have you). I deleted the "new craft" section, as it is cruft that has no meaning to those who are not deeply invested in the Extended Universe. I also reorganized the gameplay section, trimmed the excessive and repetitive explanations of warheads, and added several sourced paragraphs about the concourse and other features of the game outside of the actual flight simulation. Finally, I sourced a few lines of the Expansions/Collector's editons section.

The article could still use a few more sources for the gameplay section, and particularly for the Expansions section. Hopefully though the overall quality is improved notably. Some guy (talk) 09:06, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

The new craft section does have considerable meaning as it does go well beyond George Lucas standard universe, and except for X-Wing Alliance most of it was not retained in future Star Wars titles. Limefrost Spiral (talk) 03:27, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Please do not reinsert the material without engaging in a discussion. You giving a one sentence response isn't a discussion. The new craft are relatively minor in the Extended Universe. By your own words, "except for X-Wing Alliance most of it was not retained in future Star Wars titles." That makes them non-notable. They are meaningless to the average reader. The section even states "The ninth title in the X-wing novels, Starfighters of Adumar, has one of the rare appearances of the TIE Defender in the Star Wars Expanded Universe." Rare appearances. While certainly notable in the Tie Fighter game, the Tie Defender is not an iconic symbol of the Star Wars universe. The same holds true of the other new craft. The rest of the section is unencyclopedic. I will go so far as to dissect it sentence by sentence.
  • "Particularly the Advanced, Defender, and Missile Boat are vastly superior to Rebel fighters, and for subsequent X-Wing series games they were removed or had their attributes toned down significantly." - unsourced, subjective, excessive gameplay detail
  • "By the fifth Tour of Duty, the player is exclusively piloting the new Imperial craft and not the original TIEs, so game-play ends up similar to X-Wing." - Unsourced, subjective, not particularly worth mentioning
  • "This is somewhat at odds with the "official" Imperial Navy doctrine in Star Wars, as the Imperials in the films and other works are portrayed as making mass overwhelming attacks with expendable craft" - original research
  • "The apparent disparity is explained by the events in TIE Fighter being portrayed as largely secret campaigns involving experimental technology." - building original research upon the previous sentence
  • "Notably a recurring story arc is Admiral Zaarin's development of the TIE Advanced and then his destruction of the few Imperial manufacturing facilities producing that starfighter." - belongs in plot section
  • "In the Essential Guide to Vehicles it states that only a "few key Imperial personnel knew that the TIE Defender was used to defeat rogue Admiral Zaarin" and the Defender was considered too expensive for full production" - this is getting rather off topic; it is interesting for an EU fanatic but not important in context of the game.
  • "The game also introduces spacecraft and characters from the Star Wars Expanded Universe, including the Z-95 Headhunter from Brian Daley's Han Solo trilogy and Grand Admiral Thrawn, a central character in Timothy Zahn's trilogy." - this would be more appropriate in a "Development" section, but there isn't one.
  • "IE Fighter and the Defender of the Empire expansion pack introduce many craft that never again appear outside the X-Wing computer game series" - thus making them non-notable.
  • " Examples include space platforms (replacing the assortment of freighters and containers used to represent space stations in Star Wars: X-Wing)[5], the Mon Calamari Light Cruiser, R-41 Starchasers, and T-Wings (although T-Wings and platforms are referenced in some Star Wars novels, such as a space platform on the cover art of The Krytos Trap)." - WP:CRUFT
  • "Compared to X-Wing, TIE Fighter added 33 new craft and space stations/objects" - could go in development section or lead.
Additionally, the Gamesradar source you used doesn't say anything supporting the sentence you added it to. I'm not sure why you feel it is necessary to include it there. Surely you at least read it? Finally, "each of which consists of four to six missions each" is a grammatical failure; the change to the sentence is wholly unnecessary anyway. Another thing to keep in mind: Giant Bomb is a wiki and not usable as a source. Some guy (talk) 05:01, 13 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

@JoshDonaldson20: Please read this section about why the content was removed. Please don't add it back again, as none of the issues and concerns have been addressed. -- ferret (talk) 22:17, 12 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Potential source

[edit]

From here, some 1994 coverage of the game being leaked a week or so ahead of its release. --EEMIV (talk) 18:01, 6 June 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Cheers, that led me to the LA Times article with the release date, 20 July 1994: The Pirates of the Internet — Pseudemonium (talk) 16:55, 8 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source

[edit]

Orphaned references in Star Wars: TIE Fighter

[edit]

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of Star Wars: TIE Fighter's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "NG":

  • From Star Wars Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II: "Finals". Next Generation. No. 36. Imagine Media. December 1997. p. 173.
  • From Star Wars Arcade: "Finals". Next Generation. No. 1. Imagine Media. January 1995. p. 93.
  • From Doom (1993 video game): "Finals". Next Generation. No. 1. Imagine Media. January 1995. p. 92.

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT⚡ 19:21, 29 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Bestseller and/or commercial success?

[edit]

Is this game supposed to be a bestseller and/or commercial success or neither? Why? Thomas Wiencek (talk) 02:59, 28 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Star_Wars:_TIE_Fighter&oldid=1242674364"