Jump to content

Talk:Lost Luggage (video game): Difference between revisions

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Content deleted Content added
No edit summary
No edit summary
Line 3: Line 3:


{{Talk:Lost Luggage (video game)/GA1}}
{{Talk:Lost Luggage (video game)/GA1}}

{{dyktalk|16 June|2014|entry= ...that the 1982 Atari 2600 game Lost Luggage features terrorist suitcases?}}

Revision as of 13:08, 24 June 2014

WikiProject iconVideo games Start‑class Low‑importance
WikiProject iconThis 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.
StartThis article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale.
LowThis article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Lost Luggage (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Zanimum (talk · contribs) 21:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


I'll review. -- Zanimum (talk) 21:47, 18 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I love that there was no room on the cartridge for a luggage train! Skycap is unfamiliar. Even though there's a wikilink, would it be appropriate to say "skycap porter" or something? Otherwise, everything reads beautifully, there's nothing that needs tweaking. -- Zanimum (talk) 22:51, 24 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Went with skycap porter. Thanks for looking over the article. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 16:05, 25 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We're now at 55 GAs in the 1980s video games category! I have to say, this was one of the cleanest, GA-ready articles I've had the pleasure of reviewing. -- Zanimum (talk) 18:59, 27 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]


Im not sure quite what to say. Is this being a featured artivle intended as some kind of joke? Whilst well written and technically acceptable it is, to put mildly, not of much interest. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.141.120.173 (talk) 20:48, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Well they can't all be winners. Taylor Trescott - my talk + my edits 22:13, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]
Featured articles are chosen purely for how well they cover their topic, not for how interesting the topic is. It is a bit weird to see such random stuff featured though. --74.128.224.174 (talk) 22:51, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]