Talk:Fable (2004 video game)
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Fable (2004 video game) article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Fable" 2004 video game – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Archives: 1 |
The following references may be useful when improving this article in the future:
|
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to one external link on Fable (video game). Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}}
after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}}
to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/20080417112438/http://www.computerandvideogames.com:80/article.php?id=90363 to http://www.computerandvideogames.com/article.php?id=90363
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 17:45, 8 January 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 10 external links on Fable (video game). 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:
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/previews/fable_3
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140822065548/http://www.robosoftin.com:80/what-we-do to http://www.robosoftin.com/what-we-do#portfolio/mac
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140202203820/http://pixelvolt.com/2014/02/02/dont-overlook-fable-anniversary/ to http://pixelvolt.com/2014/02/02/dont-overlook-fable-anniversary/
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/reviews/fable
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://uk.xbox.gamespy.com/xbox/fable/546898p1.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080912033633/http://www.metacritic.com:80/games/platforms/xbx/fable?q=fable to http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/fable?q=fable
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20080725052750/http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/fablethelostchapters/review.html to http://www.gamespot.com/pc/rpg/fablethelostchapters/review.html
- Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.1up.com/previews/fable-lost-chapters_7
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081205234953/http://www.gamespot.com:80/news/6111138.html to http://www.gamespot.com/news/6111138.html
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20090203141853/http://www.gamespot.com:80/news/6121637.html?tag=result;title;1 to http://www.gamespot.com/news/6121637.html?tag=result;title;1
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) 00:35, 29 December 2016 (UTC)
External links modified
[edit]Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Fable (video game). 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:
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081025182027/http://www.music4games.net/Features_Display.aspx?id=17 to http://www.music4games.net/Features_Display.aspx?id=17
- Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20081024195656/http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/fablethelostchapters?q=fable to http://www.metacritic.com/games/platforms/xbx/fablethelostchapters?q=Fable
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) 08:41, 27 September 2017 (UTC)
Requested move 7 January 2018
[edit]- The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
The result of the move request was: Moved as proposed. The confusion with the 1996 video game is too great. ToThAc (talk) 18:46, 8 January 2018 (UTC)
Fable (video game) → Fable (2004 video game) – To disambiguate the title from Fable (1996 video game). The leftover redirect, Fable (video game), would then be retargeted to Fable (disambiguation)#Video games. Steel1943 (talk) 04:06, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- er, support obviously, but @Steel1943: per WP:MOVE why bring to RM? In ictu oculi (talk) 08:59, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- @In ictu oculi: There's a possible reason to oppose this move, but I'm not sure if I feel like putting beans up my nose. Steel1943 (talk) 14:42, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support of course, and I'm the last guy who'll tell you to skip RMs :p Ben · Salvidrim! ✉ 09:32, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support Non controversial move though.ZXCVBNM (TALK) 14:41, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- Support. The RM was a good idea considering the nonsense surrounding similarly named articles that somehow have "primary" disambiguators. —Xezbeth (talk) 18:19, 7 January 2018 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.
Conflicting information
[edit]This New York Times article [1] mentions the development time was three years and involved 80 people. While here it's mentioned 4 years and 70 people. Which source should we use here? Timur9008 (talk) 13:41, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
- Given they're from the same vintage and they're both mainstream publications, I wouldn't really privilege one over the other, especially since, especially for the time frame, they could be counting prototypes and the like in one count, but not the other. I think best choice here is include the range in the prose (70–80 people or 'roughly 80 people') or include the discrepancy in a {{efn}} for max clarity. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 17:01, 18 March 2022 (UTC)