Talk:Perfect Dark Zero/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

"Xbox 360 games" category

For some reason the "Xbox 360 games" category showed up as red on my screen. I put in a space and now its normal. Did anyone else see it? Thunderbrand 22:24, May 13, 2005 (UTC)

Boxshot

WHY the boxcover need be replaced? What wrong with current boxshot? --Mateusc 05:34, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

It is unsourced, for one. But nothing is terribly "wrong" with it, is there anything "wrong" about the replacement image? It is of a higher quality, it has a source (a requirement for images posted to wikipedia) and a clear rationale for fair use (it is part of a promotional "fansite kit", such images come with permission). Unless you can provide some proof that replacing the image will somehow harm the article, I think you are simply reverting on bad faith. --anetode╔╝ 05:37, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Unsourced? Hanhm.. it's a public game boxcover with fair use compilant.
I never saw anyone in Wikipedia broken with this... and not bad faith, just to keep the norms. --Mateusc 05:50, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Yes unsourced. See Template:No source, that type of unsourced. The image I replaced *is* sourced, and is offered with permission. What's broken is that wikipedia relies on fair use, and whenever there is an option that is more respectful of copyrights, it is preferable. Also, bad faith means that you do not assume good faith - that is, you appear to think that my actions are not meant to improve the article. --anetode╔╝ 05:57, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Well, I don't see any problem with current boxcovers. Unsourced or not it's compilant with fair use and this is already made in lot games articles here. --Mateusc 06:02, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
You do realize that unsourced images are deleted, right? If there is a sourced alternative, much less one that implies fair use and permission, then changing the image is justified. If you don't see what's wrong with the box cover, then please tell me what is wrong with the image I posted. Pointing at other pages is rather irrelevant, this is a different set of circumstances with different options. --anetode╔╝ 06:11, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
The problem of image that you posted is: not compilant with the norms os WPCVG and already a fine box image in the article. I think this need a LOT of discuss in Wikipedia_talk:WikiProject_Computer_and_video_games because as Jacoplane says, this is a consensus of community and you trying to disrespect this. --Mateusc 06:13, 17 November 2005 (UTC)
Once again, it is the box art (Image:PerfectDarkZero.jpg is the image in Image:Pdz_boxart.jpg), as suggested by WPCVG's policy on infobox usage. And even if it weren't, that does not automatically invalidate the edit or give you cause to engage in multiple reverts (or to violate WP:3RR w/r/t/ PDZ or Kameo), after all: Wikipedia:Ignore all rules, WP:BOLD. --anetode╔╝ 06:22, 17 November 2005 (UTC)

Game reviews

Do we really need all those links to each review? Why not just have Gamerankings (which is already there) and leave it at that? It would clear up the clutter. Thunderbrand 14:25, 13 January 2006 (UTC)


The review links have been removed from the article, and rightfully so. However, if anyone wants to expand the Reaction section and wishes to cite some professional reviews as references (I reckon a few quotations from specific sources are better than general statements like "leans towards the positive"), here are the reviews previously included in the article. --Nick RTalk 17:23, 20 January 2006 (UTC)

The introduction calls this game critically panned and says it got a lukewarm reception from the gaming press, even though it has a very respectable 81% at Gamerankings. Am I missing something? Ace of Sevens 20:54, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Most reviewers actually don't like the game. I don't know why they changed their minds. It's either Microsoft paid them to give the game good scores. Or they didn't have much to go by at the time.71.75.161.147 16:36, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

Article Additions

I would like to complete, or at least start to write articles for these topics: 

   * Single-player storyline and missions (difficulty settings etc.)
   * Multiplayer mode options
   * Xbox Live compatibility (downloadable content, stats, record times etc.)
   * Weapons featured

I've read wikipedia for a long time, but never edited or created anything on it. If anybody could help me, it would be appreciated, because I have information that could be included for those topics (as well as some other games). Also, I'm not sure how to reference it either. Dukester101 14:58, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

The weapons featured section is fine (I'll remove it from the to do list) - unless you can think of a way to improve it, in which case, be bold and do so! That goes for the other sections too. I think the best way to organise it, for now, would be to add extra sections called "Multiplayer" and "Online modes".
I'm not entirely sure either about how we're supposed to cite references for things that are obvious from a look at the game/book/film/etc. Does checking these things in the original material itself count as original research? If so, then a lot of pop culture articles are going to have to be changed... --Nick RTalk 17:54, 9 February 2006 (UTC)
I like the way the weapons list is set up (better than the original Perfect Dark setup). I added a few details to it earlier today. I will begin working on the character list "major," and "minor." this afternoon. I will try and start on "Online," and "Multiplayer" as well. As for sourcing, I agree with you, so I will leave it unsourced until I can find out how to source the game manual.--Dukester101 18:17, 9 February 2006 (UTC)

Added Xbox Live section with general overview of online gaming options for the game.--NeedlerFanPudge

Weapons section

I understand the use of the weapons section, but right now it's a bit... large. I'd suggest that you might want to truncate it or make it an article of its own. -TonicBH 00:44, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I've tagged as suitable for moving to the gaming wiki, as per project guidelines. --Oscarthecat 11:02, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
It's a crapload too big, remove it! Leemorrison 20:41, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

Dark Ops

is this simlar to counter strike? should that be added?

Added reference to Counter-Strike, since that is it's obvious insperation--NeedlerFanPudge

Game Engine

At current the game engine is noted as hydrocore however as far as i know (from reading various interviews with the developers and Rare's website the game used an heavily modified/updated version of the original Goldeneye/Perfect Dark games but just used Havok pyhsics. Could anyone calrify this? TheEnlightened 23:02, 18 July 2006 (UTC)

Do you have a link to that? I'd love to see it -- Chris Price
Scratch that, found this. Rare is dancing around the issue in the above article, it sounds like some Goldeneye code was used, but that it was basically a re-write with some Goldeneye code remaining. If it was more than that, I would expect to see elements or at least similar responses that I just can't reproduce between the two engines.

uh this link talks about Perfect Dark not Perfect Dark Zero

Where did Zero come from?

On November 15, 2000 - IGN.com scooped up that Rare had acquired the rights to use the names "After Dark", "Perfect Dark Evolution" and the phrase "Shot in the Dark". Whether or not these names were potential candidates to become the title for an upcoming sequel to PD, IGN did not know at the time (One can only assume that these "titles" got scrapped).

However, on June 11, 2001 - IGN.com mentions the name "Perfect Dark Zero" in a short article where Fireworks Entertainment and Goodman Rosen Prods announced that they had acquired the rights to make television and movies versions of the N64 game Perfect Dark. Thus we have the earliest mention of the final product name (from IGN, anyway). Note that "Perfect Dark Zero" was still regarded as a codename at the time, and that it was still a gamecube title.

The very same day Nintendo featured a title called Perfect Dark Zero on its online GameCube release list, but pulled the information shortly after it was released, which led many to believe this could be the official name of the still-secret first-person shooter sequel. Feel free to visit this link, I might have missed something.81.232.114.123 18:43, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

These kind of things tend to happen in the gaming industry: it shouldn't come as a surprise. Punkalicious 04:16, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Still, this is turning into a wild goose chase. I've looked through a wealth of game sites (IGN, Gamespot, etc.) but still haven't got a firm date. Is there any site which specializes in E3 coverage. The coverage on the mentioned sites was fairly vague. One might ask, why E3? Well, because that's the event where game companies traditionally have uncovered most high-priority games/titles/franchises/consoles...(you get the idea!) for the last five years. However, if not at E3, I'm sure they officially uncovered the title at some mega event, where a large amount of people were paying attention. Opinions/suggestions? I know I'm making quite a lot of guesses here, but the issue has been evading me for months now and I'm starting to run out of ideas.81.232.114.123 18:42, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Who cares? Rico Ricardo 06:31, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

Why do someone with such an attitude even care to post a comment on this page? 81.232.114.123 18:10, 13 July 2007 (UTC)

WHAT?!

This used to be a B-class article but now IT's start! Why?22:37, 12 September 2007 (UTC)Wi Account ki

Joanna's Nationality

Wasn't she British in the Nintendo 64 version? She has an American accent in this. Is there any explanation for that whatsoever? --Chaide —Preceding signed but undated comment was added at 01:31, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

No explanation is provided, but in this Edge article designer Duncan Botwood describes it as a "Mid-Atlantic" rather than American accent. --Nick RTalk 01:38, 19 September 2007 (UTC)

Shotgun

Remove this, please:

'Definitely the best close combat weapon,'

This statement is subjective and should be removed. There are policies in place in Wikipedia to ensure quality and clarity. Please be sure to review all policies before editing any part of Wikipedia. If in doubt, don't edit Wikipedia - just look at it.


172.133.157.65 04:52, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Whatever happened to "being bold", then? :) WeBuriedOurSecretsInTheGarden 14:37, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

Weapons Section again

That is way too in depth. I tagged it for moving to a gaming wiki but I checked strategy wiki and they have a comprehensive weapons page. If anyone can find somewhere to move this content to that would be great, but im going to delete it and replace it with a short summary on the weapons very soon. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Sat84 (talk • contribs) 11:28, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Ah I see this content already exists word for word on the gaming wiki. I'll start editing it then.--Sat84 11:34, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

July 2008 game update

I've been playing perfect dark zero for ages and had all the updates but recently (july 2008) i got a new update, i don't quite know what it did, but it was certainly a new update. Anyone got info on this? Thanks —Preceding unsigned comment added by 90.196.110.34 (talk) 18:34, 11 August 2008 (UTC)

There hasn't been any new updates in over two years. The update you got was more than likely from running maintenance on the Xbox 360's hard drive. When you do that, all game updates are deleted and will need to be re-downloaded. --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 07:03, 12 August 2008 (UTC)

Odd link...

The engine is listed as the HydraCore engine, but the link leads to the article for the Havok engine. Why is this? Just wondering. Miquonranger03 (talk) 04:48, 3 September 2008 (UTC)

Suggested change to the "Future updates" section

I haven't made the change yet, but I'm suggesting that the first paragraph in the "Future updates" section should be changed to a more automatic way of updating. We can grab the current month name and current year, compare, and minus the game's release year to get the number of years since it was released using special magic words and ParserFunctions.

The suggestion is to change this:
==Future updates==
[[Rare (company)|Rare]] had announced plans to make the multiplayer feature matches of up to 50 people, an upgrade from the current 32 player limit. As of February 2009, this update has not been released and it is questionable whether Rare will still release this update 3 years into the game's life.

Be changed to this:
==Future updates==
[[Rare (company)|Rare]] had announced plans to make the multiplayer feature matches of up to 50 people, an upgrade from the current 32 player limit. As of {{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTYEAR}}, this update has not been released and it is questionable whether Rare will still release this update {{#ifeq:{{CURRENTMONTHNAME}} {{CURRENTDAY}}|November 18|{{#expr:{{CURRENTYEAR}}-2005}}|{{#expr:{{CURRENTYEAR}}-2005-1}}}} years into the game's life.

My only real concern is whether or not any guideline states that this shouldn't be used in articles.

Thanks. --Lightsup55 ( T | C ) 13:40, 14 February 2009 (UTC)

"Limited" Collector's Edition

Does anyone know the story of why the supposedly "Limited" edition is so common, to the point that it's the same price as the regular edition? What was the point of the "glyph" cards inserted into them? 99.146.0.246 (talk) 05:19, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Because they made too many runs of them and found nobody cared about their collector's edition anyway? Just a theory. This isn't the place to ask. Find a forum. --ThejadefalconSing your songThe bird's seeds 12:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Perfect Dark Zero/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose); and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Issues found

  • Reference 4 is a dead link.
  • The Storyline section should probably be renamed to Synopsis or Plot to keep with the usual standard naming conventions. Storyline is still occasionally used, but the other two are much more the standard
  • The Gameplay section is completely unreferenced
  • The Combat Arena section is completely unreferenced save for one reference, and should be retitled Multiplayer to keep with standards
  • The screenshot fails WP:NFCC. It is too large (they must be a low resolution) and does not have enough fair use rationale information. See this Halo 3: ODST screenshot
  • The updates section should be written in prose
  • All references should make use of Template:Cite web (or similar templates when not a web site), and should list the publish date, publisher, author (if any), title, URL and access date
  • The Open Directory Project external link should be removed as it offers little to the reader,
  • GameFAQs may only be used for release date information. Also, reader and user based reviews are not considered reliable sources of information. Reviews should be from published companies.
  • The soundtrack image needs a rationale added. See the soundtrack to Bionic Commando Rearmed
  • In the lead section the sentence "It was initially planned as a Nintendo GameCube title, however the game suffered countless delays due to internal team problems and platform-jumping issues." No references in the body support this. It mentions the switch to Xbox 360 down the road, but nothing else.
  • In the lead "Regarding the storyline, " is not necessary
  • In the lead "have been released so far in order to continue the story of Joanna Dark." -- "so far" is not necessary
  • The plot could use some minor copy edits. There are a few punctuation and flow issues
  • In the Gameplay section "Some can also grant the possibility of using the weapon in a more improper manner, such as the Laptop's sentry gun or the SuperDragon's bounce grenades." -- "in a more improper manner" is strangely phrased
  • "On the other hand, stealth is another important element of the gameplay." -- "On the other hand," is not needed
  • "To each higher difficulty, the game also adds more objectives and makes enemies tougher in order to increase the challenge." -- "To each higher difficulty" is strangely phrased
  • "In co-operative, some missions feature minor changes so that both players have to help each other to progress deeper;" -- remove the word "deeper"
  • "In co-operative, some missions feature minor changes so that both players have to help each other to progress deeper; for instance, some doors require two people to open them; also, the second player might spawn far away from the first player and takes over a character that was AI-controlled in the single player campaign, adding a new gameplay design to the same missions." -- break this run-on sentence up
  • The gametypes in the Combat Arena should be converted to prose. The titles should not be bolded, but in quotations
  • The first paragraph in the Development section has only one source that provides little information in comparison to what might be challenged as needing a source. It needs at least 2-3 more good, solid sources.
  • A source is needing to support that PDZ was planned for the original Xbox. Reference #6, which might have supported it, is dead (it redirects to main page)
  • In the updates section, the patch section is not supported with a reference. It should also be converted to prose and the bold text removed
  • Under Cancelled Plans "To further decrease the chance of this happening, Rare had once stated during an interview that having 50 to 64 players was possible on the Xbox 360, but in turn it would degrade the quality of the game." -- there is no reference to support this
  • "On the other hand, a new Counter-Operative mode, much like the one found in the original Perfect Dark, was also promised to eventually become available as a new game mode for Perfect Dark Zero. However, this update is not available and Rare has no intention on bringing it out." -- the reference does not support the claim that it was promised to players
  • In the Reception section, the reviews table should be converted to the Template:VG Reviews template.
  • I would suggest moving the sales information to the first paragraph of the Reception section, and adding information from aggregators like GameRankings and Metacritic to that section. Then take the following sentence and start a new paragraph: "The game got a 9/10 at GameSpot, which claims that it "champions the Xbox 360 with its excellent assortment of single and multiplayer game types, as well as its incredible good looks and dynamic, intense action"."
  • Any time there is a direct quote a reference should immediately follow the next punctuation mark
  • The soundtrack should be moved up to before the Reception section


Summary - Given the number of issues I don't see this passing GAN in a week's time. Some digging will have to be done to verify certain claims that will be hard to find, and there are still a large number of issues aside from references. I have assessed this article as C class, but it's close to a B. Please feel free to re-nominate this article when the issues are resolved.

Reviewer: Teancum (talk) 16:04, 7 May 2010 (UTC)

OK, thank you for the information, I'll try and fix it myself, but if anyone wants to jump in and do it, feel free. When it's done, I'll renominate it. Niwi3 (talk) 23:01, 13 May 2010 (UTC)

Reference material

I just noticed that this is up for GAN; I'd like to point out that the Online print archive contains two print reviews of the game, from Game Informer and Play Magazine. Hope they're helpful. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:11, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Perfect Dark Zero/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll be reviewing the article over the next few days. Below you will find the standard GAN criteria, along with a list of issues I have found. As criteria pass, a or will be replaced with a . Below the criteria you'll see a list of issues I've found. Feel free to work on them at any time. I will notify you when I'm done checking over the article. At that time I'll allow the standard one week for fixes to be made.

Criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail: PASS

Issues found

  • Lead "Overall, the actual development of the game took five years to complete." - this should be in the prose. If it is and I haven't yet seen it, the reference should be moved to the prose per WP:LEADCITE.
  • Lead "1 million" --> "one million". Numbers below ten should be spelled out, over ten written as a number
  • Plot - rename the section to Synopsis, as it covers both the plot and characters. Also, the two paragraphs are long. See if you can convert it to three paragraphs close to the same length.
  • Gameplay - why is the image of the laptop gun needed? If you're wanting to demonstrate typical gameplay I suggest finding a multiplayer screenshot and putting it in the Multiplayer section per WP:MOSIMAGES (they're really close).
  • Development - the Spaceworld 2000 render of Joanna is definitely unneeded. It's a non-free image of very poor quality.
  • Reception - this section could use beefing up. I'd say it should match the length of the reviews table. You might find it easier to reorganize things by element, such as campaign, multiplayer, graphics, sound, character design, etc - rather than one "good" and one "bad" paragraph. I started doing this recently and found it tons easier to flesh out content.
  • References
  • What makes Perfect Dark Recon a reliable source?
  • Same question for MundoRare
  • Publisher fixes - IGN should be just IGN instead of IGN.com, IGN UK, etc. Game Rankings should be GameRankings. XBOX should be Xbox.
  • Refs 52 and 54 should be reorganized to match the other refs using {{Cite web}}
  • External links - change Perfect Dark Zero at Xbox.com to Perfect Dark Zero at xbox.com
  • External links - categories should be alphabetical
  • Image - ":File:Pdz firefight.jpg's caption should not be "this is what's happening in the image" per WP:CAPTION. I've also moved it to the Multiplayer section to prevent image overlap on large monitors. Simply change the caption to talk about a feature of the game rather than telling us what's in the image. Take a look at Hydro Thunder Hurricane for examples.
  • Gameplay - "such as the CamSpy (a hovering remote-controlled camera) or the Datathief (a tool used to hack into electronic devices)." Remove the parentheses, replace them with a simple set of commas. Parentheses should typically not be used.
  • Multiplayer - the scenarios should not be in quotations, nor have any sort of specific identifier other than a capital letter
  • Multiplayer - "and within each mode, there are four different gametypes (scenarios)." Same situation. The only permissible instance is "(e.g. capture the Flag and territorial gains)"
  • Development - "The cartoony style of these pictures incited speculation that the final game — then intended for the original Xbox — would employ a less realistic graphical style than the original game; possibly an anime like cel-shading technique (Rare had hired UK Manga artist Wil Overton to work with them, after seeing an anime-like image of the original Perfect Dark game he had created for the cover of N64 Magazine)." This is an extremely long sentence, and the parentheses need to go
  • Updates - "Additionally, on October 31, 2006, Rare announced that a special platinum edition of Perfect Dark Zero would be released, which would include the first map pack and two additional maps (the latter available to download for free on the Xbox Live Marketplace)." Parentheses need to go, modify text to accommodate it.
  • Soundtrack "In addition to Clynick's score, the soundtrack also contains two tracks from MorissonPoe (a New York based eclectic rock band)" Parentheses need to go, modify text to accommodate it.
  • Development - "Soon afterward, some reports further suggested the development of the game with Rare applying to trademark the name" - name --> names. Should be plural
  • Development - paragraphs 3 and 4 can be combined
  • Updates and downloadable content - "It cost 500 Microsoft Points and contained" cost --> costs

Reviewer: Teancum (talk) 01:45, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for reviewing the article. I will fix the issues when I can, though I don't have too much time on my hands this week.

  • Fixed Plot section --Niwi3 (talk) 22:48, 15 December 2010 (CET)
  • Fixed minor issues --Niwi3 (talk) 23:14, 15 December 2010 (CET)
  • Fixed some reference issues --Niwi3 (talk) 23:32, 15 December 2010 (CET)
Just so you know, the reviewer typically will do the strikeouts on tasks completed once they've verified they're done (if they're an editor that does that sort of thing). --Teancum (talk) 00:02, 16 December 2010 (UTC)
Oops, sorry --Niwi3 (talk) 01:08, 16 December 2010 (CET)

I'm done - I'll give the obligatory one week for improvements from this timestamp. --Teancum (talk) 01:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I've fixed most of the issues, though I have some questions for the remaining ones:
  • Should I remove the MundoRare reference? I think it does not provide much more additional info.
  • Yes, remove it
  • Same question for reference 23 (PDR - A History Lesson), the 5-year development cycle is already mentioned in the lead of ref 11 (Interview with Duncan Botwood)
  • Yes, remove it
  • Whould it be a good idea to simply remove the second gameplay screenshot? It's hard to find a good caption that matches the screenshot.
  • Yes, remove it
  • Beefing up the reception section will have to wait until next week, as I have time. --Niwi3 (talk) 13:51, 16 December 2010 (CET)

I've added responses to your question's above --Teancum (talk) 21:49, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Done. I assume the only issue left is that the Reception section could use beefing up. As I said before, I'll see what I can do with it next week. Nevertheless, if there are still more issues, let me know. --Niwi3 (talk) 00:23, 17 December 2010 (CET)
  • Found more issues with parentheses, I've noted them above. Other than that and the Reception section I think we're good. Fix those up and it'll pass. Just remember to write the reception talking about features, rather than "so and so gave 5/5"-type comments. --Teancum (talk) 00:49, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
Done (Removed Parentheses and extended reception section). Again, if there are more issues, let me know. --Niwi3 (talk) 12:26, 19 December 2010 (CET)

Great job. I'm passing the article now! --Teancum (talk) 18:09, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

References that may be useful when improving this article

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 6 external links on Perfect Dark Zero. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 02:38, 12 May 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Perfect Dark Zero. 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.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • 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) 06:08, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Perfect_Dark_Zero/Archive_1&oldid=1134244049"