Talk:Red Faction

Video games Mid‑importance

This 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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Train simulator (disambiguation) (8 participants)
Preston Arsement (2 participants)
Jackpot World (2 participants)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (14 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Reasons not to delete this page

Yes, there currently is no information on this page yet. But, I am in the stages of creating this page offline and will post it soon. I will have this page fully created and posted here within 24 hours. Please do not delete this article until then. (2:00am August 29th Pacific Standard Time)

Thanks, GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 09:06, 28 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Problem solved. Page is complete. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 07:50, 31 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

New Sections

I want to add more sections like gameplay and such, but I don't want this article to seem like a copy-and-paste of other Red Faction articles, which its not. Can anyone think of a good way to do this? GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 05:34, 13 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Assessment as of 2008-09-18

Article needs some real organization, and there's no solid reception for the series as a whole. It's a good start, but it still has a good ways to go. Remaining Start-class.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:34, 19 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have fixed the problem by now but will continue to work on it. GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 04:31, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Image copyright problem with Image:Red Faction 2 Front.jpg

The image Image:Red Faction 2 Front.jpg is used in this article under a claim of fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check

That there is a non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.

The following images also have this problem:

Image:Red Faction.jpg

This is an automated notice by FairuseBot. For assistance on the image use policy, see Wikipedia:Media copyright questions. --06:01, 2 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed GroundZ3R0 002 (talk) 04:32, 3 October 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Saint's Row

I don't think that the aforementioned series is even remotely related other than being by the same developer. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.129.87.190 (talk) 08:35, 21 June 2009 (UTC) It had the same company, ULTOR, and shows how they became so successfull, not a prequel in true sense but set in the same world of events.[reply]

Also, it shows why they went to Mars. "Ultor can go to Mars for all I care." -Whatever the main character of SR2 was-i've never played it. -Vaarsivius (Talk to me.) 09:43, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WikiProject Red Faction (WikiFaction) Proposal

Hello. I have proposed that a WP for Red Faction be created. Here is the link: Wikipedia:WikiProject Council/Proposals/Red Faction.

All support is greatly appreciated.

Vaarsivius (talk) 20:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Red Faction. 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://redfaction.volitionwatch.com/faq/geomodfaq.shtml
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://community.redfaction.com/content/red-faction-battlegrounds-first-trailer-1
Added {{dead link}} tag to http://community.redfaction.com/content/red-faction-origins-coming-your-tv-march
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20050217155701/http://archive.gamespy.com/reviews/september01/redfaction/ to http://archive.gamespy.com/reviews/september01/redfaction/

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) 12:59, 21 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Armageddon

The Armageddon section is a little thin - it only describes the coming of the game and the abandonment of the series. But this instalment of the game actually did come out, and should warrant a description similar to the other games. SquashEngineer (talk) 12:26, 18 September 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of Red Faction: B.E.A.S.T. into Red Faction#Red Faction: B.E.A.S.T.

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section. A summary of the conclusions reached follows.

No opposition to a merge, only support, discussion has been open for a month and a half. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 06:46, 12 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

This article was restored citing "reliable sources", which is true, but there is no significant coverage to speak of when they are popped in the Wayback Machine. The article is almost certainly not independently notable and I suggest merging it into the main series. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:24, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support per nom. -- ferret (talk) 17:22, 24 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

My main objection was that it was merged without discussion by a later indeffed editor, and there multiple reliable sources present in the article at the time. My original plan was to see if I could expand it...but it seems there aren't any more sources beyond what was already in the article. Sergecross73 msg me 16:03, 22 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Support, not a notable cancelled game. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 18:08, 2 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.