Talk:Angry Birds POP!

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

New Features on Table[edit]

Could someone please make a box on the table for new features that are introduced in the worlds to be added? I play the game regularly and try to make contributions of valuable information here, but I don't know how to make the tables and ClueBot always erases my edits, thinking it's "vandalism" — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:DD39:885:9310:6439:ADB4 (talk) 14:17, 25 May 2016 (UTC)[reply]

POP! to Pop![edit]

In case anyone was wondering, I moved the article to "Angry Birds Pop!" per MOS:ALLCAPS; apologies for not making that clear when I did the move. Trivialist (talk) 22:00, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for clarifying, however that is not proper in this case. If you look at the trademark section, it uses eBay and iPod as examples of spelling it the way its commonly done instead of following standard practice. This would be the same case, just in reverse. Since its a trademarked named of a game, it should be spelled the way they spell it. - GalatzTalk 22:35, 6 July 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Too Many Tables[edit]

Is it just me, or does this article has too many tables that spam up the page, making the readers feel unpleasant. I think we should just have one about the characters and the worlds, and the extra 2 in a small article. What do you guys think? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:FEF9:97A:C1ED:31B7:86FC (talk) 22:07, 8 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I disagree that there are too many, I think they make it very easy to follow. Some of the smaller ones I wouldnt object to being turned into paragraphs though. - GalatzTalk 02:18, 9 September 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Angry Birds POP!. 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, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

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: 18 January 2022).

  • 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) 04:58, 14 October 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Level tables- keep them or remove them?[edit]

The1337gamer removed the level listing stating "Wikipedia is not a gameguide or version history." I reverted this stating " Per WP:VGSCOPE a summary of versions is appropriate, which this is." He then reverted my changes saying "It's the exact opposite of a summary. A summary is a short paragraph that briefly covers the important parts, not an extensive list filled with trivial details."

I come to the talk page looking for consensus on an opinion on this. See the previous version here [1] and the edited version here [2].

When I look at number #10 in the above referenced WP:VGSCOPE it states "Exhaustive version histories: A list of every version/beta/patch is inappropriate. Consider a summary of development instead." To me this very clearly does not say a short summary, or a paragraph as The1337gamer states. It says not to include every little update, but a summary of development. To me a break out the way the episodes with release dates clearly shows a summary of the development. It ignores every little update, such as patches and bug fixes, or any other update which does not contain new levels. To me this very clearly is a "summary of development" as stated in the guidelines.

Thoughts? Keep in mind that this wont just affect this page but every other page within the Angry Birds franchise, as they all have similar tables. - GalatzTalk 20:33, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Agree with The1337gamer. He isn't referring to just WP:VGSCOPE #10, but also #6, #7 and probably #5. This is excessive trivial detail best suited for Wikia. -- ferret (talk) 20:54, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Looking at the tables, I agree that all that content should be at Wikia, not Wikipedia. It's not really encyclopedia-like, and thus, outside of our scope. ~Mable (chat) 21:58, 7 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Per WP:GAMECRUFT, the tables should be removed. Sergecross73 msg me 15:16, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
  • Level tables are classic video game trivia—please keep them out of the article. If necessary, move them to a different wiki. This is an encyclopedia and not a game guide. I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response czar 18:03, 8 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why is this a big issue all of a sudden for you two? The tables have coexisted fine ever since their respective articles were created, until now where you call them "gameguides". I'm going to stand my ground and keep reposting the tables, for the good of the public who has a right to view them — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:1A99:2C6D:56A3:9AE8:252 (talk) 23:47, 15 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

That is called edit warring and will get you blocked from Wikipedia. - GalatzTalk 14:48, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I've never been on Angry Birds-related articles before, so I never had a chance to complain about it :p Just looking at well-edited video game articles shows that this isn't how we cover them. But yeah, edit warring only makes the situation worse ^_^;— Preceding unsigned comment added by Maplestrip (talk) 16:10, 16 November 2016 (UTC)

Galatz your frequent vandalism have been reported by several users to Wikipedia officials, so be aware of that — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:1A99:74EA:7076:DF9F:7DCC (talk) 23:34, 16 November 2016 (UTC) BTW nobody ever considered it a "gameguide" until you started this whole mess- why is it such a big deal to you NOW? :p — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:1A99:74EA:7076:DF9F:7DCC (talk) 23:37, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

First of all, what vandalism are you referring to? I would love to see this proof of several users reporting it. Second, you need to learn to read, I very clearly said I didn't think it was an issue to have, but consensus said it was, so that trumped my feeling, and I went with the consensus. Rather than you doing the same thing, you have chosen to just say WP:IDONTLIKEIT and think your feelings trump everyone else's. That is not how WP works. - GalatzTalk 14:30, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Why don't you refer to this: Do not edit war even if you believe you are right Read it 50 times then get back to me :) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:1A99:74EA:7076:DF9F:7DCC (talk) 23:46, 16 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

The official policy on edit-warring is at WP:EW, not whatever you found. Wikipedia essays, which I'm guessing is where you got that, are always trumped by Wikipedia guidelinesa and policies. Guidelines are trumped by policies. WP:EW is a policy. Also, our official policy on game guides is at WP:GAMEGUIDE. — Gestrid (talk) 04:36, 17 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Guys, who else remember this page before the article apocalypse occurred? I'm sorry if I'm a bit foul (bird pun) tempered, but Wikipedia is a place where people contribute to articles and make them flourish, not tear them down to meet their own insights. We have to cooperate when it comes to the different aspects of editing, for we all view different things. After all, the slogan says "free to edit", right? If you get my drift, you can join me in repairing our beloved website, and start fresh. If you deny my offer, then you have been overrun with arrogance and self-ambiguation. The choice is yours.... — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:1A99:C870:10B2:B95A:2F59 (talk) 18:20, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I'm confused - we just have a different purpose than other video game websites? Like, I'm a bit overwhelmed by the amount of people in this thread of comments as well, but it's not like this is anything new... ~Mable (chat) 20:15, 19 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

All I'm trying to do is stand by ground and negotiate peace, so we can restore AB POP! back to it's original state, but it's hard to do that if the person you're in conflict with doesn't bother to take at least read your awe inspiring idea......such a shame — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2602:306:CCA8:1A99:CD33:2A2A:589C:3D8A (talk) 18:09, 20 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Semi-protected edit request on 29 November 2016 for "Angry Birds POP!"[edit]

Why should the tables containing helpful info on this page be removed, along with the tables on the other Angry Birds articles? They help users/players understand the aspects of the game, and better yet, they can all cooperate to contribute bits of information of their knowledge and help this (and other WP pages for that matter) page expand! :) Nintend01 (talk) 12:37, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

This is explained in the section above - "Wikipedia is not a gameguide or version history." The specific guidance, at WP:GAMEGUIDE states:-
Video game guides. An article about a video game should summarize the main actions the player does in the game. But avoid lists of gameplay weapons, items, or concepts, unless these are notable as discussed in secondary sources in their own right in gaming context. .... Walk-throughs or detailed coverage of specific point values, achievements, time-limits, levels, types of enemies, character moves, character weight classes, and so on are also considered inappropriate. A concise summary is appropriate if it is essential to understanding the game or its significance in the industry.
There is a long list of things that should not be included at WP:VGSCOPE. - Arjayay (talk) 12:52, 29 November 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Playable Characters[edit]

Could we add a list of the playable characters in the game? 2603:6010:8B45:FA00:95DB:50BE:A5CD:582E (talk) 21:37, 3 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Angry_Birds_POP!&oldid=1198749299"