Talk:Donkey Kong (video game)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Featured articleDonkey Kong (video game) is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.
Main Page trophyThis article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on October 15, 2007.
Article milestones
February 22, 2006Peer reviewReviewed
February 28, 2006Featured article candidatePromoted
Current status: Featured article
WikiProject Video games (Rated FA-class, High-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.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 High  This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by the Nintendo task force.
Wikipedia Version 1.0 Editorial Team / v0.5 (Rated FA-class)
WikiProject iconThis article has been reviewed by the Version 1.0 Editorial Team.
Featured article FA  This article has been rated as FA-Class on the quality scale.
 ???  This article has not yet received a rating on the importance scale.
Note icon
This article is within of subsequent release version of Everyday life.
Taskforce icon
This article has been selected for Version 0.5 and subsequent release versions of Wikipedia.


This article is in need of a massive overhaul to be compliant with the FA criteria. Most notably, Story and characters doesn't really need to exist outside Gameplay; it's just an almost promotional narrative about Donkey Kong's significance in the game industry (and I don't know what the heck is up with "The Lady is instantly recognized as female from her pink dress and long hair"), and the sections after Development contain kind of an odd organization scheme. There are also a number of unreliable-looking sources (e.g. Donkey Blog, Dadhacker, Don Hodges, Twin Galaxies) and, less importantly, widespread inconsistent and incomplete citation formatting. Tezero (talk) 05:49, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Yeah I, and others, have already heavily edited unbelievable amounts of junk out earlier this month. I have been astonished. Thanks for prompting another pass. Anyway. I would submit that, dadhacker, and Donkey Blog are situationally reliable sources because the site content is mostly expertly devout to the subject, is not user-generated content, and those articles are directly relevant to this one. That's my opinion, and that subject is discussed in WP:VG/OFFICIAL. I don't know how Twin Galaxies isn't on the reliable sources list. I just requested it to be listed. Twin Galaxies exists to be the utmost reliable source in video game record-setting, and is as famous as Guinness just for video games, but I guess you haven't heard of it somehow. I don't know what you think doesn't need to exist, about text that defines the subject's significance. I just don't even know how to respond to that! That's as far as I've gotten so far. — Smuckola (Email) (Talk) 07:57, 28 August 2014 (UTC)

Unfortunately, further work is needed. I was unable to find the material currently tagged as dubious in the citation given for that sentence, and am not able to read Japanese and so cannot address the page needed tag. The paragraphs in the Legacy section are disconnected from each other and are split into too many short sections. DrKay (talk) 21:07, 27 February 2017 (UTC)

@DrKay: I just noticed this, you gonna follow through and sling it up at FAR? Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 23:45, 15 August 2018 (UTC)
This really should go to FAR. In addition to already mentioned issues, the development stuff is badly inaccurate in places based on newer sources that have come to light. Indrian (talk) 02:28, 16 August 2018 (UTC)
Feel free to nominate it then. I am an FAR coordinator so can't really wear two hats...Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 03:54, 16 August 2018 (UTC)

Donkey Kong programmers[edit]

Can this be considered a reliable source?

The latest theory holds that Donkey Kong Jr. does appear to be a hack of the Donkey Kong code, more or less, with lots of strange bugs. Not unlike how Ms. Pac-Man is a hack of Pac-Man. Apparently Ikegami Tsushinki wrote the code for Donkey Kong when Nintendo hardly had any programmers, and then Nintendo got some more programmers and hacked it into Donkey Kong Jr. I feel dumb about trying to keep this out of the article in the past, but it's been hard to line up good reliable sources for this and I'm still looking. I do know of expert programmers who can confirm that DK Jr. seems to be a hack of DK. It even has the same kill screen. -- Doctorx0079 (talk) 01:29, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

Gamasutra is a reliable source. -- ferret (talk) 01:40, 3 January 2019 (UTC)

No Emulated Releases in the Infobox[edit]

Resolved: Confirmed that the infobox shouldn't included emulated platforms, per Template:Infobox video game#Syntax guide. ~ Arkhandar (message me) 12:52, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

TarkusAB, is that the case for all video games? So I should delete the info if I see it somewhere else? Or just this Donkey Kong page since the infobox would be too wordy? Thanks. --Bchill53 (talk) 01:44, 22 February 2019 (UTC)

@Bchill53: I think the consensus is to omit emulated re-releases form the infobox on all VG articles. ~ Arkhandar (message me) 02:32, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
@Bchill53: @Arkhandar: Yes it applies to all video games, per the template documentation. You should delete it elsewhere if you see it. See Template:Infobox video game under "Platform" in the syntax guide. TarkusABtalk 02:34, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
@TarkusAB: @Arkhandar: Will do, thanks for the heads up. I believe I've seen this elsewhere. I may ask for both of your input if I get some heat in the future about it. "WHY YOU DELETE THIS?" "Sorry..." (Points at Tarkus <----) --Bchill53 (talk) 02:41, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
@Bchill53: :) Yes it's prevalent on lesser viewed / unmaintained pages because most editors aren't involved with the VG project and don't know the policy. And you don't need to point at me, point at the policy. I don't make the rules. TarkusABtalk 02:47, 22 February 2019 (UTC)
@Bchill53: Hahaha don't worry, if anything happens just do like User:TarkusAB said: leave a link to the rule you're following in your edit summary. Cheers! ~ Arkhandar (message me) 12:50, 22 February 2019 (UTC)