Talk:Kingdom Hearts Coded

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Talk:Kingdom Hearts coded)
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Kingdom Hearts Coded has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

About Re: coded's US release date[edit]

Re: coded's US release date is not March 31, 2011. Tetsuya Nomura confirmed that it will be released shortly after the Japanese version of the game is released which means its release date is still October 2010. So as always, no reliable source on the US version's release date=don't edit that, please.

UPDATE I HAD ENOUGH of the "Q1 2011" crap as Re:coded's North American release date, so I'm putting its release date as "October 2010", so please I beg, don't change the release date until the series' creator and director Tetsuya Nomura reveals the true NA release date in a magazine interview article. Kyrios320 (talk) 11:09, 6 October 2010 (UTC)


What did the reception mean by this game being the "most skip-worthy"? Is it that bad? (talk) 16:27, 12 January 2011 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kingdom Hearts coded/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 05:14, 25 April 2015 (UTC)


Lead and Infobox[edit]

  • in collaboration with the Walt Disney Internet Group for mobile phones. - You should call it Disney Interactive Studios instead of Walt Disney Internet Group for consistency
  • It is the fourth installment in the Kingdom Hearts series and is set after the events of the Kingdom Hearts II - "the" is not necessary
  • The lead is a bit too short, and it is not really summarizing the entire article. There is no information about gameplay, and too little information about story. It will also be better if it is split into several paragraphs instead of simply one giant paragraph.
  • WP:LEADCITE - It will be better if the sources are used in sections instead of the lead.
  • Can the list of episode release dates have its own section, a section similar to The Walking Dead (video game)#Episodes instead of listing them in the lead? It looks really clumsy


  • The gameplay section is too short and feels under-developed.
  • , except the player is given more freedom to control their actions through the use of button commands. - Since the section is talking about characters this sentence is not really necessary
  • which take the form of red-and-black blocks and Heartless Sora has encountered in the first game - When I am reading it I think that Sora has a nickname called Heartless Sora. So I recommend you rephrase this sentence
  • Sora's Heartless - When I read Sora (Kingdom Hearts), I know that Heartless is a creature. Then what does Sora's Heartless here means?
  • In a scene exclusive to HD 2.5 ReMix - Should be Remix only
  • Jiminy wrote about the adventure here in the same journal, so it was also erased - This sentence doesn't sound necessary
  • Quite a lot of new characters are introduced in the end of the plot section. May need some explanations on who they are.
  • In a second secret ending exclusive to HD 2.5 ReMix, Braig meets with the younger incarnation of Master Xehanort after his and the other members of the Organization's reconstruction. - Doesn't sound like a complete sentence
  • What is the Organization?
I added a link to the article, let me know if we should put more.
  • Coded get capitalized in the development section but not the Setting section?
I think coded is supposed to be lower case unless it starts a sentence, so the lowercase first word use would be wrong.
  • Coded was directed by Tetsuya Nomura and co-directed by Hajime Tabata, and is the first collaboration between Square Enix and the Disney Internet Group. - Why call it Disney Internet Group?
  • which would reveal some plotholes behind the first Kingdom Hearts game - Kingdom Hearts need to be italicized
  • In mid-2007, Nomura mentioned a desire to create a spin-off Kingdom Hearts game - Kingdoms Hearts again need to be italicized
  • Nomura planned to release the game via a new business model, one the industry had not seen yet, to lower barriers to entry. - If it is something new, it is definitely something the industry hadn't seen. So, it is a bit redundant here.
  • Included in the model is an online cell phone portal called Kingdom Hearts Mobile which will allow users to create avatars and play minigames. - Kingdom Hearts Mobile need to be italicized
  • who took over the role after the passing of Jiminy's former voice actor Eddie Carroll - I will use the word "death" instead of "passing". Sounds more formal in my opinion
  • However, it remained unconfirmed until Re:coded, among other titles, was presented at E3 2010 - "among other titles" is not necessary
  • It combines the gameplay elements from a mix of Birth by Sleep, 358/2 Days, and the original coded - I don't think "a mix of" here is necessary because it sounds weird here.

* exclusively on the PlayStation 3. I will add released before exclusively

  • Though not compulsory, Template:video game reviews can be very useful here
  • Is it really necessary to separate website-based and magazine-based reviewers?
  • Name for magazines need to be italicized
  • The reception section is a bit too short, and is relying too much on quotes. The first paragraph and the second paragraph is very inconsistent.
  • References are needed for 1UP, Nintendo Power and ONM.
  • That see also section feels unnecessary.


  • Inconsistent date format in citations
  • "Square Enix Staff" is not necessary.
  • Why Square Enix is the author of a GameSpot source (18)
  • Why include in a citation?
  • Quite a lot of primary sources are used. Can it be replaced?
I cut a lot of dead links, I see three references that cite in game dialogue, but that probably won't be found anywhere but direction quotation from the game itself. Anything else you think should be replaced?
  • Source 4, 19, 18, 38, 29, 39 are dead
  • Some sources seems to be redirected
All redirects functioning, none can be made clearer than they are now.



Overall it is a fine article. However, the gameplay section needs to be significantly expanded, and the lead and the reception section needs some overhaul. Here is the review
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and y:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

I am going to leave it on hold for a week. If the issues I mentioned above are addressed, the article is go to go! Good Luck. Good article on hold AdrianGamer (talk) 12:57, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll be addressing these issues soon, thanks for the thorough review! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:32, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
Do you need few more days to fix the issues I mentioned above? AdrianGamer (talk) 10:59, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
I do if thats alright, some of the corrections are taking a bit more time than anticipated, and require some fundamental overhauls. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:18, 4 May 2015 (UTC)
Can you finishing addressing the remaining issues by May 16, 2015? I cannot put it on hold for too long. AdrianGamer (talk) 13:47, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I'll try, if you have to close it by then it's fine. I should be able to address most of the remaining issues. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:22, 12 May 2015 (UTC)
I am sorry that I have to close the review today. However, after you have addressed all the issues I have mentioned, I will be happy to review the article again. AdrianGamer (talk) 04:15, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

Title revisited[edit]

I believe the "coded" in the title should be capitalized. It might be stylized as lowercase but Wikipedia:Naming conventions (capitalization) says to capitalize proper nouns, which "coded" is. Also despite what it says above (previous talk page conversation many moons ago), per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks, "coded" should be capitalized in the text even if it is usually stylized as lowercase. – czar 01:24, 17 May 2015 (UTC)

✓ done – czar 00:10, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Revisited revisited[edit]

Kingdom Hearts codedKingdom Hearts Coded – I suppose this was changed again since the last discussion? We do not follow stylizations in article titles per Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Trademarks. The few English sources we have on the non-"Re:coded" title also capitalize "Coded".[1][2] I am no longer watching this page—ping if you'd like a response czar 12:01, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

That's fine, I just saw how everything in the article said "coded" so I moved I thinking it was a mistake. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 14:54, 8 March 2016 (UTC)
Moved it back, added the note. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 15:02, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

Re:coded as a separate article[edit]

I know Re:coded is a separate but similar game to coded, but should 're:coded' not be a separate article from 'coded'? Here are the reasons I think should be a separate game and article...

•"re:coded" received relatively negative reviews compared to the original mobile version of the game, which was for Jeremy Parish a sign mobile games are starting to become "full fledged" games. The primary attack targeted the controls and camera, and shallow story telling.
•Graphics and controls differ in both, but controls particularly excel in the mobile version. The DS version was praised for the incredible graphics.
•The remake of it in HD 2.5 Remix can't count as a separate article because it already is included as a remake in a list of remakes withing a compilation game.
Please take these into consideration.
Sincerely, FDJK001 (talk) 03:23, 28 May 2015 (UTC).
It is true that the games are very different, but lets see. There is precedent for keeping the article together, Final Fantasy III is very different in 3D but it doesn't need to be split. Lets keep expanding the article as it is, and if it gets too big, we will split it. Sound good? Better to have one FA than two B class after all. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 18:58, 29 May 2015 (UTC)
True. I just thought the reviews mentioned accumulated both games' scores together, and following this comes confusion.
Nice rest of the day to you.
FDJK001 (talk) 06:45, 30 May 2015 (UTC).
You are right though, we do need to split out and label which ones are coded and which are recoded to avoid confusion. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 13:38, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Kingdom Hearts Coded/GA2. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

I'll have this finished soon. A day or two at least. JAGUAR  21:33, 4 April 2016 (UTC)

Initial comments[edit]

  • "Coded was a Japan-only release announced at the 2007 Tokyo Game Show" - needs italicisation
  • "Gameplay is mostly puzzle solving, with action-RPG gameplay elements" - reads slightly awkward, how about The game play is centered mostly around puzzle solving, with action-RPG gameplay elements?
  • "Mini-games and platforming are also featured" - link minigame and platform game
  • "Tetsuya Nomura decided to create a Kingdom Hearts spin-off for cell phones" - cell phones or mobile phones? Should be consistent throughout
  • "This leads king Mickey and friends" - This leads king Mickey and his friends?
  • "The game received mixed reviews, with reviewers praising the graphics and gameplay variety" - 'review' overload, how about The game received mixed reviews, with critics praising? Feel free to ignore this part
  • "Kingdom Hearts Re:coded had an added system to incorporate multiplayer experiences called "tag mode"" - should be in present tense
  • "The story was supposed to be "fluid", so not strictly sticking into the chronology of the Kingdom Hearts series" - the latter half sounds a bit unencyclopedic, how about The story was initially supposed to be "fluid" and did not adhere into the chronology of the Kingdom Hearts series
  • "so the planned expansion to other Japanese phone carriers and to America were not possible" - always prefer 'United States'
  • No dead links
  • Dab links OK

I'll leave this on hold until all of the above are clarified. Let me know if you have any questions Good article on hold JAGUAR  20:01, 5 April 2016 (UTC)

All the issues have been addressed, and am happy to conclude that this meets the criteria. Well done! Good article JAGUAR  17:34, 6 April 2016 (UTC)

Clarity issues[edit]

Some reading issues here. I came here to read specifically about Re:coded (it redirects here) and I don't have a sense of what the game is about or what was remade about it from reading its section. From the lede, I can extract that it's a remake for the NDS platform but what changed? And weren't there reviews? This type of info would be necessary for GA breadth, for what it's worth. As a reader, I'd expect the Re:coded section to even be somewhat self-contained, in that I can read it and be able to explain to another person the essence of the remake. I am no longer watching this page--ping if you'd like a response czar 01:49, 7 December 2016 (UTC)

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Kingdom Hearts Coded. 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.

You may set the |checked=, on this template, to true or failed to let other editors know you reviewed the change. If you find any errors, please use the tools below to fix them or call an editor by setting |needhelp= to your help request.

  • 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.

If you are unable to use these tools, you may set |needhelp=<your help request> on this template to request help from an experienced user. Please include details about your problem, to help other editors.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 17:01, 20 April 2017 (UTC)