Jump to content

Talk:Toontown Online/Archive 1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Archive 1

Fansites

People are repeatedly adding links to external fansites to this topic. According to the Wikipedia External_links topic, "On articles about topics with many fansites, including a link to one major fansite is appropriate, marking the link as such". Toontown has so many fansites now, I don't think there's one "major" site, with the possible exception of Toontown Central. That being the case, I think it's best to eliminate all fansites from this topic. -- SleepyheadKC 19:35, 27 March 2006 (UTC) 

No fansites at all. --Z.Spy 01:25, 28 March 2006 (UTC)

and will someone(other than me)PLEASE update the page??

Thanks for the endorsement Weird Flapjack. Come on over and check us out. This is Fuzzy Bunny Bop, Management, ToonTask.com Hi Fuzzy! And i was the one saying no links to IF sites. --Z.Spy 00:06, 11 January 2006 (UTC)

Most of the revisions in late January 2006 were by me, known as Big Tom Supernugget on the TTC site. (Sorry about the huge number of minor edits -- I'm a relentless editor of my own writing). I'm a longtime toon of 2.5 years, and I enjoyed working on this. Hope you like the changes.

My assumption is that Wikipedia should serve as a very good general description of Toontown along with what makes it unique and interesting. I don't see Wikipedia as being the place for a detailed players' guide or strategy guide. Would you agree? SleepyheadKC 19:35, 2 February 2006 (UTC)

All fansites sould be deleated ASAP these are dangrous and are full of Online Predotrs they are for toons to go into chat rooms and make secret friends with pepole around the world. That is agenist the toontown Secret Friends rules and must be premently deleated.

I think that these should be deleated beacuase they have no connection with Disney and is copyright. On the bottem Of Toontowncentral.com it says it is not powerd by Disney. We should deleated these due to copyright.Sonic34 13:35, 9 November 2006 (UTC)Sonic34

Fansites are significant - they contain information. Also, it is not powered by Disney but it does not violate copywrite - if they did, the sites would have been shut down by now. The problem is that fansites are also equal, and Wikipedia only wants us to list the most significant fansite, so I guess we won't be able to list any of them, unless we want to come to a consensus as to which is the most significant. -Ryanbomber 13:48, 9 November 2006 (UTC)

I concur. Even if it says something like "Not related to Disney whatsoever" that isn't a copywrite infringement. Besides, wouldn't Disney do something about those people that offer up the secret codes to talk to people? Take VMK for an example. Doesn't use secret codes, but enforces not being able to give out secret information. The same thing happens with Toontown Secret Friends, but it isn't really patrolled, due to the fact that secret friends usually only happen between two people, and that no other suscribers other than another friend can read it.Huanghe63talk 00:13, 19 November 2006 (UTC)

Well, since we're on the subject, Disney DID do something about the secret codes being passed on fansites. Back in December 2004, they added the "Restricted Secret Friends" setting to the parental controls -- it requires the Parent Password to be entered every time a secret is generated or entered. If a parent wants to limit their child's Secret Friends, all they need to do is keep the child from knowing the Parent Password. (No I don't work for Disney, but I know about this enhancement because I had specfically requested it).

Back on topic, I agree that we shouldn't list fansites in the article. Vandelay 18:27, 21 November 2006 (UTC)

They have been deleated.Mr.Rachel 20:15, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Recent vandalism

I see that the topic was locked today due to repeated vandalism. I understand what's at the root of this: the recent 3-day lockout of several users due to Disney's accusasations of macro activity. I also understand that many of these accusations very well could be incorrect. But vandalizing this page is not the solution. I, for one, would have been happy to accomodate discussion of this issue in the "Criticisms" section of the article, and I'd still be willing to do so. Vandalizing the article is NOT a battle that you can win. Please work through proper channels (i.e. Disney) to get some resolution to this issue, not Wikipedia. Vandelay 04:18, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

All true. However, he/she wrote in their comment "lock this article so everyone will know". It seems that having the article protected was their intention. Looking to the fan sites for a clue, I found that it was significantly more than just a few users who were affected. Just one thread on this issue, on one of the many fan sites, has had more traffic on it than anything I've ever seen before, and will soon register over a thousand posts and tens of thousands of views over just 4 days. Crooks don't usually generate that much concern. Moreoever, there is substantial evidence that the company does not provide any recourse and there are no "proper channels" to work through. For crying out loud, kids who probably wouldn't otherwise misbehave have adapted to the situation by gleaning home numbers of key execs to spam and flame them verbally. That must be some education Disney is providing!217.132.25.220 04:46, 8 November 2006 (UTC)

I realize that the page has been Vandalised at least 4 times from now and this needs to stop! I have some really godd Ideas for this page that I would like to edit for it but we need for all this nonsense to stop. We also need to edit the page beacuase there are some typofixes that need to be edited. Lets get the Issue over with so everyone can help edit agian.

I agree that vandalism of the Wiki page here isn't at all constructive. Making a note of what happened is sufficient to let people know what went on last weekend. Also, I've a note for User:Ryanbomber: More than several players were put on hold; an informal poll at Toontowncentral.com revealed that 47 of 166 site users found their accounts on administrative hold for "third party macro use" from 3 November to 6 November. It's impossible to say whether those 166 users are truly representative of the overall Toontown player base, but if they are, that means a bit over 1/4 of Toontown's US accounts were locked out over the weekend. If so, that would certainly explain why we haven't been getting anything more than canned responses in e-mail and on the phone... they are probably still being flooded with inquiries. 71.207.192.196 06:57, 10 November 2006 (UTC)

Im not sure when the vandalism will stop what I do know is that Toontown Online will be taking away acounts that have connections with Toontown Central and Toontask.com. Already a few acounts were taking away and that some of the vandalism was form those users writing comments about toontown. Of course, these were there not real but we should watch out for more of these edits.Sonic34 18:59, 13 November 2006 (UTC)Sonic 34

Posting stated above is not even viable for posting. Toontown Online has not and will not take away anyone's account for a "connection" to toontowncentral.com or toontask.com. Account names in both fansites should not match user names in Toontown Online. Even if some do match (yikes!) Toontown Online would be at best guessing if the username they found at one of the fansites was indeed the same username in their database of users.

This is just stupid get over Toontown Central the fan sites have been deleated and the article is no longer locked.Eddy643 13:14, 28 November 2006 (UTC)

Some person is using there IP addres to vandalis the page could some one PROTECT the page please!Themasterofwiki 13:24, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Citing references

Today's featured article is about the computer game Half-Life 2. I suggest we use it as a model for how to improve the Toontown article. For one thing, it cites a reference for basically every claim made. I'm going to start working on adding references to the Toontown article. Please help if you can! Vandelay 17:00, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Toon Clothing

There hould be an article on Toon clothing. Some thing about the clothes is that girl toons can wear whatever they want, boyish or not, but boy toons can't wear skirts or shirts that look girly. If a boy tries to buy a girl outfit, on the cattlelog on top it says doesn't fit. Also, boys can wear girl clothing if a boy goes to a friend's house (Who is a girl) and goes to her closet and tries on her clothing, but he can't wear the clothes out of the closet. By the way, it's actually very funny when u see a boy wearing girl clothes. please add a clothing section. Thanks. 70.170.93.169 01:59, 26 January 2007 (UTC) I entered a section about clothing. Please read it & tell me if I missed anything.

"As of surveyed Toontown"?

Someone added the results of a survey to all the gag descriptions (for example, "As of surveyed Toontown, this is an 86% gag choice"). Does anyone know what survey they're talking about? Was it a Disney survey, or was it a poll on a forum site? I'd like to make sure the numbers are accurate, and if so, I'd like to reference a link to the survey in the article. Vandelay 15:18, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

These "surveys" are polls that are found on the main page of toontown.com[1] to the right. Every week (I think) they change the polls to a new topic. It will be kind of hard to find a reference for past polls though. Hope i could help in any way. 70.170.93.169 02:04, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I know about those polls, but I don't think this was one of them. The polls on the Toontown website let you select only of the choices, and the results always total up to 100%. This gag survey must have let people select multiple choices, because the numbers don't add up to 100%. I'm guessing the gag survey must have been on one of the fansites? And if we're going to quote numbers from a survey, we should provide a link to the survey results. I'll remove the remaining references to this survey until we have some way to verify them. Vandelay 23:09, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Do we need to cite lags?

Lagging is present in just about every computer game (MMOs more so). Is there any specific reason that it needs citation?

I agree that it shouldn't be there, and perhaps neither should any of the current "Criticisms" unless we can cite a source. Last week, I requested a peer review of this article, and one suggestion was to remove the entire "Criticisms" section, since it's unsourced. Vandelay 23:41, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

Results of peer review

Last week I requested a peer review of this article. Results can be found here: Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computer_and_video_games/Peer_review/Toontown_Online I agree with most of the suggestions: the "Gags" section needs to be cut down -- most of that info is interesting only to current Toontown players. I also agree that more 3rd-party reviews of the game (i.e. from gaming websites, newspapers, etc) should be discussed, and that the "Criticisms" should be removed unless we can find worthy sources for them. Anyone want to discuss further? Otherwise, I'll likely edit the article soon. Vandelay 23:46, 8 February 2007 (UTC)

I chose to be bold and remove the criticisms now. Nifboy 22:59, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Doodles

I think we need more on doodles. They are only mentioned once but they can be a big part of the game and really save your butt most fo the time. You can teach them all kinds of tricks like jump, backflip, and speak. You can also double the amount they heal by training them enough. This would be a good add-on or at least a decent separate article. A good resource for this would be stratics.com or toontask.com Thanks! Sage of the Seltzer — Preceding unsigned comment added by Sage of the Seltzer (talk • contribs) 17:50, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Already done! Hope you like it. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.210.230 (talk) 21:28, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

"Toontown" or "ToonTown"?

I disagree with the article's renaming to "ToonTown Online". NONE of the Disney press releases about the game spell it that way. Neither do any of the media articles about the game. If you visit their website, the browser title bar will say "Toontown Online". Per WP:RM, we really should have had a discussion before this move took place. Vandelay 18:36, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Your opinon.Themasterofwiki 17:55, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Yes, that's the purpose of the "Talk" page -- to share opinions about the article. If you disagree, maybe you could try to explain why? Vandelay 18:22, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
Moved page back to "Toontown" spelling. Vandelay 11:14, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:ToontownLogo.jpg

Image:ToontownLogo.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot 14:43, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Bugs section needs editing

The Bugs section needs some serious editing. It goes on about warning players what will happen if you hack your character file, what will happen if you get banned or suspended, and even gives a (somewhat vague) explanation of what a bug or a glitch is, even adding an example of a beneficial in-game bug. And the person who added this even signed it. I imagine this was some little kid who plays the game. I'd fix it myself, but since it says the article is part of the WikiProject videogames and whatnot, I guess a member of the project should do the fixing.

CrisLander 16:48, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Agreed and done. Yes, this article gets quite a lot of kid-player edits. This one wasn't very encyclopedic at all, so I removed the section. Vandelay 02:35, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Vista Incompatabilities?

Us vista users are completely unable to access toonotown. Any bug reports sent about it always get a message that is "not yet compatable" Should this be added to the article? It seems to be blocking a major portion of the users, as most have probably moved up to vista by now. unless someones found away around this error...

From what I've read, people have figured out workarounds which allow Toontown to run on the 32-bit version of Vista, but not the 64-bit version of Vista. Go to ToontownCentral.com and do a search on "Vista", and you should be able to find the instructions for the workarounds. Vandelay 20:47, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Actually, I'm using Vista and I can play Toontown, you have to go to the website, then into Help>FAQ>Technical>PC> and into the question "Can I play Toontown on Windows Vista?". There, it shows a way to workaround Vista's security systems to play Toontown. Soon, they'll come out with a version Vista compatible without all those steps. Abcw12 00:16, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Software versions

I believe that the "retail box" version of Toontown is off the market and no longer being produced. My Google searches come up empty as far as legitimate stores that still carry it. (A few Amazon resellers are selling what are probably old copies for ridiculous prices, but that's all I could find). I think the only way to get the game now is the free download. Maybe we should update the opening section to reflect this?

Might also want to update the reference to the "entirely ad-supported version of the game" supposedly coming later in 2007 (since the year is nearly over). Actually, my belief is that the cited source (the July 2007 MediaWeek article) got it wrong. I don't think they're "moving" Toontown to ad-supported, I think there's simply adding an ad-supported LIMITED version, as they did for their new Pirates Online game. But I don't have a cited source for that at the moment. Vandelay (talk) 23:17, 29 November 2007 (UTC)

Boss Hq

Since there is no info from Disney about Bossbot HQ. Lets not talk about it much. We can assume that it will come out. Also we do not have confirmation that Boss Hq will be connected to Chip and Dale's Playground. So we can add extra words like "Assume" "Probally" "Might" "we think". When we get the info confirmed by Disney (Not a fansite) then we can edit those extra words out. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KitT.Kat-TTC (talk • contribs) 23:14, August 25, 2007 (UTC)

I put "might", but that whole thing got deleted.

Because you cannot use those words like this. You can only use them in certain situations, such as very (very) obvious conclusions. Game additions don't fit in that. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 17:06, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

Ok, there is more info in the Toontown Newsletter, saying it is named the CEO Here is a link to a site that has the newsletter scanned http://www.toontowncentral.com/forums/showpost.php?p=1964815&postcount=1 —Preceding unsigned comment added by KitT.Kat-TTC (talk • contribs) 13:23, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Bossbot H.Q. is out on test, you can see on the test website. We know almost everything about it now, so we should be able to post about it. Stop deleting posts. Besides, we could at least write “TBA” in place of a description. 70.179.70.237 (talk) 12:05, 1 February 2008 (UTC)

Boss is out on test

Boss is out on test now. There is also level 2.0 cogs.

A level 2.0 cog is a regular cog like " Big Cheese Bossbot 10 2.0"

(Note: I have only seen Corp. Raiders 2.0)

Then after you kill the 2.0 cog it will blow up, Cogs will fly out his butt, then he will turn into a Skelicog level 11

Boss hq is castle shaped and there are 3 different "Mints/factories"

You get in a cog golf kart and do random games and a maze. If you fail you lose 20 laff. —Preceding unsigned comment added by KitT.Kat-TTC (talk • contribs) 01:06, 30 January 2008 (UTC)

Though I doubt much will change, we'll hold back the details till it goes live. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 01:13, 30 January 2008 (UTC)
It came out two days ago, and I saw some Youtube videos before that. Basically, a v2.0 cog is 1st a normal cog, once you kill it, it turns into a Skelecog (not sure if it stays same level, up one, down one?) Then when you kill the skelecog, the Cog as a whole is gone. That's just what i've seen. I currently don't have any hands-on experience with BBHQ, so whet i've just said might have changed during the last few week of testing. Hope that helps! Abcw12 (talk) 04:50, 8 March 2008 (UTC)


Chief Justice, not CJ

the Chief Justice can be refered to as "CJ", but he needs to be introduced as the Chief Justice or people will not know what he is. i keep changeing part of it to Chief Justice but somebody keeps changeing it back to CJ. stop that! --70.179.70.237 (talk) 00:45, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

It's wikilinked, just like the other three. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 00:49, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

yes, but people know what a CFO or CEO is, but i dont think anybody would know what a CJ is. i noticed that somebody changed them all from abreviations. i think we onley need to do that with CJ.--70.179.70.237 (talk) 18:54, 7 May 2008 (UTC)

New game regions

Just a note, that Toontown Online is now available for Malaysia, Phillipines, and Singapore at http://www.mobiuskids.net/toontown/index.php and is also linked from the toontown.com international redirection page. The official launch date is 15 Dec 06 but as far as I know it was available since 30 Nov 06. --Quira 03:39, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

I added an external link to the he Southeast Asia version, and a reference to it in the article. Vandelay 21:06, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Also, they have closed and re-opened the game for Germany —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.48.244.13 (talk) 18:31, 2 July 2008 (UTC)

Gardening

Do we have any gardening experts here? Specifically the gag bonuses for trees and the bonuses for flowers, their effects, and what combinations of jelly beans works at what level. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Lebeshantur (talk • contribs) 00:51, 1 April 2007 (UTC). I copied the codes and numbered them. The info is also available on other sites. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.210.230 (talk) 21:31, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Getting New Gag Tracks

If you are on your Final before starting a new gag, Your allmost done with the neiberhood. If you beat that Final gag track, You will get a new gag track and you will switch neiberhood. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.223.157.103 (talk) 01:19, 11 January 2009 (UTC)

Lack of Objectivity

This article reads like a fan site. It is as though Disney itself has crafted a marketing piece on the game product in the guise of a lengthy and wholly uncritical gamers' guide.

It is most obvious in the opening paragraph which proclaims the game to be non-violent. That is simply an absurd statement that reflects a perspective compatible with a Disney marketing staff person or an adult player used to the extreme violence of many computer-based games.

The statement that the game is non-violent is repeatedly refuted in the lengthy description of game play in the article itself. It is simply false to call this game "non-violent." It is a game that is focuses on "Battles" and destroying characters that are described by game text as robots but visually appear in the game with detailed human-like features: faces, hands, legs - fully anthropomorphic.

How does the ToonTown site comply with the COPPA statutes? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 216.103.110.146 (talk) 04:52, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Unless you can support your opinion, it is original research. I personally do not see anything violent about comedic falling pianos or funny lightning strikes. It sounds to me like you just have an axe to grind. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 05:50, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Right, you say "I personally do not see anything violent..." Well, you are your subjective self and that is great. But reliable sources disagree so live with it. 216.103.110.146 07:39, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
No, they don't. You're inflating an ESRB rating to make it seems as if they do. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 07:44, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
I like the image you just gave me of a big letter E with a tire pump hooked up to it - inflating bigger and bigger. But really, I just don't get your POV. The ESRB rating says what it says - if you don't like reading the whole thing and just go for the single letter on the rating then you are deflating the rating by ignoring the very basis for the single letter rating which the ESRB definitively says is Cartoon Violence and Comic Mischief. 216.103.110.146 08:10, 7 November 2007 (UTC)
Saying that a game contains violence is not the same as disputing a claim of non-violence. Ton and Jerry crush each other with pots and all manner of crap. It's not real violence, it's cartoon violence, because through it all they are never really injured. To say that this game is violent for slap-stick humor is misleading at best. Regardless, the current state of the article is acceptable, as you get your violence mention and I don't have to deal with unsourced claims. — Someguy0830 (T | C) 08:18, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

Third opinion

I came here due to a plea posted in Wikipedia:Third opinion. Here is my opinion.

The problem arises from these two sentences in the first paragraph of the lead section:

Toontown's 3D virtual world takes its theme from the colorful style and humor of classic animated cartoons, packaged into an online game experience that its authors claim is social, non-violent and kid-safe.[4] The game has an ESRB rating of E, for Cartoon Violence and Comic Mischief.[5]

There are two problems here:

  1. The two sentences contradict each other, one claiming "non-violent" and followed by the other saying "cartoon violence". Sorry, I can't see how cartoon violence qualifies as "non-violent".
  2. More important (and serious) is that the first sentence misrepresents the cited source. The source makes no claim of non-violence, only kid-safe.

Therefore, I recommend deleting the word "non-violent" from the lead. It's uneccesary and misrepresents the cited source. It's sufficient that the next sentence says "cartoon violence" anyway. -Amatulic 17:43, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

In all fairness, with regard to the accusations that the game is not "non-violent", I think it's safe to say the game is extremely mild and lacking in violence compared to the average MMOG. To use the behemoth of that category, World of Warcraft, compare dropping anvils and using squirt guns to chopping into pieces, incinerating, etc, in addition to the human sacrifice, torture, demonic rituals, and outright deaths that appear in that game. Figured I'd throw that out there. Narco (talk) 04:39, 21 November 2007 (UTC)

You obviously do not play World of Warcraft. There is no chopping into pieces, incinerating, or torture and the human sacrifice and demonic rituals are not violent. 98.233.253.138 (talk) 19:48, 25 May 2009 (UTC)

Speedchat+ available on UK

Today(6/7/2009) Toontown UK has implemented Speedchat+,so the sentence about UK-no-SC+ is removed.

tyteen4a03 —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyteen4a03 (talk • contribs) 13:12, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Possible Virus/Spyware problem?

My anti-virus had some trouble, detected Toontown.exe as a virus. As its not my program I need a valid reason to uninstall this and I was wondering if anyone else knows anything of problems with it? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 75.68.36.81 (talk) 01:04, 18 April 2007 (UTC). Disney actually inserted a virus into Toontown it monitors your keystrokes and what you have installed its "for your own protection"

some computers are a little "jumpy" with that. i have had the game since 2001 when it came out as a beta and i have never had any problems with it. 67.247.66.70 (talk) 12:37, 12 August 2009 (UTC) It is not a virus. The reason it said that is because your antivirus is very crappy.

I want to keep my nose out of editing this page, since my long history with Toontown Online and my relationship with the largest fan forum and strategy wiki will call in to question my objectivity in any chages I make to the article. The last thing we need is another pissing contest from all the fansites for the game.

Anyway, the External Link "Disney's Toontown Online guide at StrategyWiki" http://strategywiki.org/wiki/Disney's_Toontown_Online probably does not belong here. It leads to a ad-heavy site, with incomplete and inferior information. There really is no benefit to linking to that site, other than for the advertisers and whoever is selling the ads there.

If we are going to link to a strategy guide, probably the only site that has worthwhile information AND won't start another argument is Disney's own strategy guide at http://play.toontown.com/playersguide/PGPage.php?pg=0

Kid Bugs (talk) 14:12, 20 September 2009 (UTC)

Toontown France Closed

Toontown France is closed(read official website for details) so I removed the link to TT France. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Tyteen4a03 (talk • contribs) 11:23, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

System requirements

In the infobox, in the section System requirements, the text is: See [[Toontown Online#System Requirements]]. However, there is no section within the page with that title. Could someone clear that up? --c|haosys|t 20:14, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

I'm assuming that a long while back, the system requirements had their own section, but the section was later removed because an article shouldn't have its own section just for system requirements. When I have the time, I'll see if I can re-add the system requirements (or someone else if they can do it). I have added the requirements. Thanks for bringing that up, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:39, 24 December 2009 (UTC)

Hey

I'm new here, and want to learn how to use this site... since I'm familiar with the game, I decided that this would be a good place to start. Any tips/ideas? Arfn24 (talk) 01:58, 26 June 2010 (UTC)

First off, welcome to Wikipedia! There are plenty of places to start. It's great that you're familiar with Toontown; if you believe that the article is missing something, you can always add it. However, the article is already pretty long, so I'm not sure that there's that much that you can add :) If you do have content to add, though, it is important to note several things. First, you should avoid inserting content that serves no purpose other than to assist a player at playing the game. For example, a list of all the Cogs would not be appropriate for the article, as that is only helpful to someone who wants to learn how to play Toontown, but not helpful at all for the common reader who is coming here to learn about Toontown. In addition, most everything you add should be backed up with a reliable source. While it is great that you know plenty about the game, it is best to link to another reliable site that gives that info, so it has some credibility.
Based on your edits, you seem to be interested in video games in general. When I first started editing, most of my edits were also related to video games. What I did and what you can do is to continue finding articles of which you have an interest in and contribute to them. Have you ever heard of WikiProject Video games? You may want to check that out; there you'll find people who share a common interest in contributing to video game articles, and you'll find all sorts of things to help you out, including lists of things that could use expansion.
You also seem to be good at finding and reverting vandalism, which is a great thing to get into. Keep at it.
Over time, you'll get more experienced. Hope this helps. If you ever need help, just leave me a message on my talk page. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:39, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Okay, thanks. It doesn't seem to need much else, I agree.

Thanks for pointing me to WikiProject Video games, I'll check that out. Arfn24 (talk) 20:43, 27 June 2010 (UTC)

Maybe a sentence about how the Panda3D engine, which is cross platform, can be run on, say, Linux but Toontown cannot? --Allmightyduck (talk) 23:03, 28 June 2010 (UTC)

Cleanup

This article is overly indepth on the world IMO, and is overly long. Allmightyduck  What did I do wrong? 16:59, 29 October 2010 (UTC)

Article too long?

The article is getting too long in my opinion. Any suggestions about a revamp? My own thought is that the article contains too many "stats" (i.e. the hit points of every gag, the levels of every type of cog, etc). According to WP:NOT#IINFO, we're not supposed to be creating a "game guide". Perhaps these stats could be moved to a separate article on "Toontown gags", or if someone creates an external site with this info, that site could be listed in the "External links" sectdion. Vandelay 14:53, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

I actually just noticed this today. I was gonna trim it when I had some free time. -Ryanbomber 23:46, 4 December 2006 (UTC)

What do you mean too long? An article can never be too long - Tud123

Might want to read WP:LENGTH -- it suggests that articles should be less than 32K in length, to keep them easily readable. (The Toontown article is currently 39K). This isn't a Wikipedia requirement, just a general rule of thumb. I'm just wanting to discuss it, especially since the article seems to contain a lot of specific "stats" (i.e. lists of every gag, hit points for each gag, lists of cog levels, etc.) that might not be appropriate for Wikipedia. What does everyone think, should the stats stay in the article? Vandelay 16:06, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Ok, I made it 34k , by removing all the information we don't need :) . - Tud123 10:53, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Actually, before we started making major changes, I was hoping that we could discuss here to get some agreement on exactly WHAT should be deleted. For example, I would have deleted the "algorithms and formulae" section, the damage points for each level cog, maybe the lists of each gag, and some of the less important "criticisms". I would have left in the verbiage about Gardening and Doodles, and the System Requirements. What do you think? Vandelay 15:56, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

In my agreement, I think we should make a list of th types of cogs in the cog section area, which will give more information to the article, what do you think? I think this article should be long, because well written articles are long. --RaptorZangle20 (talk) 13:44, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

System requirements is kind of iffy. Maybe not in quite such verbatim, but some basic info on it. All the formulae and other "numbers" is a bit cluttery and also not supposed to be here as it's sort of game-guidey. Doodles and Gardening should go back, though. -Ryanbomber 17:17, 8 December 2006 (UTC)
What do you mean? I came here specifically looking for the SysReqs and instead found a dead link in the sidebar thanks to it being deleted. That's specifically the kind of useful information that belongs here.144.189.100.25 (talk) 07:33, 6 September 2009 (UTC)

I removed Doodles and Gardening because they are found at toon estates (Also, there was incorrect information that stated level 7 gags always hit). - Tud123 21:16, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

I see your point, but if that's the reasoning then we should add something about Doodles and Gardening to the Toon Estates paragraph. And we need to put something about System Requirements back in because it's linked from the Info Box at the top of the article. I'll make an attempt. Vandelay 21:23, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Gardening and Doodles needed to be readded because the Toon estate info is insufficient but deleted the Toon estate info —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.210.230 (talk) 23:40, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

The article shouldn't be treated like a game guide but should have enough info to cover all aspects of a topic. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.210.230 (talk) 00:56, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Codes, clothing, and dog training aren't aspects, they're trivia. — Trust not the Penguin (T | C) 01:18, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

The clothing and doodle training sections are informative. They were requested in the discussion page by name. I replaced the gardening list with a link to a site with the list. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.210.230 (talk • contribs)

Things that are requested by one person need to be agreed on by consensus. There is a consensus against adding that stuff. Please stop re-adding it. Also the burden is on you to add well-written material, not to just spew out text and tell others to clean it up, as you did in one edit summary. Wikipedia articles must conform to Wikipedia policies; in this case WP:NOT is relevant to this article, and WP:3RR is relevant to your behavior. These policies are not negotiable. ~Amatulić (talk) 23:51, 16 July 2008 (UTC)

Funny Farms

In "Playgrounds" they mention something about Funny Farms being a newly introduced playground. I have absolutely no idea why they did that. It is widely known that Funny Farms was removed. If you need a reference this should do: http://toontown.wikia.com/wiki/Funny_Farms . If that is not enough you can play Toontown for yourself and look for it on your in game map. It no longer exists. I'm sorry if I came across as being rude but I'm just utterly shocked that someone could be so careless with this article! Funny Farms has been removed for years !!

If you don't mind I'm going to edit that and remove it. I will also edit some other disturbingly common grammar and spelling errors.

Thank you!! Ratkinzluver33 (talk) 20:35, 23 February 2011 (UTC)

There's apparently a lot of stuff like that that needs updating, I corrected the free accounts bit which appeared to be 3 years out of date. Poliasz (talk) 02:55, 8 March 2011 (UTC)
Free accounts are still available at Toontown - see Toontown's official FAQ. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:07, 8 March 2011 (UTC)

Clans?

I haven't actively played Toontown since August of 2009, but I'm pretty sure clans are not an official feature. Does this section really need to be there? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.15.145.45 (talk) 01:45, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

The mention of clans in the article seems to be original research, so I have removed the section. Thanks for bringing it up. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:49, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Too many lists

Please, people, let's keep the lists out the article (the list of cogs, the list of gags, etc.). They are unencyclopedic since they don't really offer any further information. More than once, these lists have caused the Toontown article to get tagged as needing a "cleanup". There is also an active Wikipedia project to remove such lists from articles -- see WP:LAUNDRY). I've deleted these lists many times, but they keep getting added back in. Vandelay 16:49, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

Sorry, I was the one that always put in the list of cogs. I didn’t know it was a bad idea at the time, but it would have been nice if you contacted me (assuming you could figure out that I did it). I spent allot of time on it... --Steelebob2 (talk) 21:14, 5 March 2008 (UTC)

The only reason I entered the gardening combos was to help Toons know which jellybeans to plant —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.123.210.230 (talk) 23:44, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Maybe rather than putting the lists, you could put a link to somewhere that has the lists, as there are tons of places online where you can find this information. I think it might even be on toontown.com itself. So there's no reason to have lists in the article. --Latinluv (talk) 18:59, 4 April 2011 (UTC)

Captialization

Toons and Cogs are capitalized in the game itself, so shouldn't it be the same in the article? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 71.209.5.11 (talk) 21:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC).

They are?? I don't think so... --Latinluv (talk) 18:57, 4 April 2011 (UTC)
Looking at a page from the official Toontown website, "Toon" and "Cog" are both capitalized. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 03:59, 5 April 2011 (UTC)

Some Questions...

1. Why not have a link to the List of Toontown Gags in this article.

2. Uhh... Anyone mind telling me how those two things listed in the Glitches section glitches???????? - Jexerg — Preceding unsigned comment added by 75.8.19.6 (talk) 14:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

List of Gags ( Slapstick Humor )

Throw: 1 cupcake 2 slice of fruit pie 3 slice of creme pie 4 full fruit pie 5 full creme pie 6 birthday cake 7 wedding cake Squirt: 1 flower squirt 2 glass of water 3 squirt gun 4 seltezer bottle 5 hose 6 thunder cloud 7 geyser Toon up: 1 feather 2 megaphone 3 lipstick 4 Bamboo Cane 5 pixie dust 6 jugling balls 7 HIGH DIVE Sound: 1 bike horn 2 whistle 3 bugle 4 aoogah 5 elephant 6 fog horn 7 opeah voice Drop: 1 flower pot 2 sandbag 3 anvil 4 heavy weight 5 safe 6 grand piano 7 ocean liner Lure: 1 $1 bill 2 small magnet 3 $5 bill 4 BIG MAGNET 5 $10 bill 6 hypno glasses 7 presention Trap: 1 banana peel 2 rake 3 marbles 4 Quicksand 5 Trapdoor 6 TNT 7 train track That is all the gags!!! jojo out - peace sign up with another - — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.204.180.237 (talk) 03:31, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Millions of users

An editor persists in changing the cited 2007 user account figure from 1.2 million to 30 million. In this edit from 2007, an editor cited Mediaweek as the source for the 1.2 million figure. Although the cited URL is no longer valid, and has not been archived by the Wayback Machine, it does seem unlikely that Mediaweek said 30 million. It would have been a very strange mistake by Agyle (talk · contribs).

If you have evidence for a higher figure from 2007/2008, please give a reliable source for it. Similarly for the current 50/70 million figure - where did Disney give these statistics or publish this advert? -- John of Reading (talk) 08:00, 11 September 2011 (UTC)

FD hacks section

Is this section really necessary and/or accurate? There are no references in this section. As a frequent player of the game, I haven't been able to find any note from Disney stating that FD is the culprit. All that has been said is that users of third-party software will be terminated from the game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 67.162.145.77 (talk) 22:09, 30 July 2013 (UTC)

Downtown Toontown

What is with the fact that people keep putting stuff about this supposed sequel into this article without citations? A Google search yields nothing except for forum posts asking about it. Correct me if I'm wrong here, but doesn't WP:CRYSTAL discourage rumors? --Thunderbird8 (talk) 05:06, 31 August 2013 (UTC)

Club Penguin mentions

Disney actually did mention Club Penguin in their closing FAQs, at least at first. Mention of Club Penguin disappeared a day or two afterwards, a lot of people assume this was done because of a large backlash that it generated (obviously there's no way to know for sure). Unfortunately, the Wayback Machine does not have the page in question archived. --Thunderbird8 (talk) 02:11, 4 September 2013 (UTC)

Article overhaul

I just completed an overhaul of the article to make it fit Wikipedia's standards more. Far too much information on the game was given; most of it was gameplay specifics on the Cogs, which can be found at the Wikia of the game (which I have added a link to). I also changed the tense of the article to make it past-tense now that the game is closed, as well as a couple of minor changes (Why was Bob Iger mentioned as a composer?). Please leave any comments about my changes here. SlyCooperFan1 (talk) 18:38, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Just noting that I've added a section concerning paid memberships that I had forgotten to add previously.SlyCooperFan1 (talk) 20:21, 24 September 2013 (UTC)

Bad article

This article needs serious work. I think it should be locked.

Agreed. This article reads like a marketing piece for the game is not neutral by any means. My experience trying to correct heavily slanted language in the article has been frustrating as fanboys keep coming back to revert any edits that attempt to discuss the game with NPOV.

Totally agreed. This is the most biased (non-spam) wiki article I have ever read. This was clearly written by Disney representatives. Especially the intro. 99.233.96.234 (talk) 19:30, 27 August 2008 (UTC)

I agree as well. As a gamer looking for an unbiased opinion, I was surprised at the amount of PR influenced language present in a Wikipedia article. I believe some more examples of critism would be helpful. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 69.149.129.44 (talk) 20:41, 8 April 2008 (UTC)

This page needs lock down, someone just put down for plot to kill cogs. Which is not a plot or a summary -3mmaqwe — Preceding unsigned comment added by 3mmaqwe (talk • contribs) 05:42, 5 November 2013 (UTC)

Vandalism

This article is appearing to become vandalized more often.. I'd like to offer a tip of advice and suggest that editing this article should need approval or at least an account to do anything. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.166.39.107 (talk) 07:09, 6 November 2013 (UTC)

Private Servers

I don't believe private servers belong in the article, seeing WP:NOTDIR. Allmightyduck Let's chat! 21:39, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

Recreational Activities

The long non-combat activity section is very unnecessary for an overview of the game. It's not very neutral. One paragraph would be sufficient to explain it more simply and effectively. CaptainKelvin (talk) 19:34, 18 November 2013 (UTC)

Semi-protection

Good day,

As the article currently undergoes several rounds of fruitless addition / deletions of pretty much the same material, it is placed under semi-protection. Users unable to edit directly may propose changes here on the talk page, using the template {{Edit semi-protected}} to draw attention to their proposals.

It is probably worth reminding participants that Wikipedia doesn't pretend to be a game guide, and that extensive coverage of features and mechanisms typically don't serve a general audience. Thank you for your cooperation. MLauba (Talk) 16:38, 19 November 2013 (UTC)== Remove dead external links again? ==

Why keeping dead links? There was attempt to remove them, but it was reverted as if they are historical monuments or something. --George Ho (talk) 16:24, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

  • Hi. George just invited me to a discussion on these dead links. I had reverted a revert of removal of four dead links. And I suspect that even if not dead, they were not worthy external links. I think the revert I reverted was a recent changes revert, as a poorly explained cut by a new account, not sure. --SmokeyJoe (talk) 20:53, 22 November 2013 (UTC)
Dave, what do you think of the dead links? George Ho (talk) 23:54, 22 November 2013 (UTC)

Toontown Rewritten

Maybe we should write about toontown rewritten? The toontown that a bunch of other guys are doing 100% free. Still in the aplha phase www.toontownrewritten.com — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.253.23.36 (talk) 22:41, 26 December 2013‎ (UTC)

Only if there are reliable, independent sources covering the subject :) Information on Wikipedia should be covered by reliable third-party sources to ensure that what we write about is accurate and notable enough to be included. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:11, 26 December 2013 (UTC)

Request to Edit this Page, February 13 2014

I have been a member of the Toontown community for seven years and since I'm a registered user I think I should be eligible to edit this page. I am not interested in creating vandalism, I just want to add necessary information. VeteranToon (talk) 18:10, 13 February 2014 (UTC)

You can edit this and other semiprotected pages, when your account on Wikipedia becomes autoconfirmed. This usually happens when your account is at least four days old with at least 10 edits. RudolfRed (talk) 02:39, 14 February 2014 (UTC)

Private Servers

I see many people are constantly adding information about private servers. This is not necessary in this Wikipedia page. If you would like to contribute, please refer to the peer edit request (as a link can be seen near top of this talk page). Sections like "Reception" are normally added to game articles. Also many more sources need to be added to the article. NightHawkCanada (talk) 09:28, 9 January 2014 (UTC)

I don't think it is necessary to add information about private servers either since this page is solely intended to reflect the original works of Disney's Toontown Online. However, I advocate the idea that there should be separate pages created for the fansites and the private servers. They are all eligible websites, and I am in the process of creating a page for Toontown Rewritten, the most prominent private server in the community. If people insist on adding information on fansites, why don't they take the time to create a separate page?

VeteranToon (talk) 18:15, 13 February 2014 (UTC)VeteranToon

The reason why I add it is because it's not just a fansite. These servers are being paid for my there corporation and have the proper funding for them. Toontown House and Toontown Rewritten involve creating accounts and they use Panda3D for the generation. They pay money for this. So, it's not just a fansite. I put it there so that people who miss Toontown and have been seperated from there loved ones due to the site's closing, can still have a hope of enjoying the 10-years before Disney switched it's priorities to Club Penguin. And I hope you can reconsider removing it. Thank you.

PeanutButterMarshmallowTime (talk) 15:56, 18 February 2014 (UTC)PeanutButterMarshmallowTime

Hey,
I'm sorry to say, but a reasoning such as "I put it there so that people who miss Toontown and have been seperated from there loved ones due to the site's closing, can still have a hope of enjoying the 10-years before Disney switched it's priorities to Club Penguin.", is the exact reason why it shouldn't be there; to promote websites (this is a Wikipedia, not an advertisement). There are also no reliable source for it either. It is an illegal server, that shouldn't have it's own section on the article, as it was never part of the original game. If anything, the most I would say is no more than a sentence of "loyal fans" attempted to make private servers/fan sites, (ONLY if it has a source as well) perhaps in reception or closure. It had no significant part on the game made by Disney itself. Additionally, no other proper game article on Wikipedia has lists of fan websites or copies of the game. For your sake, I would also like to let you know that some of the makers of these private servers do not agree with the addition of this information to the article.

I appreciate your effort to contribute to this article however, maybe you could help locate some sources to verify gameplay, and even work on a reception section which is needed. You can refer to the archived peer review I requested at the top of this page for more ways to help.
Thanks, NightHawkCanada (talk) 07:40, 21 February 2014 (UTC)

Toontown Rewritten

Should this page have information on the unofficial fan-made sequel named "Toontown Rewritten"? Should it merit it's own page or should there be info on it here? Starvr344 (talk) 00:55, 28 February 2014 (UTC)

Question is, is it notable? Did reliable sources made word of it? --Soetermans. T / C 09:32, 2 March 2014 (UTC)

Just to go by the links, one by one:

Release dates

Is there any use for these release dates or should we leave them out

JP=April 19, 2004 UK=May 25, 2004 FR=May 1st, 2005 DE=November 2005 BR=August 13, 2006 SEA=2007}}}}

Kringe1 (talk) 16:33, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Proposed merge with Toontown Beta

The beta stage of this game isn't notable on its own. Novato 123chess456 (talk) 23:40, 4 July 2014 (UTC)

Not much of anything is notable on that Toontown Beta page. I don't really think anything is worth adding to the Toontown Online article, unless perhaps the dates of the multiple beta stages are important. The Toontown Beta article should just be deleted. Kringe1 (talk) 05:31, 5 July 2014 (UTC)

Coverage of ToonTown Rewritten

Hey all - can we get a consensus on whether or not to include a brief mention of the Toontown remake, Toontown Rewritten, in the article? Over the last year, editors have been adding, removing, and re-adding coverage of the site. My two cents: There is one solid source from Bloomberg covering the project. I think it warrants one or two sentences under Toontown_Online#Closure, but nothing more (and especially not its own section). This was also a point brought up at the deletion discussion for Toontown Rewritten. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:42, 15 August 2014 (UTC)

I agree with keeping a brief 1-2 sentence description for the private servers because the projects seem to have become popular within the Toontown Online community. However it should be made clear that these projects have no affiliation with The Walt Disney Company, they have no permission to remake Toontown Online, and they are entirely community servers made by players of the game.
Also, mentioning of any and every private server may not be allowed because then this page will become a nest full of game remakes. The only one i know that can qualify as being notable is Toontown Rewritten, as there was the Bloomberg article. So sorry for the other private servers (Toontown Infinite, Toontown House, etc.), but unless they garner more attention then they should remain off of this page.Kringe1 (talk) 08:45, 20 August 2014 (UTC)
I also agree with the previous points about having a brief description for Toontown Rewritten; it is not very much unrelated from Toontown Online. However, other private sources should not be mentioned unless other reliable sources mention them, too. Llightex (talk) 21:58, 25 August 2014 (UTC)
Also, I feel we shouldn't link Toontown Rewritten to this page in the External Link section. The External Link section should be reserved for useful information about the game itself, not a link to the fan-made revival. The Bloomberg article should be enough. By having the link to Toontown Rewritten here it seems that this article is actually supporting the game and not taking a neutral point of view. (my opinion) Kringe1 (talk) 02:29, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Agreed on having no link - it's only indirectly related to the subject, which isn't enough to warrant an external link. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 13:58, 28 August 2014 (UTC)
Don't worry, I've already made a couple major edits over the past couple days including TTR & TTI so I don't worry! ;) Epicandrew1220 (talk) 23:32, 9 October 2014 (UTC)
@Epicandrew1220: Hi there - I've reverted the edits, per the points made in our discussion above. The point stands that content on Wikipedia should be primarily based on third-party coverage in the news and media. With the limited coverage TTR and TTI have gotten, it's only worth a brief mention in the article, if at all. As for the external links, they don't belong in the article prose. Check out WP:EL for more info on that. Thanks, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:17, 10 October 2014 (UTC)
@SuperHamster: Alright, I'm fine with you removing the links but SERIOUSLY!? You just deleted about an hour+ worth of work. Can you try not to get rid of everything next time and try to tell me what to fix BEFORE YOU RUIN ALL MY WORK! Thanks anyways for the heads up & info. Epicandrew1220 (talk) 13:59, 13 October 2014 (UTC) EDIT: Also it's own section is fine, it is a huge part of Toontown, the rebirth of it (sort of)
@Epicandrew1220: You can always access previous versions of the page by clicking on the 'View history' tab at the top and finding your particular revision. Here is the version of the page as you had it. As for TTR having its own section; again, it's not fine. What is determined to be significant on Wikipedia is based on how much coverage the topic receives in independent and reliable sources. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:07, 13 October 2014 (UTC)

New Gameplay Format

Does anyone else think there are way too many subsections with an abundance of information under Gameplay? On good articles I've seen at most 3-4 subsections and that was on games that had a lot more material to talk about than Toontown. For example, look at Halo 3. For those that don't know, Halo 3 is a console game with a lot more gameplay design and it is about 1/5 of the length of this article and only 1 subsection. Another good article to look at is Batman: Arkham City. That game also has a lot of gameplay to talk about, and even though it is a bit bulkier it has a great flow, doesn't give excessive detail, and doesn't use any subsections.

I propose we merge all of the subsections under Gameplay and make it flow really nice with a few paragraphs and delete the extra unneeded things. (For starters, we should eliminate 90% of the boss battle descriptions.) Kringe1 (talk) 02:40, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I'm going to briefly work to copyedit the gameplay section to remove excessive information. I'm not sure how far I'll go with this - so I encourage any other editors to follow. This is to follow WP:NOTGUIDE. ~NottNott ( ✉ -☻) 14:20, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Concision of Article

The massive and all-encompassing nature of the article has been an issue for quite some time. As per WP:NOTGUIDE, this should really be an issue editors should be working on so we can improve the quality of the article. I've begun by shortening the gameplay section drastically, and I hope there won't be any conflicts in doing so. Extreme detail to the game belongs on the Toontown wiki, and not Wikipedia itself, and I encourage any editors out there to do the same to the other sections. As well as this, the article probably warrants at least one non-free image to illustrate the in-game world. ~NottNott ( ✉ -☻) 15:22, 28 May 2015 (UTC)

Needs another Peer Review

The last Peer Review happened 1-and-a-half years ago, and since then the article's been re-re-rewritten multiple times into something completely different. Because of this, I think another peer review is needed to decide what the current state of the article is. What do you guys think? Harryhenry1 (talk) 02:27, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

A PR is only needed if you need feedback on what the article lacks. A proper PR takes a lot of effort so there should be a reason for requesting one, not just as a regular event. Anyway, what this article needs is really straightforward. Its Reception section is empty with an expansion tag—it needs an actual section with balanced text from the listed reviewers. And all of the text throughout the article is unsourced! All claims/facts should cite a reliable, secondary, independent source. That's what's next. – czar 16:23, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Toontown Rewritten

Bringing this discussion back from the dead. Heh. I would like to point out that this fan-made revival did not get its own page before because it wasn't "influential" enough for one (with the Bloomberg article being shot down as "just one thing"). Now, we have Toonfest at OMGCon, which was a main event at the con that's currently celebrating its 10-year anniversary, and... I'm just gonna let these pictures of inside and outside of the panel (respectively) speak for themselves. 1 and 2. The game's plot and certain other structures have already proven it to be different in many ways from Toontown Online, moreso than a small subsection will allow to talk about, so, I just want to ask, is it agreeable that Toontown Rewritten is "influential" enough, now? 71.29.16.241 (talk) 19:59, 13 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for bringing this back up for discussion. What we look for in articles is not necessarily "influence", but notability. This looks at how much significant coverage the subject has received in a variety of reliable sources. So the Bloomberg article is one example of a good, reliable source that covered Toontown Rewritten - are there more? If there are independent articles, new stories, interviews, etc. discussing Toontown Rewritten at Toonfest, that could help point towards notability - though I don't think that will still be indicative that Toontown Rewritten is notable enough for its own article. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:24, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
I think Wikipedia needs to remove it as it violates Disney's copyright and trademarks on Toontown Online A8v (talk) 17:22, 1 August 2015 (UTC)
@A8v: Just because something may violate copyright/trademark doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it in an article. We shouldn't link to copyright infringements, but in this case, we don't have a link to Toontown Rewritten. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Toontown Online. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 11:36, 9 January 2016 (UTC)

Checked! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:34, 13 January 2016 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to 2 external links on Toontown Online. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

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.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 19:02, 11 February 2016 (UTC)

Recent Edits

There have been a lot of edits in the gameplay section, a total deletion of the paid membership section, and some of the 'awards' that were previously mentioned have been deleted from the page; all with no discussion as to why. Are these legitimate edits or should there be a mass revert? Kringe1 (talk) 04:06, 22 April 2017 (UTC)

Or A Good One? — Preceding unsigned comment added by BlakeOnYT (talk • contribs) 08:07, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

@BlakeOnYT: Welcome to Wikipedia. Articles don't become good or featured articles based on a guess but rather the guidelines here and here respectively, when it's then reviewed by an independent editor. Hope this helps. -NottNott|talk 09:40, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Toontown Online. 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.

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) 01:51, 13 January 2018 (UTC)

Date format

There are two different date formats: yyyy-mm-dd & dmy. Which format should we standardize? —Wei4Green (talk) 02:19, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Actually, there is another one: mdy. —Wei4Green (talk) 02:21, 21 May 2018 (UTC)

Proposed name change

I think the name of the article should be change to Disney's Toontown online, given the fact that there are now many different types of (non-for profit) toontown related servers, and the official name of the game is actually Disney's Toontown Online, given in its logo. 3mmaqwe (talk) 12:45, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Disagree - Disney's Toontown Online already redirects here, and the game's WP:COMMONNAME is Toontown Online. Plus, your reasoning for renaming the article to support the unofficial servers is misguided. Wikipedia editors have repeatedly removed information on the unofficial servers for many reasons, mostly WP:NOTE. I think the article is fine as it is right now. ~SlyCooperFan1 21:19, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

Mention of a specific private server

Should Wikipedia really endorse an illegal private server, specifically the one listed under close in the last sentence of the first paragraph as of current? If it's not official then it's just another illegal program and citing the specific name allows people to find the server with ease and play the unofficial game no longer supported by Disney, which breaks all copyright laws of the original game. Xbon (talk) 18:52, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

@Xbon: See Talk:Toontown Online/Archive 1 § Toontown Rewritten where @SuperHamster explained: "Just because something may violate copyright/trademark doesn't mean we shouldn't discuss it in an article. We shouldn't link to copyright infringements, but in this case, we don't have a link to Toontown Rewritten." ~SlyCooperFan1 22:25, 24 October 2019 (UTC)

Importance

I changed the importance level of this article related to the projects it is included with. I believe Toontown online had a very big impact for early MMO or Mud games . I also think that its important to give more information to this game since it is directly sourced when people inquire google about this game, opposed to any other source. - 3mmaqwe (talk) 12:58, 13 January 2019 (UTC)

You are not supposed to change the importance levels on your own. You are supposed to request reassessment of the article from the WikiProjects themselves. For WikiProject Video games, this is done by adding |reassess=y to the template on the talk page. I've already done this. For WikiProject Disney, this is done by requesting a reassessment at WP:DISNEY/A. ~SlyCooperFan1 21:19, 13 January 2019 (UTC)
While it's reasonably well known, it doesn't seem to have had an impact on the industry or it's genre so I don't think this classifies as above low importance for WikiProject Video games so I've removed the reassessment tag. CrimsonFox talk 13:16, 4 February 2019 (UTC)
To this day, I still don't get why Toontown Online is so underrated and insignificant to Poptropica (2007) and Club Penguin (2005). They are both of mid-importance, yet TTO (2003) is low-importance. Wei4Green • #TeamTrees🌲 23:02, 27 October 2019 (UTC)

Request to Allow mentioning of Toontown Corporate Clash

Toontown Corporate Clash is a reimagining of Toontown Online that I think is worth a mentioning considering how different it is from Toontown Rewritten. 196.128.10.234 (talk) 12:16, 12 July 2023 (UTC)

Tania

Hi name is tani 190.69.57.75 (talk) 22:56, 21 August 2023 (UTC)

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Toontown_Online/Archive_1&oldid=1215336935"