Talk:Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast

message: This section is ALL OR, first person, and speculative. I'm thinking about removing it - dont see any way to clean it up. Wooty 05:46, 5 October 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: It's all original research, and I have played JK2 and JK3 for a couple of years. This is an encyclopedia, not an essay on how you felt about the game's decline. Wooty 18:50, 6 October 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  History 

message: Is the number of memory blocks the game takes up on Gamecube really relevant in any way? If no one complains here, I will remove it. Timbatron 03:36, 10 November 2006 (UTC)
replies: text: Done Timbatron 04:15, 14 November 2006 (UTC)
thread_title:  GCN info 

message: Removed links to JediKnight.net and JediKnightii.net from the External Links section. Just squatters there now. 194.144.92.20 20:33, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Removed links from the External Links section 

message: I looked at this article yesterday for the first time in a few months. I noticed that many of the sections had been taken out, which I did not have a problem with as they were largely unencyclopedic (a list of cameos, weapons, planets visited etc hardly seems appropriate for an encyclopedia).
So virtually the only thing which this page consists of is the plot section, which goes into way too much detail (see WP:PLOT). So much so that I decided to take it upon myself to write a condensed version of the plot. The new plot summary is six short-to-average-lengthed paragraphs, which is much more preferable than ten or so long paragraphs we currently have.
Hopefully I'll be spending more time working on other essential areas of the article that should be there (primarily gameplay, development, critical reception). I want to get this to at least B-class, but preferably GA-class. UnaLaguna 20:20, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We've got a long way to go. We have to cover reception, development, and references to these along with gameplay mechanics.—Theodorel 09:39, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-written the plot summary 

message: I'm a good way through writing a gameplay section. You can view it in its current stage at User:UnaLaguna/Sandbox (which also has some useful links ). Currently I think all it needs is a bit about the community's interpretation of the multiplayer side of the game (bowing, master/padawan clan setup). And yes, I can source it. UnaLaguna 06:55, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Done, as far as I can tell. I may have missed something, and if so feel free to add it, but remember to source what you say as the Gameplay section is currently fully-sourced. UnaLaguna 19:53, 15 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Gameplay 

message: Gameplay, Plot, Development, Critical Reception and References are all sorted out now. Effectively three things remain:
# Sorting infobox information - I think it would be more useful to provide the release dates for the individual platforms instead of the release dates solely for the PC version. This should take little time. Done
# The current lead section is poor. It's currently in the works. I'll admit I find lead sections the hardest part of an article (probably why I left it to the end), but I'll give it my best shot. Done
#We have space for another image or two, so should probably use it. I'm planning on taking a screenshot in multiplayer, and possibly one from the opening cutscene. Done
Then we have assessment, and hopefully a trip to the GA-making end of Wikipedia (or beyond!?).
I've re-done the external links section; the official website and one of the forums links produced a 404. I couldn't find a suitable alternative for an "official page" from LucasArts (Raven do have one, but it's not good enough to be worthy of external link section-ness in my opinion). I got rid of the Massassi link, too, since it has more of a focus on the previous game in the Jedi Knight series. I kept the jk2files.com link as from my experience it's the biggest file site for JKII around, and actually reviews the files it puts up there. UnaLaguna 08:01, 23 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Perhaps a picture of Kyle himself would work in the plot section? --FireV 00:02, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'm thinking of uploading a screenshot from the opening cutscene, with Kyle and Jan in the cockpit. I'd also like to try and fit an image from multiplayer in there somewhere. UnaLaguna 06:17, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Okay. Try to get a shot where the camera angle shows Kyle & Jan head-on, because portraits usually make better pictures. --FireV 06:46, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I took your advice for the Kyle/Jan picture, and also added a screenshot from the multiplayer game. Now it's time for ASSESSMENT!!! Dun dun dunnnn. UnaLaguna 12:19, 25 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Re-vamping nearly done! 

message: This is in regards to the request at the VG Assessment page.  I'm rating this article as B-class, Low-importance.  Here are a few tips to improve it!
So, you're doing a great job with this, definitely.  What jumps out at me immediately is that there are no references for the plot section (generally the hardest to find).  Other than that, though, it's looking great, I'd recommend finding some references for that section, and sending it on to GAC!  --PresN 14:20, 28 June 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the advice. Now I'm off to GAC Land... UnaLaguna 06:54, 29 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  VG Assessment 

message: This article's Good Article promotion has been put on hold. During review, some issues were discovered that can be resolved without a major re-write.  This is how the article, as of July 6, 2007, compares against the  six good article criteria:
:1. Well written?: Pass Great work.
:2. Factually accurate?: Fail References 7 and 38 do nor lead to the articles they were sourcing. Also, references 48 & 1 lead to the same page, as do References 2 & 44. These need to be combined into one reference each.
:3. Broad in coverage?: Pass Great work. I do suggest, however, that you include a "Character" section in the future.
:4. Neutral point of view?: Pass Great work
:5. Article stability? Pass
:6. Images?: Pass All have copyrights and rationale.
Overall, great work on this article. I love how you source within the document as often as you can. However, some the references need to be fixed before I can promote it (See above comments) This should not be too hard to fix, so when you do plesae notify me on my talk page so I can promote it. Thanks! :)
Please address these matters soon and then leave a note here showing how they have been resolved.  After 48 hours the article should be reviewed again.  If these issues are not addressed within 7 days, the article may be failed without further notice.  Thank you for your work so far. 
— Z1720 07:05, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Refs 1 and 48 have been merged, as have 2 and 44. I clarified source 38, as what it shows (the number of JKII mods in each category on the FileFront site) verifies the claim made in the article, and I assume it's a reliable source (it shows there are hundreds of sources... which there are). I replaced source 7 (which showed the scores for Xbox, GameCube and PC versions of the game) with references already in the article which show the same aggregate scores. UnaLaguna 18:20, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I hereby grant this article GA status, as the references have been fixed. Great work! Just one tip: if you continue working on this article to get it to FA status, I would suggest adding a character section. (See Final Fantasy 7) Good luck in the future and I can't wait to see improvements on the article Z1720 19:28, 6 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Thank you for the swift response and promotion to GA! Whooo! And I think I will try to get the article to FA: thanks for the advice. UnaLaguna 19:35, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

text: Consider that character section added! I guess I should stick this article up for Peer Review to get ideas to get it to FA. UnaLaguna 21:13, 11 July 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Good article nomination on hold

message: This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force. I believe the article currently meets the criteria and should remain listed as a Good article. The article history has been updated to reflect this review. Regards, T Rex | talk 19:07, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Good to know. Thanks. Una LagunaTalk 20:59, 22 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: GA Pass

message: External links have been updated.  From time to time this area is tampered with, valid and relevant links are deleted while clan websites and online stores (Moby Games) are put in place.  I just took the time to update this area, your thoughts are appreciated but please discuss before changing...  —Preceding unsigned comment added by Kfedup (talk • contribs) 02:22, 30 September 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: External Links

message: Does anyone else find this unethical? I suggest we delete it. Quietmartialartist (talk) 17:44, 20 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WP:SPOIL. --FireV (talk) 02:11, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: FireV's link pretty much covers it. If you're reading a plot syopsis section, wouldn't you expect all major plot details? Admittedly the current heading perhaps doesn't make that very clear - I'll change it from "Story" to "Synopsis". Una LagunaTalk 09:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Well should there not be a "Spoiler" Warning? Little kids looking this up probably don't even know what Synopsis means. Quietmartialartist (talk) 14:48, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: If you're not happy with "Synopsis" we can change it to "Summary", but policy still applies. Una LagunaTalk 19:55, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ending revealed in the article 

message: Surprised to find myself directed to this page when I searched 'reborns', seems somewhat inconsequential.  —Preceding unsigned comment added by 86.151.134.21 (talk) 13:40, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Reborn are some of the primary villains within the game. As far as I can discern, it originally had its own article at "Reborns"; the article was then moved to a more appropriate article name. The subject didn't have enough information to justify its own article, so was replaced with a redirect to here. Una LagunaTalk 17:13, 3 January 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Redirected from 'reborns'?

message: Again the external links section was tampered with.  The person who did it didn't even bother to put a note in the talk section (of course) so I've restored it to it's original format.  
--24.21.245.143 (talk) 00:15, 12 July 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links (again) 

message: *Playthrough / Interview with devs --Teancum (talk) 15:58, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
thread_title:  Great interview with developers