Talk:Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow

message: the story section is copied and pasted from the official description used to sell the game. I think we should write about the plot of the game. unfortunatly I am not good at writing but I can help with the plot. --Phil 12:13, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Just go ahead and rewrite it. Someone will come along and improve. K1Bond007 23:23, 30 October 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: Done and done. Joylock 17:40, 07 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  story 

message: I think we should merge the character articles into the main Splinter Cell article, or (in the case of characters like Sadano or Nikoladze) at least into the articles for the individual games in which they appear.
These character articles are rather short, and it's unlikely there's going to be much that can be added to them. Joylock 18:00, 09 November 2005 (UTC)
replies: text: sounds good. like List of character in Splinter Cell series or something like that. --Phil 03:05, 10 November 2005 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging character articles into main article 

message: It could be elaborated more. Maybe info on weapons of the two classes and such. And maybe add the made up rule of deathmatching, in which spies ignore their objectives and proceed to attack mercenaries only. Deathmatchers also tend to dislike the use of tasers by the mercenaries.\
There's a great template from the Chaos Theory section that can be used for multiplayer here. Chaos Theory didn't change too much except for removal of the crappy phosphorus grenade.
I accomplished myself what I wished, pretty much cutting and pasting the equipment page of Chaos Theory to here. It's not quite complete so hopefully someone else can help trim and add a bit.70.132.12.250 05:47, 2 March 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Multiplayer 

message: Are they nuts?70.231.229.66 13:59, 10 January 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  Ubi Removing Multiplayer Support for PC Version 

message: Anyone ever realize how much glithces the PS2 version has? I spotted a glitch when you knock a guy out and he falls, the sound of his body hitting the ground is not synchronized. Also I get the OPSAT icon when I don't have any updates, also when the guys sitdown on an object, they are sitting a few inches away from the object so it looks like they're floating. 68.195.59.194 18:29, 6 April 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  PS2 Glitches 

message: :Image:SplinterCell2Box.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 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 08:07, 6 June 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:SplinterCell2Box.jpg

message: This article does not mention a single word on how the game fared with critics and fans. Can anyone give me a proper explanation on why such a section is not included, while most other contemporary high profile releases have sections in their articles covering this aspect? Broadbandmink 17:42, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Because no one's bothered to put one up. It's not like this is a GA or anything. ColdFusion650 19:12, 26 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Then we ought to include such a section, agreed? Broadbandmink 16:22, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: We? Who is this we? I'm not familiar with him. ColdFusion650 16:24, 31 July 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: WE as in the contributors of this article. It was a simple, friendly question. If I was interested in sarcasm I would simply turn to my sister. Now, to be more direct, do YOU (you're familiar with him, right?) think someone ought to include a section to this article that deals with how the game was critically and commercially recieved? Broadbandmink 16:39, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: My point was, the whole concept behind Wikipedia is if you want something done, you are free to do it. Remember, be bold in editing. ColdFusion650 16:45, 1 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: Still, there's a thin red line between boldness and foolishness. Venturing into a subject completely on your own might, in worst case, end up in losing sight of the real objective (that is, writing a decent article) in pursuit of petty ambition. Therefore, it is my staunch opinion that one should work in a democratic manner by discussing things thoroughly before writing and thereby hopefully avoid future disputes. The worst sorts of arguments, anyway. To make a more practical example, I was going to ask if you, my fellow contributors, are considering Gamerankings, Gamestats and Metacritic as good places to start in order to build a basic reception section into this article. If so, I will start writing a first draft, put it in the article, and leave it there for people to comment, rewrite or even scrap if they feel necessary. If not, what other sites do you recommend? Broadbandmink 18:14, 2 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a section with reviews based on Metacritic and Gamerankings. I've also found Rotten Tomatoes to be a good site for reviews, although I didn't check that site when writing the new section. --Pixelface 10:40, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
replies: text: I'll check out Rotten Tomatoes. What about Gamestats? --Broadbandmink 21:54, 18 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Reception?

message: Removed the supposed fix for entering the elevator, saving everyone else the false hope that I got after seeing that section. (It didn't work. Plus, it doesn't make much sense, and there are no other online references to the fix.)
I suspect there was some confusion in this edit, where the editor may have interpreted "it is possible to put projectiles in the elevator" as "putting projectiles in the elevator will fix the glitch".
Also, I'm starting to think that the references to the versions as "1.0" and "1.1" and citing the porting process as the cause of the bug may also be original research. –Unint 20:46, 14 August 2007 (UTC)
thread_title:  GameCube glitch 

message: :Image:Pandora tomorrow xbx.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 (talk) 15:47, 19 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Pandora tomorrow xbx.jpg

message: I don't think private security forces are allowed to mow down intruders with impunity like in this game...70.231.251.6 (talk) 05:38, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  ARGUS 

message: Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just added archive links to  on Tom Clancy's Splinter Cell: Pandora Tomorrow. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add  after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add  to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:
*Added archive https://web.archive.org/20060728185113/http://www.gamechronicles.com:80/reviews/xbox/scpandora/tomorrow.htm to http://www.gamechronicles.com/reviews/xbox/scpandora/tomorrow.htm
When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.
Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 07:55, 9 January 2016 (UTC)
thread_title:  External links modified 

message: So why is there no mention about the controvery surrounding games being sold in Australia missing CD keys?
This page talks about it https://www.shacknews.com/article/31167/australian-pandora-tomorrow-cd-key
RichardFry (talk) 07:18, 5 October 2018 (UTC)
replies: text: ikr? the same source is mentioned on the product key article 207.81.187.41 (talk) 06:16, 4 February 2022 (UTC)
thread_title:  Invalid Australia CD keys