Talk:Ninjabread Man

message: :Image:Ninjabread Man.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 23:11, 6 November 2007 (UTC)
thread_title: Fair use rationale for Image:Ninjabread Man.jpg

message: Is it necessary? It's only two sentences long...--Megaman en m (talk) 22:18, 15 August 2008 (UTC)
thread_title:  Plot section 

message: Article previously stated that "The game was an original new Zool game, but due to its poor quality, the Zool license was dropped." This was flagged as 'Citation Needed' and looking online I can find no evidence of this claim, other than comments that seem to refer back to this page. This claim seems unlikely as Zool was developed by Gremlin Graphics/Interactive who ceased in 1999, and according to this Eurogamer reviewhttp://www.eurogamer.net/articles/popcorn-arcade-roundup-review Ninjabread Man was released as a budget title at the same time as Anibus II and Rock 'n Roll Adventures using the same engine/interface/controls etc. I believe that the candy land setting was just another 'skin' for the developer's basic game to create another budget title, and has no link to Zool unless someone can provide a verified citation. Wilbossman (talk) 14:07, 17 May 2013 (UTC)
thread_title:  Zool 

message: Just wondering whether these crappy clones are all notable independently of each other, or whether they rather get their notability mostly for being notorious asset flips of each other and whether, since the pages for this, Anubis II, Rock 'n' Roll Adventures and the Toyland one are naturally all repeat much of the same information and are therefore somewhat redundant with one another, they might be better served under a single, not-yet-existing, page for Data Design Interactive.  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2A02:C7D:261F:F200:895F:F190:B8A0:E6F8 (talk) 18:58, 6 January 2021 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merge/Independent Notability 

message: The games are known for having the "same interface, same controls, even the exact same tutorial level" with different theming, and on List of video games notable for negative reception, Ninjabread Man is given a section, with the other games given a paragraph within that section. Eurogamer grouped Anubis II, Rock 'n Roll Adventures, and Ninjabread Man into one review. QuietCicada - Talk 16:09, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
replies: text: There should also be a merger with the Anubis II article, and an additional section for Myth Makers: Trixie in Toyland. MrSwedishMeatballs (talk) 04:15, 19 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Merging Rock 'n' Roll Adventures into Ninjabread Man