Talk:Tomb Raider

Suggestions

I think we should make an article about Tomb Raider music, whatever should be called. There is a big evolution in Tomb Raider tunes, from classic violin to modern beats. Lot of fans are absolutely loving this kind of music. --Locke 10:29, 22 March 2006 (UTC)

Yes, because this section is getting too extended and technical. -- RRS 20:59 09 january 2010. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 187.27.216.103 (talk) 22:59, 9 January 2010 (UTC)

Table for the list of games in the Series

I think the list of games should be put in a table to make it easiet on the eye.

There seems to be no mention of the games in the series.. did these get deleted somewhere?121.73.68.27 (talk) 08:21, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Nude raider paragraph hard to understand

"by a gamer who stated that Eidos sent something to their house and discovered that it was a lawsuit and that in the lawsuit filed against him by Eidos because of the Nude Raider patch, Eidos stated in the lawsuit, that he said in the lawsuit it stated that Eidos sent the lawsuit to both gamers and servers, which some say is up to around 60-80 pages on the electronic mailing list, that the Nude"

Now what the f*** is that supposed to mean? It's a bit hard to follow, I think :>

Custom Jeep for movie

I found out that Jeep made a custom Wrangler for the Movie "The Cradle of Life", but I'm judging whether or not it's worth adding.

[1]

Here's what I wrote in case any of you decide this is worth adding: "During the production of The Cradle of Life, Jeep was assigned to make a specialized Jeep Wrangler for the movie. It was basically a custom Jeep Wrangler with attachments to improve durability and lighting. It was later marketed as a custom Jeep Wrangler Rubicon Tomb Raider edition, and its sales hinged on the success of the movie. "

Mac versions of Tomb Raider

There is no information regarding Tomb Raider video game releases for Macintosh computers. This link could be used as a reference unless anyone else has better information. It has release dates and publisher information.

https://www.gamedb.com/ssps/0/11/search/?PHPSESSID=109732561a46909e024c2a0e69d7be8a&search_name=1&search_description=1&search_category=1&search_keywords=tomb+raider

Removed table from the articles page

Instruments	Oboe	String orchestra	Choir	Harp	Brass section	Violin	Vibraphone	Orchestral percussion	Sound FX	Piano	Chimes	Electronic percussion	Singing voice	Ethnic percussion	Ethnic string instrument	Duduk	Pan flute
Tomb Raider	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Tomb Raider II	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	No	No	No
Tomb Raider III	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No
Tomb Raider: The Last Revelation	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No	No
Tomb Raider Chronicles	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	Yes	No	No	No
Tomb Raider: The Angel of Darkness	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	No	No	No
Tomb Raider: Legend	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes
Tomb Raider: Anniversary	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	No	No
Tomb Raider: Underworld	No	Yes	Yes	Yes	No	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	Yes	No	No	No	No

This table has been removed from the article's page. It looks like it doesn't belong to the Tomb Raider page, but I believe it stays ok for future ideas, critics or suggestions. --TudorTulok (talk) 10:03, 13 January 2010 (UTC)

tombraiderchronicles.com

Here are some talks made after Thejadefalcon wanted to point out in one of his edit summaries: "As I said, discuss on the talk page. Edit summaries aren't long enough" on 23:12, 14 January 2010. Here are previous edit summaries regarding the problem.

"Undo. In my experience, this is a notable one, possibly an official fansite (they have the music for download, for instance). Take it to talk page?" by Thejadefalcon on 16:27, 14 January 2010 (for using the link)

"Don't know what to say about make a external site to be the only fan site here" by TudorTulok on 16:39, 14 January 2010 (for using the link)

"This site is merely a fan site, not remotely official. Self important, yes; official, definitely not. Other fan sites have music and all sorts of stuff to download. Why include this one only?)" by 87.114.70.149 on 23:10, 14 January 2010 (against using the link)

--TudorTulok (talk) 04:02, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

It's a fansite plain and simple. —Mike Allen 04:14, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

OK, then. Out with it, permanently, and no more debates. --TudorTulok (talk) 04:56, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

There has already been some discussion about TombRaiderChronicles.com [2]. It was decided that the website should be kept as a list as it is deemed more than a fansite. I'm not saying we shouldn't have a review, but you might want to read that previous discussion.

TombRaiderChronicles.com is also used frequently as a reference on multiple of the Tomb Raider articles (also been questioned but left alone previously). Phynicen ^"Chat" 11:46, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I agree with JGXenite's views. That seems to say basically everything I can think of. If people feel a discussion is warranted, then I'm happy with that. If not, the status quo seems to be to keep the link. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 18:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

It's ok, one more thing, shouldn't we have some bot-archiver here, on this talk page, maybe a lazy one because the page seems too long, or maybe just for the near future. --TudorTulok (talk) 22:06, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

Bot set up. --Thejadefalcon^{Sing your song}_{The bird's seeds} 22:11, 15 January 2010 (UTC)

I think it's ok to use it as a source (via their news section) on certain things that are not reported else where, but not for an EL, it's a fan site. If that makes sense? —Mike Allen 00:28, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

Assessment of Tomb Raider

I have requested an assessment of Tomb Raider to determine if the current rating is correct or could be raised to B class. Phynicen ^"Chat" 23:48, 16 January 2010 (UTC)

I really would like someone to do something about what is written in assessment: "The <<Films>> section focuses on plot, which is not suitable for a series article, contributing to a slightly "in-universe" feel." --TudorTulok (talk) 13:37, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I have already partially dealt with:

• "citations needed in character section, possible to copy across from main article as appropriate. Verification and additional citations required in "Games" section lead, as tagged. "Music" section requires additional citations. Further sections are ok, but would benefit from 'borrowing' citations from their main articles, to ensure the facts are clear."
• "Additionally, the music section could be compressed and written as summary, rather than the current broken-down layout. The music section would definately benefit from its core paragraph being expanded, whether these subsections remain or not."

These could obviously be changed a little more but for the most part, I think these points have been addressed. The film section is now the main one. Phynicen ^"Chat" 14:14, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I have just finished addressing the problems with the film section. I've included one sentence for each giving a short summary of what the film is about, then focused more on reception and box office performance. I think all points have been met now. I'll ask for a re-assessment. Phynicen ^"Chat" 15:36, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

B-class Assessment

1) The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.

• NFail, citations needed in character section, possible to copy across from main article as appropriate. Verification and additional citations required in "Games" section lead, as tagged. "Music" section requires additional citations. Further sections are ok, but would benefit from 'borrowing' citations from their main articles, to ensure the facts are clear.

2) The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

• YPass, enough detail to satisfy the casual reader.

3) The article has a defined structure.

• NFail, the lead section should not contain citations, as material there should be present and cited later in the article. Additionally, the music section could be compressed and written as summary, rather than the current broken-down layout. The music section would definately benefit from its core paragraph being expanded, whether these subsections remain or not.

4) The article is reasonably well-written.

• CMostly Pass, the readability suffers slightly from the sections being very short, and it gives the article a slightly fragmented feeling.

5) The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.

• YPass, the article has good links to split-pages, and uses tables well.

6) The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

• NFail, the "Films" section focuses on plot, which is not suitable for a series article, contributing to a slightly "in-universe" feel.

Hope this assessment helps, feel free to poke me at my talk page with comments/queries. --Taelus (talk) 00:06, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Re-assessment

1) The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations where necessary.

• YPass, issues cleared up. "Games" section could still use additional citations for absolute clarity, but the detail can be gained from other sources present in and around the section already, thus fine for B-class.

2) The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

• YPass, as previously assessed

3) The article has a defined structure.

• CMostly Pass, the lead section should not contain citations, as material there should be present and cited later in the article. Music section is better now.

4) The article is reasonably well-written.

• YPass, the reading flow is much better after recent changes.

5) The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.

• YPass, as previously assessed.

6) The article presents its content in an appropriately accessible way.

• YPass, the problem section has been cleaned up in recent changes.

Again, hope this helps, once the lead section is fixed it should be B-class quality. To be very specific, try moving the cite about Square Enix into the infobox if it is suitable, possibly create a "Reception" section to hold the citations for the sales figures and popularity expressed in the lead. Happy editing, --Taelus (talk) 17:12, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

I've addressed number 3. I have removed the passage about Square Enix and moved the citation to the infobox. The passage about the popularity of the Tomb Raider games has been moved to the bottom of the Games section. I believe it suits here better than a new section titled Reception (it is one line of text). That should be everything now Phynicen ^"Chat" 17:43, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Yup, that is fine. B-class given. (Will update listing at WP:VG/A) --Taelus (talk) 18:33, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Thanks! Now to work on the other Tomb Raider articles :D Phynicen ^"Chat" 18:39, 17 January 2010 (UTC)

Tomb Raider Peer Review

I have created a peer review for Tomb Raider to see people's opinions on what could be improved. I'd like to try and get Tomb Raider to a Good Article status and eventually, A-class. Phynicen ^"Chat" 14:19, 18 January 2010 (UTC)