Talk:Temple Run

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.

Does anyone think I should start this page about the app? --J (t) 21:55, 17 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]


The "Engine" used is not Canabolt. I could see how someone with little knowledge of the topic could misunderstand by the article. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 66.151.13.188 (talk) 20:15, 7 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Clearly it's not a engine, but Canabalt did define the genre this game sits in. Should it not be mentioned? Somnolentsurfer (talk) 14:40, 9 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Someone please edit, an Android version is not yet released (2/8/12). There was a phony version on the market, but it has since been removed. http://threatpost.com/en_us/blogs/phony-temple-run-game-android-plays-android-ios-app-gap-020712 70.224.170.4 (talk) 19:56, 8 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested Improvements

No Image !!! No mention of endless run glitch — Preceding unsigned comment added by OS X Epic (talk • contribs) 20:07, 19 February 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No reason for the glitch.

In the character write-ups, it appears that there is some soft racism and sexism. It's odd that the occupations of all the men are listed, but the women are "girls," especially when their occupations are listed on the character select screen. Moreover, why is Barry's occupation in scare quotes? Seems like an odd choice, and this reader, at least, jumped to racist/sexist conclusions. Should be modified. OatsMalone (talk) 13:05, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

They are not sexist and please refrain from using harsh words. --J (t) 01:14, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I would add in the popularity section, that this game inspired many other Video game clones, like "Agent Dash" and "TheEndApp". Also, what is a fake game? —LazyAndroid (talk) 06:07, 21 August 2012 (UTC) I'm thinking there could be more about Temple Run: Oz'.' Like maybe a picture, or a few more details about it. DaltonBantz (talk) 14:13, 9 May 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Fair use images

We need a screenshot, but how can we obtain this? I don't know about fair use... --J (t) 15:53, 16 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 27 April 2012

Please replace "Scarlett Fox, a girl with Scarlett Fox, a female explorer. Please replace "Karma Lee, another girl" with "Karma Lee, Far East Female".

The article seems sexist using the term "girl" for the female characters, but giving the male characters specific titles.

Also Barry the "cop" should be Barry the cop, its explicitly states in the game he is a cop, this seems a bit racist. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 199.173.225.33 (talk) 13:40, 1 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Source: I play the game and http://www.gamerevolution.com/faq/temple-run/unlockable-characters-guide-62483

199.173.226.236 (talk) 18:13, 27 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I do too (as the creator of this article) and I have made these changes! I was the one who made the forgetful remarks. This was purely coincidental and this was NOT sexist. Please don't use the term "sexist"; it is not true. If you think you can make some awesome edits, please login. Thanks! --J (t) 01:10, 3 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Also, playing the game is NOT a reliable source! --J (t) 05:45, 28 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Suggested change

Montana Smith is not a "Cowboy", as this is never stated in the game. He is "the second greatest explorer ever" and appears to be a relatively clear parody of Indiana Jones, considering his name, and the references to Montana's hat when he dies in-game. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.54.115.185 (talk) 18:21, 24 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Please file this as an edit request. I am not going to make the change, so I suggest you log in. --J (t) 21:16, 25 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is
transcluded from Talk:Temple Run/GA1
. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Torchiest (talk · contribs) 13:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for nominating this article. Unfortunately, it has too many problems to become a good article at this time, so I am going to fail it for now. The biggest problem is that most of the article is unsourced. Specifically, the Gameplay section has no sources, the Spinoffs section is almost entirely without sources, and the Reception section is only partially sourced. Also, a lot of the sourced details in the lead should be moved down into the body, and the lead should be rewritten to cover the entire article more evenly. In particular, a new Release section would be a good addition to the article, where you could put the information about 50 most-downloaded apps and the 1 million downloads. I'd probably remove the Popularity section and move most of that into the new Release section as well. Once all that is done, you should submit this for another, more in-depth review. Sorry, and good luck! —Torchiest talkedits 13:40, 2 August 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Edit request on 24 January 2013

Please change 'It is expected for release on Android by the end of January 2013.' to 'It was later released on Android on January 24,2013.' [1] Priyesh C (talk) 16:02, 24 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Shawn5150 (talk) 00:50, 25 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

References

  1. ^ https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.imangi.templerun2

Inline citations still an issue?

Just wondering if inline citations are still an issue for this article? Looks improved to me. Synergee (talk) 03:12, 8 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Merger proposal

The following discussion has concluded. Please do not modify this section. Result of discussion: No merge.
Hello. Due to the lack of information on
My Talk Page
)
18:20, 16 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: Temple Run 2 is hardly a stub any more, and it will continue growing as more effort is put into it. A merge is, in my opinion, completely unwarranted and would waste time in the very near future.  drewmunn  talk  20:25, 16 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I think "hardly a stub" may be stretching it. Temple Run 2 has been out for a while. Not a ton of effort has been put into expanding the article. There is not enough information for it to require its own article. It is very similar to Temple Run, other than an updated UI and a few minor changes. The time that it would take to merge is minimal, and in addition to Temple Run, Temple Run: Oz and Brave are on that page. It is very similar. It would be a lot easier to have the whole series on one page for people reading this article. And the point of an encyclopedia is to help people understand and learn information, not to confuse them, right?
My Talk Page
)
04:22, 18 August 2013 (UTC)
  • Oppose: I come late to this discussion, but here's my two cents. I don't think having Temple Run on one page and Temple Run 2 on another is going to confuse anyone, and although I do take your point Mr. Julio, I see no reason why the two pages should be merged. They're two completely seperate games, and merging them would require unnecessary work. And yes, I know the same can be said for Brave and Oz, but they're derivative spin-offs rather than 'proper' sequels. Just because the Temple Run 2 page is weak doesn't mean it should be merged. There are literally thousands of articles with very little information on them on wikipedia, but they don't get merged with other articles because of that. I think the effort that would go into merging the articles would be better spent simply improving the Temple Run 2 article. I think in the future, if a Temple Run 3 were to come out, then maybe having a Temple Run (series) page could be warranted, but at the moment, I'm forced to agree with Mr Drewmunn. Bertaut (talk) 21:47, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I've just expanded the development and reception sections in the Temple Run 2 article, as well as tidying up the rest of it, so that should put the question of a merge to bed. Bertaut (talk) 02:09, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Merge: I think it should be merged because it makes much more sense to have all the series together. There are two spin offs on Temple Run, but they are not spin offs of the original game. They are spin offs of the series. And Bertaut, just adding useless info to an article to make it longer does not make it better. YOLO SWAGG 2013 (talk) 22:51, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Haha. Yep. A reception section and a development section. Useless. Good one. Bertaut (talk) 23:22, 5 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose: I can see no logical reason to merge. They're two distinct game built on two different engines, and both articles are fine as they are. I agree that I don't see anyone getting confused, especially when both articles link to one another in the lead. Sociallyacceptable (talk) 18:06, 7 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose – they're separate games that are part of a series by the same company. Epicgenius(give him tirade • check out damage) 23:08, 2 November 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's safe enough to close this now. Four opposes, one support, no comments in over a month. Bertaut (talk) 02:33, 6 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

English

Oki 154.115.222.182 (talk) 20:37, 30 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Temple_Run&oldid=1202907728"