Video games Start‑class Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game Start This article has been rated as Start-class on the project's quality scale. Low This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale. Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Could someone update it? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.23.18.188 (talk) 03:16, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Instead of automatically redirecting to the Bloons TD page I think there should be a page about the Bloons brand, such as the actual game Bloons and not the spinoff Bloons Tower Defense. Jasonxu98 (talk) 22:25, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

We need to make this page about all of them Bloons, bloons td and spinoffs and change the name to Bloons and redirect Bloons TD to here I'll work on that in my sandbox and switch them if you want me to Black60dragon (talk) 23:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I was going to suggest this, but it looks like someone beat me to it. I agree that Bloons should get an article, especially if Bloons TD gets an article. Alphius 22:14, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I think Bloons should get its own article, but Bloons TD should not redirect there because it is already a longish article. Sfoske70 (talk) 14:49, 14 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

So we make a bloons page on its own and how about I go ahead and make a subpage and give you guys the link and everyone could work on it so it gets down fast and right.

• Bloons --Black60dragon 19:13, 11 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Guess I beat you guys to it.FlashingYoshi! 18:13, 20 June 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlashingYoshi (talk • contribs)

I took a screenshot of Bloons TD, but I am not sure if it goes against copyright to post it. Sfoske70 (talk) 01:02, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I just contacted Ninjakiwi about this - asking for permission to use their logos and screenshots. Maybe we'll get a favorable response! Walkop (talk) 01:54, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

What the Heck, It is called a Banana Farm, how come everytime I look in this page I see that Banana Farm has been messed with! — Preceding unsigned comment added by 180.194.242.197 (talk) 12:35, 18 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I looked now and it says banana farm now. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Ecstatic girl (talk • contribs) 01:38, 12 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Added a little bit on the actual gameplay and money earning processes - including the Banana Farm. It should be correct. Walkop (talk) 01:59, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The article seems a bit low on actual information about the game and the specific variations on each edition. Anyone willing to help out? I've done a bit, added a table for version availability etc. but even that is low on factual, direct information; and isn't really relevant to gameplay. Walkop (talk) 02:03, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Just letting you know, Wikipedia is not a gameguide. Listing all the types of bloons, towers, levels, etc. is not helpful. Also the table you inserted was unnecessary. The information included in the table should be in the sections for each game, and/or the lead. Just remember, Wikipedia covers things on a real world perspective. Some development information from interviews or something would be more helpful then minor gameplay features. Thanks, _Blake ^{(Talk·Edits)} 16:23, 14 July 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Of course; I understand. I was actually thinking similarly, but this article is a bit low on information and I hadn't really gotten around to it yet. Thank you for giving your perspective and for your correction. I'll try to help in more factual objective ways. Thanks! _Walkop ^(talk) _{22:45, 14 July 2011 (UTC)}[reply]

Is it mostly conjecture?! Look at this: http://ninjakiwi.com/blog/what-more-btd4/ FlashingYoshi! 17:37, 29 July 2011 (UTC) — Preceding unsigned comment added by FlashingYoshi (talk • contribs)

I am doing major cleanup on this article. If any suggestions please reply here. Thanks Forgot to put name (talk) 09:45, 19 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I think we should put a section about updates and include a small description of it. Marco Daniel Velasco (talk) 10:09, 20 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Does M.O.A.B. stand for: Massive Ornary Air Blimp or Mother Of All Bloons?

Could someone provide a citation for this? Ultimately, is it even of noteworthy mention?

Thanks! --Bananasoldier (talk) 01:24, 30 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to be improving this article for a while. If you have any questions about my editing, feel free to ask! --Bananasoldier (talk) 03:03, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I asked SuperHamster for his advice/opinion on the article in its current state. It was really useful to me, so I'm sharing it here:

"Overall coverage of each game looks good, but I also think it's a bit long. Excessive gameplay detail isn't desirable for an encyclopedia, such as lists of all the types of towers, bloon colors, etc. (particularly for Bloons TD 4). Focusing on the key features and biggest changes between each game (graphics, game modes, new features, etc.) are the most important.

I think the next best place to look at is the reception section, since it only mentions a couple of games right now. It's complicated since it's going to cover the entire series. I'd look at the Grand Theft Auto series' reception section as a good example; we can provide an overall impression of the entire series, then get into game-specific ratings (with a table?).

Also, question: I believe the article should be moved to Bloons TD, since the series seems to have been renamed? Unless I'm missing something.

For reliable sources related to video gaming, Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources provides more information than you could ever want about video game sourcing. This list provides a comprehensive list of commonly accepted sources, along with custom Google searches set up so your search only returns results from the listed websites. Hope this helps! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:59, 31 December 2013 (UTC)"

To-do list:

• move article focus away from elaborate gameplay detail to key features that differ between games

• add and improve reception section

• move article location  Done

• check current references

• add more references

Bananasoldier (talk) 07:22, 31 December 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Some gameplay images are definitely needed and won't be hard to include, but I'm considering removing the logo pictures as I don't think they serve any purpose. Thoughts? Samwalton9 (talk) 20:01, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can agree on removing logo pictures because if we kept them, we'd need a logo picture for Bloons TD 5. Then it would be unbalanced, and we'd need logos for 1 and 2, and then there'd be images all over the place. We should change the infobox image, as well, because it seems a little outdated.

I'll see what I can do for 4 & 5 screenshots. It might be hard to acquire screenshots for the original version, given that Ninja Kiwi's probably taken the game down.

Bananasoldier (talk) 22:35, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah a logo of some kind would be good for the infobox. Actually just move the infobox image down to the 1st game's section would be best I think. All of the games are still available on the net so we can grab any screenshots that are needed :) Samwalton9 (talk) 23:28, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, that's good! I added an image for BTD5. Should it be cropped? Bananasoldier (talk) 23:50, 1 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It doesn't need cropping, but it does need reducing in size. For something like a screenshot to be legitimate fair use it needs to be much smaller than that (1,920 × 1,278 is not small by any means!). Resize it to something like 500x300ish and it should be fine to use. It basically needs to be the case that someone couldn't just copy the art straight out of the screenshot and use it elsewhere. Samwalton9 (talk) 00:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

When I looked at the image, it looked kinda blurry, so I assumed it was "low resolution." Oops. =P Gotcha. Bananasoldier (talk) 00:47, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I fixed it now, but the larger resolution is still there as a "previous version" of the image. How do I kill it off? Bananasoldier (talk) 00:56, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You need to add {{Non-free reduced}}, which I've done :) Samwalton9 (talk) 01:04, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! :D Bananasoldier (talk) 01:12, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Do you recommend we have a screenshot for every version? Bananasoldier (talk) 01:22, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

No I think that would be overdoing it, especially since the first two versions looked pretty much the same. Maybe just one for TD3 to show the first graphical update might be good, then we've got 1-3-5 to show the change. Samwalton9 (talk) 01:32, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Okay. Odd numbers it is! Bananasoldier (talk) 01:42, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Now that we have three images which are kind of meant to be looked at sequentially, it might be a good idea to use Template:Multiple image? Samwalton9 (talk) 02:28, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I concur. Bananasoldier (talk) 02:37, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'd also like to get an infobox logo, but not sure which logo to use. The first game's logo isn't the prettiest of things, but I think it might be the best to use since it just says Bloons Tower Defense. Thoughts? Samwalton9 (talk) 12:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

It looks a bit plain. Bananasoldier (talk) 16:35, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

How about this one? [1] Bananasoldier (talk) 16:38, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Is that an official logo? Samwalton9 (talk) 16:41, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to contact them about that question. Bananasoldier (talk) 16:51, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I just did some searching around, and I'm guessing this is the image from the DS version.[2][3] Bananasoldier (talk) 16:54, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

In which case yes I think we should go with that one :) Samwalton9 (talk) 18:43, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

this might be a good place to source it from since it's full size and is Bloons TD rather than Tower Defense. I'll go ahead and upload it now. Samwalton9 (talk) 18:48, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Should we be capitalizing "bloon"? Would it be considered a proper noun or no? Thanks, Bananasoldier (talk) 02:39, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I honestly have no idea. Samwalton9 (talk) 12:08, 2 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

We should ideally treat it as the game treats it. Looking at the Android description page for Bloons TD 5, they do capitalize it in the description. But looking into the game on my phone, and I'm seeing the term "bloon" both capitalized and not in different cases...

If we can figure out whether the developers consider it a proper noun or not, then we can go off that. I'm leaning towards it being a proper noun, but we should probably try to get more evidence. Until then....heh. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 02:30, 3 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

"Bloons follow the map's set path on the track until they either reach the exit(s) or are popped." -Gameplay, paragraph 2

Would you consider this sentence already stated in the first paragraph or do you think it's okay? Bananasoldier (talk) 01:50, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Also, paragraph 2 of gameplay: Maybe we should reword the statement about the bloons being layered inside one another in a Russian Doll style. I've found no sources that actually call it "Russian Doll," and it was merely my observation, therefore original research. Bananasoldier (talk) 02:03, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think the slight duplication is a worry, it words it slightly differently anyway. And it's a shame that it kind of might be OR because it's a really good example. I'd be tempted to leave that and see what the GA reviewer thinks. Samwalton9 (talk) 16:36, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I can't find the release date of the original Bloons TD Battles. Is it absolutely necessary that we add it? Bananasoldier (talk) 04:01, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

While poking around, I did find this:[4], which basically consists of all the old Ninja Kiwi blog posts. Unfortunately, no BTD Battles there. Bananasoldier (talk) 07:15, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, from this [5], we at least know it was released in 2012. Bananasoldier (talk) 07:21, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I missed this. We can use that last link to just add that it was released in 2012, that's fine :) Samwalton9 (talk) 16:35, 4 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bloons TD/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs) 05:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC) I'll take this. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:32, 6 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What can make this better is more information and more citations.Order of the sword (talk) 04:55, 13 January 2014 (UTC)Order of the sword[reply]

Good Article Checklist

• Well-written -the prose is clear and concise, respects copyright laws, and the spelling and grammar are correct; and it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
• Verifiable with no original research: it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline; it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines; and it contains no original research.
• Broad in its coverage: it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
• Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias, giving due weight to each.
• Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
• Illustrated, if possible, by images: images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• Disambig links: No issues
• Reference check: One issue

1. Daemon's Take on Bloons Tower Defense 3 - Web Games Feature at IGN (info) [ign.com] - Redirects. Essentially 404ed.

Comments:This article could potentially meet several points of the quick fail criteria, but I will hold it for a week just in case. The main issue is the lack of development which is completely non-existent as this point and the other article does contain the basic beginnings of the a proper development section. This article also has issues meeting the broad and focused aspects of the GA assessment. This article is a smaller portion of the Bloons line of games, but the section on TD2 is shorter than a stub should be. Its content is a single sentence. The prose is also a problem, with many of the sentences being choppy. This article is like a start or C class as it stands right now and I think it will be very hard to fix this in the time. Though I did make you wait quite awhile for the review, so I can give it two weeks to be fair. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 18:36, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Dead URL

 Done - Added an archive URL. Samwalton9 (talk) 18:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Development section

I'm at an impasse with this one. I can't find any information on the development as sources generally only covered the games themselves. Samwalton9 (talk) 18:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

What do you think can be done ChrisGualtieri (talk · contribs)? Samwalton9 (talk) 14:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Broad/Focused issues including small TD2 section

I think I'll just remove the TD2 heading and make it TD1&2 as a section. Makes sense seeing as 2 was just a small update to 1. Samwalton9 (talk) 18:57, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

 Done Samwalton9 (talk) 18:59, 14 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

• Prose

Will take a look at this now. Samwalton9 (talk) 14:29, 17 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

The article is just really lacking without details, this article tells nothing of its availability its marketing its specials or features on websites such as Kongregate. Each game is given no real details or coverage, each one is less than a stub by itself. I don't think there is enough content to make GA as a result. The reader doesn't get much more then "it exists, you pop balloons and it released on this date" for each of the games. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 14:51, 18 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry, I actually went out and played one of the games to see what is missing from this. And its a lot. The gameplay aspects alone could be given their own section and this is not really trivial stuff. I simply believe that even the basic game functions are being omitted and so is the distribution and other aspects. I do not think I can pass this without a substantial amount of coverage being added. It is just too bare bones. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 05:58, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You mean the gameplay aspects for each game? Regardless I think we've run out of coverage for now and have agree that it's fine if you fail the GAN. Doesn't look like we're going to find any sources for expansion any time soon. Samwalton9 (talk) 15:13, 28 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Are you sure there aren't reviews, manuals, or in-game dialogue that can be used to cite gameplay aspects? I find those all very helpful. Tezero (talk) 21:20, 29 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think we've used reviews as much as possible. Manuals and in-game things I hadn't considered for gameplay but that doesn't solve the lack of development section problem unfortunately. Thanks for the advice though. Samwalton9 (talk) 12:49, 30 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Something else that needs to be mentioned is that there's no Development section. You at least want to have a BS Development section if you can't find interviews or primary sources, as is the case in Digimon Racing, for example. Tezero (talk) 06:22, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I saw this at GAN, but where's the development section? czar ♔ 03:28, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

As much as I'd love to have a development section, I didn't come across any information on the games' development. Samwalton9 (talk) 09:02, 7 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

I think we need more things about bloons monkey city, as it is an important game to the bloons series.

I think we need more things about bloons monkey city, as it is an important game to the bloons series.Order of the sword (talk) 05:53, 10 January 2014 (UTC)Order of the sword[reply]

Hi! Could you list some sources that would prove Bloons Monkey City's notability? Bananasoldier (talk) 00:22, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah as hinted by banana, we couldn't find sources which talked about monkey city. Though we know that the game exists, we can't really write anything without those sources and thus had to leave it as a mention in the series intro. The same was true for a lot of the other Bloons TD series games unfortunately. Samwalton9 (talk) 00:30, 11 January 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, but still, can't we try to find something to make this work? As I mentioned earlier, this game is important to the bloons series.Order of the sword (talk) 04:53, 13 January 2014 (UTC)Order of the sword[reply]

If bloons monkey city is an add on pack, then bloons tower defense battles might as well be too. Both are add-ons, after all.Order of the sword (talk) 04:59, 13 January 2014 (UTC)Order of the sword[reply]

Ba-bam! I emailed the NinjaKiwi team and I got some more references that I don't think we've ever tapped into before: [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11]

Press releases: [12]

If we found credits to all the games, would they be of any use? Thanks, --Bananasoldier (talk) 17:33, 1 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Some game guides do exist for Bloons TD, as they appear here. --Bananasoldier (talk) 06:53, 2 February 2014 (UTC)[reply]