Talk:BMX XXX

From WikiProjectMed
Jump to navigation Jump to search

Nudity in mainstream games

"At the time of BMX XXX's release, sexual humor and nudity were not widely explored themes in mainstream video games" They were. Think of the Leisure Suit Larry series for example. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 46.253.186.82 (talk) 05:56, 18 October 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Denied classification in Australia?

I don't know if the game was modified and re-released, but I've seen it for sales in shops in Australia... -Nova Prime 11:47, 8 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just added archive links to one external link on BMX XXX. Please take a moment to review my edit. If necessary, add {{cbignore}} after the link to keep me from modifying it. Alternatively, you can add {{nobots|deny=InternetArchiveBot}} to keep me off the page altogether. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true to let others know.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—cyberbot IITalk to my owner:Online 18:34, 8 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Source

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 21:24, 16 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Prose

Lede

General

Five cites is usually my threshold for bundling, but sure, I'm willing to move that down a notch. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
All above points have been addressed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 18:08, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Review meta comments

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk02:16, 5 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by Cat's Tuxedo (talk). Self-nominated at 19:55, 20 October 2022 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
QPQ: Done.
Overall: @Cat's Tuxedo: Good article! Hook is interesting, QPQ is done, and the article is a good article. Approving. Onegreatjoke (talk) 20:53, 20 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]