Talk:Mini Metro (video game)

Sources 07/03/2014

• SUBWAY MAP SIMULATOR LETS PEOPLE PLAY URBAN PLANNER
• Doing lines: Subway-builder Mini Metro is coming to iOS & Android
• Could You Run WMATA? Try the 'Mini Metro' Game
• (Versão alpha gratuita de Mini Metro é disponibilizada) Free alpha version is available Mini Metro
• This Addictive New Game Lets You Build Your Own Subway System
• Is Mini Metro the Next Angry Birds?
• Minimalistic subway layout game allows you to be a virtual transit tycoon
• New app lets you design your own subway system
• London Tube-style map shows how Dublin public transport will link up
• Addictive game lets you play subway god, weep at your inefficient creation

  Tentinator   21:57, 7 March 2014 (UTC)

Sources from 11/03/14

• Optimise the tube with Mini Metro map game
• Playing Mini Metro, the Supremely Addicting Subway Game
• Mini Metro makes you enjoy designing subways. Seriously

  Tentinator   20:58, 11 March 2014 (UTC)

Requested move 4 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the proposal was moved. --BDD (talk) 20:20, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

Mini Metro (game) → Mini Metro (video game) – Please place your rationale for the proposed move here. --Relisted. George Ho (talk) 04:17, 11 May 2015 (UTC) Anarchyte (talk) 09:05, 4 May 2015 (UTC)

• Move – per #2 at WP:NCVGDAB --The1337gamer (talk) 21:24, 8 May 2015 (UTC)
• My initial reaction was to Support move per WP:NCVGDAB, but then I notived Red Slash moved it from (video game) to (game) in May 2014, so I'm curious to hear their thoughts on this. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 18:43, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
  • Oh, nothing, just WP:CONCISE. But I would oppose this move for the same reasons. Red Slash 22:43, 10 May 2015 (UTC)
    • Alright, well, that being said, I still support a move, per WP:NCVGDAB. Video game articles mistakenly disambiguated with (game) are routinely moved to (video game) with or without a RM. ☺ · Salvidrim! · ✉ 04:24, 11 May 2015 (UTC)
• Support is appears that NCVDABS is the standard here and I don't see why this should be an exception. it should be noted that an attempt to move the video game 2048 failed to have it moved from (video game) for that very reason.--70.27.228.231 (talk) 00:44, 12 May 2015 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the proposal. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page. No further edits should be made to this section.

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mini Metro (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tintor2 (talk · contribs) 02:18, 11 August 2016 (UTC) Hello, I, Tintor2 will review this article. It looks to be in good shape, so I'll probably pass it after seeing issues solved. Here we go:

• Can the lead be expanded to be split in at least two paragraphs per WP:Lead? The article is pretty so I think it would be easy.

I've expanded this.

• Gameplay section: What does "In the Normal play mode"? Is it a diffculty?

It's the name of a game mode. I've added quote marks to emphasise that. The text explains how "Normal" differs from the "Endless" game mode. Tell me if it still isn't clear.

• Reception: The vg reviews template could be expanded with the ones you used in the prose like "| rev1 = | rev1Score = "

The other reviews didn't give scores.

• • The excellence in audio could also be added with "| award1Pub = | award1 = "

I don't like to use the award entry in the VG reviews template because the text looks too small and cramped. So I prefer to just summarise in prose if there aren't that many awards. That's just my personal preference.

• Lastly, just an advice. If the development section is too large, I would recommend it to have a subsection.

Usually I would split the development section into subsections, but for this article it seemed better to write it in a chronological order due to the way the game was released. So there isn't really clearly defined subsections for it.

That's all I could gather. Looks like a solid GA. Also if you have some free time could you take a look at my latest peer review? Cheers.Tintor2 (talk) 02:18, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

@Tintor2: I've addressed your comments above. Anything else need to be changed? --The1337gamer (talk) 21:32, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Congratulations. Article became a GA.Tintor2 (talk) 21:39, 12 August 2016 (UTC)

Requested move 1 July 2017

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was:  Not done (page mover closure) DrStrauss talk 22:37, 8 July 2017 (UTC)

---

Mini Metro (video game) → Mini Metro – The latter is currently a redirect, and the disambig page doesn't have much on it, as "Minimetro" is what is being disambiguised  – Nixinova ⟨T|C⟩ 21:04, 1 July 2017 (UTC)

• Support as a more WP:CONCISE name. -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 21:08, 1 July 2017 (UTC)
• @Nixinova and KAP03: Mini Metro is a disambig page with 3 choices. Anthony Appleyard (talk) 20:24, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
  • Well, move that page to Mini Metro (disambiguation). -KAP03(^{Talk • Contributions • Email}) 20:26, 2 July 2017 (UTC)
• Comment Here's a link to pageviews. The dab page Mini Metro was a redirect until earlier today, so there's little surprise that it doesn't show anything. Going by those views, the Austin Mini is clearly the primary topic. The question is whether Mini Metro should redirect to Austin Metro or not, and that can only be determined by those who know how commonly the car is known by this term. Hence, my contribution is a mere comment; I let others vote! who know more about the topic. Schwede66 09:18, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
• Comment the game is the clear primary topic on google web search, but the car is the clear primary topic for book searches - which is not suprising given the difference in age/eras for the topics. I'm leaning towards primary disambiguation, but not firmly (at the moment). Thryduulf (talk) 18:16, 3 July 2017 (UTC)
• Oppose I agree that "Mini Metro" should either be a disambiguation page, or should be pointing to the Austin Mini. This page on the game is fine where it is. --MASEM (t) 18:23, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Why should it point to the Austin Mini? It is a prior name; the game is now the primary topic. Mini Metro - the game. MiniMetro - the people mover systems. Austin Metro - that. This is all fine; have hatnotes; they are all different. – Nixinova ⟨T|C⟩ 19:48, 3 July 2017 (UTC)

Why, because of this. This kind of search is how we establish notability in objective reality, so we don't get 10 gamers saying one thing and 10 car owners saying another. In ictu oculi (talk) 02:59, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

• Strong Oppose, no one ever referred to Mini Metro as "Austin Mini", Mini Metro is the Mini Metro and should redirect to the car. Is the game even notable? In ictu oculi (talk) 02:02, 6 July 2017 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Requested move 29 March 2024

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review after discussing it on the closer's talk page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

The result of the move request was: not moved. (closed by non-admin page mover) Bensci54 (talk) 17:35, 5 April 2024 (UTC)

---

Mini Metro (video game) → Mini Metro – I think that the additional disambiguation is not required because there is no other article with the exact match. We have MiniMetro, about the people mover. Also, the mini Metro dab is not even mentioned in the light rail page so not sure why its listed in the dab article. There is a discussion about the same thing, but its been 6 years and its been more than reasonable enough time to request another one. A case of WP:DIFFCAPS and WP:SMALLDETAILS may apply here. A dab page may not be necessary so could be a case of G14ing it. JuniperChill (talk) 00:28, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

• Austin Metro has more views (5,331) than the video game (1,167) and was called "Mini Metro", MiniMetro has 397[[1]] and readers looking for that may well use to words as the normal format. Crouch, Swale (talk) 19:54, 29 March 2024 (UTC)
• Oppose While a realively well known video game in the video game world, it doesn't the name recognition that would elevate it above the other topics at the disambiguation page. --Masem (t) 20:42, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

  I clearly stated that the dab page doesn't contain any other matches of 'Mini Metro' so it should be named without any disambiguation. If they are not looking for the video game, then that is what the hatnote is for. This reminds me of the situation at Sun Haven where again, other than the dab page, there is no proper article with that name, and all of it has a disambiguator but the video game with that name has since been deleted. Also, Empire of Sin video game can be named that way since the dab page doesn't list any others with the exact name. This is why I proposed this rename move thing. JuniperChill (talk) 21:50, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

>"the dab page doesn't contain any other matches of 'Mini Metro'" That is false. Austin Mini Metro and MiniMetro are clearly legitimate topics that can be referred to as "Mini Metro". See WP:DPT. 162 etc. (talk) 22:01, 29 March 2024 (UTC)

• Oppose. The Austin Metro was once almost universally referred to as the Mini Metro (I'm old enough to remember it being!). I would go so far as to say that should be a primary redirect. -- Necrothesp (talk) 13:45, 2 April 2024 (UTC)

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.