Talk:Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express

Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express is a former featured article. Please see the links under Article milestones below for its original nomination page (for older articles, check the nomination archive) and why it was removed.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on February 16, 2008.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
July 7, 2007	Featured article candidate	Promoted
November 20, 2021	Featured article review	Demoted

Current status: Former featured article

Video games 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 articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Train simulator (disambiguation) (8 participants)
Preston Arsement (2 participants)
Jackpot World (2 participants)
Melee (game terminology) (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (5 participants; relisted)
Crazy Bus (14 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

BLITZKRIEG

I've launched my assault against this pathetic stub, and it's already surrendered!!!!!! A shiny, glossy, copy-edited article is what remains, and I feel justified in my belief that this is an FA, and is one of my best articles, if not THE BEST!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!Paaerduag 12:50, 19 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I'm impressed! Well done :-) Ta bu shi da yu 08:16, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

'High' rating

I changed the Agatha Christie articles to a 'High' rating as I believe that, considering that Christie has only sold less books than Shakespeare and the Bible, that games based on her works are of incredible importance and aren't obscure. Given the source material of these games, I do believe that a 'High' rating is justified. Thoughts? Paaerduag 01:03, 6 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the book versions are quite important and influential but the video game versions are different altogether. They bring nothing new to adventure game genre in both gameplay and artistic sense. And they aren't exactly hailed as masterpieces either. I think that these games should be rated "low" in both projects (video game and adventure game). --Mika1h 18:27, 14 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

My idea is based on the subject matter being extremely important - this is the first time EVER that Agatha Christie games have been made into a video game series of any time. This is compounded with the fact that The Adventure Company is a famous company dealing with this source matter. That's my view anyway.--Paaerduag 07:51, 16 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, it didn't do anything particularly innovative or unique, even within the field of adventure games or sell a lot of units, or get noticed for any other reason than the Christie connection. In fact, if it wasn't for that, I daresay this would be known as "just another miscellaneous adventure game". Those are the criteria that a game needs for higher importance IMO. Green451 (talk) 16:15, 8 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

That Agatha Christie is notable does render every single derivative of her work equally notable. Paaerduag, by your reasoning random pop culture references to, say, the Bible or Shakespeare would automatically mean a "high" or "top" rating for just about every single episode of The Simpsons, Family Guy or Robot Chicken. If you compare this with other high-importance articles within the same genre, you'll notice that adventure game legends such as Leisure Suit Larry and Police Quest are sharing the same rating, and that just isn't a fair assessment. I'm moving it down to "mid" for now. Peter ^Isotalo 07:51, 11 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm surprised you even nagivated to the talk page of this article, because I thought you detested video game articles too much. But I agree with your assessment of the importance, fair enough. --Paaerduag (talk) 09:26, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All I can say is that TFA politics and real life interests do not always coincide.

Peter ^Isotalo 18:11, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Dab text added

I hope nobody minds, but I've added the following to the top of this article:

This article refers to the video game. For other uses, please see Murder on the Orient Express (disambiguation).

I've done this because there's a dab page which readers might also find useful. Incidently, this is a very good article! - Ta bu shi da yu 08:15, 10 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I considered this addition for a while, but ultimately I don't think that it is worthwhile. Don't get me wrong: I have nothing wrong with "for other uses..." at the top of a page, but this article is specifically "Agatha Chrisite: Murder on the Orient Express", not just the name of the novel by itself. That, I think, means it shouldn't have such a link at the top, as someone wouldn't search for "Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express" if they wanted the novel or one of the films, they'd just search for "Murder on the Orient Express". For these reasons, I ultimately thought it best to remove it. Tough decision though.--Paaerduag 07:32, 12 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I would add the dab text because there is nothing in the article title to suggest it's a video game. Say someone who doesn't know the subject would search for "Murder on Orient Express", it takes you to a page with best matches for those words. One of them is "Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express" and the other "Murder on the Orient Express", you wouldn't which one is which until you click the link. I say you would click the link for the video game first because it has the author's name on it. --Mika1h (talk) 11:12, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The scenario you're proposing seems very unlikely. Murder on the Orient Express takes you to the article about the novel and anyone who clicks "search" will get the article about the novel listed first with pretty clear descriptions concerning each article. Googling for "Murder on the Orient Express" will also lead you to the article about the novel rather than here (as a first choice). As for not noticing that this article is about a video game, you'd have pretty much have to be mildly intoxicated or a moron in a hurry.

Peter ^Isotalo 18:07, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I meant that from looking at the link (article title) in another page, you don't notice it to be about a video game. --Mika1h (talk) 22:13, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

If so, it would be better if the context explained what the article is about.

Peter ^Isotalo 07:51, 22 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

...Wow...

My stub...it's very much...not a stub anymore...very nice job 0_0 Pieguy48 03:29, 13 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome featured article. So cool :) Ziros (talk) 01:46, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

2006 point-and-click???

So it only takes over two thousand points/clicks to play the game? I think it'd take more than that. I've been bold and changed the leading line slightly so that it actually says what it is supposed to say. Someone would need to change it on the Main Page of wikipedia since it's featured today. --Novelty (talk) 11:45, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

it's fairly obvious that 2006 refers to the YEAR 2006. I don't think this needs to be changed. --Paaerduag (talk) 12:56, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Wow Novelty you are ******* retarded. --Radiohumor (talk) 20:43, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The Last Express

I feel that The Last Express, a critical success but commercial failure nine years earlier, should at least be mentioned somehow here as it shares the same theme. (A murder on the Orient Express.) Doesn't refer to A. Christie, though.

Thoughts? 85.181.184.80 (talk) 18:10, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I think a see also section could be created and the link added there. --Mika1h (talk) 22:16, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

when I had another one of my FAs up for FAC a while ago, Raul654 removed a "see also" section I had put in it. I was puzzled at first, but was later told that they are considered outdated. and unless this game has a CLEAR link to AG:MOTOE, I don't think it is really necessary to have a link to it here.--Paaerduag (talk) 23:54, 16 February 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Should the Plot Describe the Solutions?

I've noticed that the plot summary says that there are three solutions, but it doesn't actually say what any of them are. Murder on the Orient Express describes the two solutions in the original novel and featured articles for adventure games like Myst outline the endings. I know that the third ending in particular is a bit of a surprise (and a really good one!) but I really think that they should be explained. Thoughts? -Thunderforge (talk) 07:05, 23 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Since nobody responded, I went ahead and added them in. For a Featured Article, this article really seemed to be lacking in the Plot section. -Thunderforge (talk) 03:13, 26 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Agatha Christie: Murder on the Orient Express. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20070929125326/http://au.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/agathachristiemurderontheorientexpress/news.html?sid=6158094&mode=press to http://au.gamespot.com/pc/adventure/agathachristiemurderontheorientexpress/news.html?sid=6158094&mode=press

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:44, 29 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source

FA sweeps

Looking at this older FA as part of the ongoing FA sweeps. Main concerns here seem to be sourcing:

QuandaryLand (as Quandary) is listed as unreliable at WP:VGRS.
As is 2404
Game Over Online is listed as inconclusive on reliability, so it probably doesn't meet the "high-quality RS" needed for FA
Same thing as GOO applies to Strategy Informer
Game Chronicles is listed as unreliable.
Adventure Classic Gaming is listed as unreliable,
No indication the YouTuber with 58 subs who posted the interview link on YouTube really has the copyright permissions for that video, so it may fail WP:COPYLINK.

As some of these sources, especially Adventure Classic Gaming, seem to be used heavily, it looks like this needs significant sourcing work and may require a featured article review. Hog Farm _Talk 02:01, 26 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]