Talk:Top Shop

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

Low

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

A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants)
Red Barrels (2 participants)
The Campaign Trail (Web Game) (23 participants)
Paper doll (video games) (5 participants)
TheoTown (10 participants; relisted)
Old Grandma Hardcore (6 participants; relisted)
WePlay AniMajor (2 participants; relisted)
Zero Hour (video game) (6 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Opinionated

Now, despite the fact that I agree completely, I feel that this article is a little opinionated. However, I don't quite feel qualified to clean it up myself, could someone take care of this? Zeotronic 10:50, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Fair use rationale for Image:Boardgametopshop cover.jpg

Image:Boardgametopshop cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in Wikipedia articles constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images uploaded after 4 May, 2006, and lacking such an explanation will be deleted one week after they have been uploaded, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.BetacommandBot 03:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Monopoly contrasts

While Monopoly is an appropriate comparison point for the game, I think that the article goes too far with the comparisons, one line specifically bothers me:

"In addition to its modified game play..."

That line suggests that the game is merely a variation of another game, Monopoly, if your following the article. I wouldn't call the games THAT similar... Top Shop shares similar concepts to Monopoly, but calling it a modification unless comparing it to an even similar game seems inaccurate. Zeotronic (talk) 02:39, 24 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Move?

The following discussion is an archived 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: Move. Cúchullain ^t/c 16:41, 8 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Board Game Top Shop → Top Shop –

A number A1 products have a "genre" listing at the top and on the spine; this is one of them. Fortunately, the copyright notices on the back of these games simply have the correct game title. I suppose that would also give reason to use "TOP SHOP", but let's not go there. Despatche (talk) 21:26, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Top Shop is already a disambig page. Or move Top Shop to "Top Shop (some disambiguator)". Anthony Appleyard (talk) 23:40, 11 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Weak Support, as Top Shop only lists two actual articles, this and Topshop, this article could then have the {{For}} template to Topshop. -- [[ axg ◉ talk ]] 23:20, 12 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Comment there's the other disambiguation page at topshops, so the two disambiguation pages should be merged, and a single disambiguation page exist somewhere. -- 76.65.128.43 (talk) 06:05, 13 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A merge isn't really necessary. I've redirected Topshops to Top Shop, but it didn't list anything not already there. --BDD (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. Top Shop should remain a disambiguation page as it is at present. This is not a primary topic. Move to Top Shop (video game) if necessary. -- Necrothesp (talk) 15:44, 14 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]
Support Top Shop is a junk dab page that I have no problem overwriting. The only real article there is Topshop, so I'm fine moving this page and using hatnotes. ("For the video game..." and "For the British clothing retailer...") --BDD (talk) 17:25, 6 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]
- An article with more than one hatnote? Horrible. That's what we have disambiguation pages for. -- Necrothesp (talk) 10:16, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

No, each of those hatnotes would be on a separate article—the retailer and the game, respectively. --BDD (talk) 16:11, 7 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

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.