Talk:Star Fox Command

GA passed

1. Well written? Pass

2. Factually accurate? Pass

3. Broad in coverage? Pass

4. Neutral point of view? Pass

5. Article stability? Pass

6. Images? Pass

Nicely done, it now is a GA for it conforms to what is asked of such an article. Lincher 00:23, 13 October 2006 (UTC)

Why did we remove the box showing the stats of chracters?

Mine if I add it back? —Preceding unsigned comment added by NFAN3 (talk • contribs)

It was removed because prose does a better job than a table. And having statistics is violating WP:NOT as a game guide. Thunderbrand 14:16, 17 October 2006 (UTC)

Ending Saving Problem

My game has had a problem saving the alternate endings. Once I beat the game on an alternative path, it plays the credits, but freezes at the last slide of the credits, and so never saves the ending. It saves the charcters in the gallery, but not the endings. (I have had this problem with both Slippy's ending (#7) and the StarWolf Returns ending) Does anyone else have this problem? Thanks! 209.26.22.172 05:06, 22 November 2006 (UTC)

I think your game must be messed up. --Gaming King 12:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Reception

The current version of the Reception section is almost perfect, but lacks reference to the slight stylus control problems cited by many professional and fan reviewers. --Gaming King 12:58, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

When I played this game, I never had a problem with the controls.

Especially barrel rolls. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 81.103.46.88 (talk • contribs).

Final Installment

Isn't this the last Star fox game in the series? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 63.3.11.130 (talk) 20:00, 9 April 2007 (UTC).

No, there is another one in the making from the same makers of this game for the Wii. Due to not liking the idea of the team breaking up for most fans, it is most likely that this next game will have a completely different plot with some new characters not from this game...Take that Marcus! HA HA HA! :P

But that game has only been hinted, not confirmed. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 63.3.2.2 (talk) 14:08, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Possible Trivia?

Do you think that maybe we should put the facts that music is reused from previous installments? (ex: Fox's mothership BGM is that of Area 6's from 64; Kat's BGM is a remixed version of her theme (on Zoness) from 64; Wolf's BGM is a remix of the Star Wolf battle theme from 64 and Assault; the title theme is a remix of past title theme, notably 64 and Adventure; the Oikonny battle has a remixed boss theme from 64, etc) I'm just asking. ChromeWulf ZX 22:40, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Trivia sections are usually discouraged in good quality articles, but you should totally put any sourced information you have into the development section, or if there is a lot of information about game music, make an Audio section. Judgesurreal777 22:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

GA Reassessment

Star Fox Command

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page • GAN review not found

Result: Consensus exists that this article does not meet the standards of GA. Bgsu98 (Talk) 21:28, 29 November 2025 (UTC)

This is a quite old GA, as it was listed in October 2006 - just over two months after the game's original release. However, I am concerned that it no longer meets the standards expected of a GA in 2025. Just a few things that stand out on a first glance:

1. Lead is very short and contains no summary of the development, and barely anything on the plot, gameplay and reception.

2. Gameplay is, effectively, mostly unsourced as entire paragraphs only cite the game's instruction manual, which is a primary source that should not be used so extensively. There's also a CN tag on the multiplayer section.

3. Development uses unreliable sources such as GoNintendo and Reddit, and has several obvious grammatical errors. The game's release dates are also not sourced.

4. The prose in reception is very poor and does not meet MOS:VGREC. The entire section is one block of text that mostly cites review scores without going into detail on critics' opinions. Also uses questionable sources such as Mansized and QJ.net.

All things considered, I think this would need a lot of work to bring it up to current GA standards, so I am electing to nominate it for GAR. MidnightMayhem (talk) 07:02, 10 November 2025 (UTC)

• Delist I was surprised at how reception-light this is for a GA, especially for such a prominent game. I'd call it C-class at best. It certainly needs an expansion. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 15:17, 23 November 2025 (UTC)
• Delist I agree with all four points here, especially the extreme overreliance on primary sources (the manual, Reddit, the interview). Very, very far from GA. JustARandomSquid (talk) 21:56, 24 November 2025 (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.