Talk:Kixeye

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted because...

Casual Collective rebranded itself as Kixeye on April 28, 2011. This the information about the company under its new branding. --Jonathanwirt (talk) 21:22, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

All the info in here can already be found in Casual Collective: if you want to rename that article to Kixeye, then we need to WP:MOVE the page instead, so we don't lose the edit history. Thanks, Mr. Credible (talk) 21:24, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

How do you WP:MOVE? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jonathanwirt (talk • contribs) 21:28, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Just let this article be deleted, then go to Casual Collective, choose the down-arrow menu, select "Move", and fill in the new name in the form that pops up. If you like, I'm happy to do it for you. It won't work yet though, as the new name's been taken, so we'll need to wait for deletion. Mr. Credible (talk) 22:10, 28 April 2011 (UTC)

Contested deletion

This page should not be speedy deleted because the corporation has changed its name. However, thousands of visotrs will know the firm by old name (Casual Collective), so a redirect will be needed as well.--72.39.30.144 (talk) 03:09, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

The proper way to do this is to move the article at Casual Collective into this title. Before that can be done, this page needs to be deleted to make way for the move. A redirect will be automatically created when the article is moved. ctzmsc3|talk 04:42, 29 April 2011 (UTC)

Heading

Jusst to let you guys know, I added the topic heading-- copied from Talk:Casual Collective. SimonOrJ (talk) 03:30, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

External Links and screenshot

The screenshot of Casual Collective is outdated and "old" and "older" Casual Collective Websites are unclear(?). www.casualcollective.com redirects to kixeye.com. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SimonOrJ (talk • contribs) 03:41, 15 May 2011 (UTC)

More, newer info

a couple things: 1. can we remove the deletion headings/notes? 2. this article (http://www.gamasutra.com/view/feature/6507/were_going_to_need_another_.php) seems to give some info, such as (rough, as it can easily fluctuate on a weekly basis) number of employees, that i would imagine normally goes into articles about companies. i haven't read all of it yet, but hopefully will soon, but wanted to share and see if anyone else is up for adding more beef to the page. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Eric Jack Nash (talk • contribs) 22:02, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

The unreliable cites need to be purged and the other issues addressed. In particular, see WP:RSOPINION and WP:SOURCES. Regards, RJH (talk) 22:16, 11 October 2011 (UTC)

Agreed. I've been going through and removing some overly detailed descriptions and adding in third-party reliable sources where applicable. Schultzee (talk) 22:15, 4 September 2012 (UTC)

Capitalization

The article refers to KIXEYE in all caps, which is also how KIXEYE refers to itself (e.g. here). Should the article be moved to KIXEYE? - ctzmsc3|talk 00:59, 3 December 2011 (UTC)

Intro -- Backyard Monsters as game developers?

"It developed several games ... developed by Preece, Scott, and hired game developers such as Backyard Monsters, which achieved the Mochi Award for Best Social Game of 2010."

Am I missing something? Backyard Monsters, as far as I know, is strictly a game. Lefoby (talk) 04:24, 16 July 2012 (UTC)

section deleter

Recent activity of deletion from 2.31.221.128

he deleted the battle pirates section

please report him if he continues Megabombs (talk) 20:42, 22 October 2012 (UTC)

kixeye

kixeye refuses to correct any issues with war commander the same as it did with backyard monsters it has recently removed the ability to report to kixeye any issues glithches and bugs with the game as they did with backyard monsters just before stopping all support with the game yet another shining example of kixeyestotally moronic incompetance — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2.121.126.128 (talk) 19:44, 23 October 2015 (UTC)

Battle Pirates: Kixeye does nothing to fix the glitches and allows members to continue to exploit those glitches, though there is proof positive of the issues. They offer resets to bases that have been banned even though their TOS states they would not unban a base. They pick and choose who to keep as customers based on how much coin you purchase. Cheaters should not be allowed to "reset" their bases. Kixeye needs to follow their own TOS. Pretty soon you will read that Kixeye has shut its door due to lack of revenue...Customers are tired of getting screwed...... 107.147.155.172 (talk) 05:35, 10 August 2016 (UTC)IM

References

Vandalism

This vandalism has been on the page since 24 October. Can it be undone? 15.211.201.87 (talk) 21:37, 3 December 2015 (UTC)

Semi-protected edit request on 11 August 2016

The page is still partially vandalised; the info-box alone has three pieces of defamatory or rude text. The page needs to be read over with a fine-toothed comb to remove what vandalism remains.

74.69.2.255 (talk) 03:54, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Reverted. Please reopen if there any additional issues. — JJMC89 (T·C) 04:18, 11 August 2016 (UTC)

Updating the Logo

Hey Wiki editors,

I wanted to request that KIXEYE's logo on your page be updated please. I am an executive assistant with the company, and we revamped our logo in 2016. It will not let me upload anything onto this request for some reason, but if someone reaches out by email, I can send the proper version. I'd appreciate if someone could please help to get this version on your page. We are working on making sure all external communication reflects our most updated changes in uniform. I would appreciate your help!

Thank you, Gianna - [email protected] — Preceding unsigned comment added by Giannaburns (talk • contribs) 23:49, 13 February 2017 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 4 external links on Kixeye. 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://archive.is/20130117003611/http://www.appdata.com/devs/32549-kixeye to http://www.appdata.com/devs/32549-kixeye
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20120625084126/http://www.gamersdailynews.com/articlenav-3302-page-1.html to http://www.gamersdailynews.com/articlenav-3302-page-1.html
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20121110131506/http://www.gamezebo.com/news/2012/10/17/kixeye-continues-synchronous-strategy-“live-battles”-war-commander to http://www.gamezebo.com/news/2012/10/17/kixeye-continues-synchronous-strategy-“live-battles”-war-commander
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20101108063333/http://www.appdata.com/apps/facebook/113574023556-desktop-defender to http://www.appdata.com/apps/facebook/113574023556-desktop-defender

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) 07:40, 12 January 2018 (UTC)

Controversy section is not impartial

I think this section was added only to harm the company (i.e., trolling). The description is very one-sided and suggests the company is sexist and racist. Regarding the two articles that are cited: - the first one reveals at the end that facts were misattributed. This was a minor article while the description on the page suggests a controversy with large impact. - the second article actually explains that racism is not tolerated in the company and incriminated employees are fired.

Hence I believe the current controversy section is unfair and should be removed.

Best, — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2600:1010:B067:14BE:E173:1626:F35E:51C8 (talk) 07:11, 22 March 2018 (UTC)

Would it be better if the section said that the journalist's article sparked the controversy rather than Kixeye? I do agree that it's not NPOV-compliant, but I'm not sure if removal is necessary. My rule of thumb is improved when possible, delete when necessary.--Macks2008 (talk) 22:02, 9 November 2023 (UTC)