The citation for the download count links to a EA (the developers) own press release. I am questioning the validity of this claim. 82.8.176.194 ( talk) 00:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I too question the accuracy of this claim and would ideally like to see an independent source. A later EA news article further claims "over 132 million paid downloads on mobile phones". -- 88.96.197.246 ( talk) 13:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Should this not be renamed Tetris_(Mobile) due to the near duplicate of the app that is the Android Version? JimJam707 ( talk) 12:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Rupert Loup ( talk) 19:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
The PS3/PSP game is very different, sharing nothing in common except being versions of Tetris published by EA. The PS version wasn't even mentioned in this article until years after its creation, prior to which the article was decidedly and specifically about the version for mobile platforms. In other words, the addition was an inappropriate expansion of the scope without basis. Sadly, such article hijackings are all too common. It should be split off. oknazevad ( talk) 15:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)
This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
The citation for the download count links to a EA (the developers) own press release. I am questioning the validity of this claim. 82.8.176.194 ( talk) 00:38, 21 January 2015 (UTC)
I too question the accuracy of this claim and would ideally like to see an independent source. A later EA news article further claims "over 132 million paid downloads on mobile phones". -- 88.96.197.246 ( talk) 13:12, 23 March 2021 (UTC)
Should this not be renamed Tetris_(Mobile) due to the near duplicate of the app that is the Android Version? JimJam707 ( talk) 12:13, 4 February 2012 (UTC)
- Rupert Loup ( talk) 19:22, 20 September 2020 (UTC)
The PS3/PSP game is very different, sharing nothing in common except being versions of Tetris published by EA. The PS version wasn't even mentioned in this article until years after its creation, prior to which the article was decidedly and specifically about the version for mobile platforms. In other words, the addition was an inappropriate expansion of the scope without basis. Sadly, such article hijackings are all too common. It should be split off. oknazevad ( talk) 15:19, 4 February 2023 (UTC)