Template:Did you know nominations/Saints Row: Gat out of Hell

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Hawkeye7 (talk) 19:38, 30 October 2014 (UTC)

Saints Row: Gat out of Hell[edit]

(

)

... that in Saints Row: Gat out of Hell, the player-character works to fill "Satan's Wrath"?

Created by MAinternational (talk). Nominated by Czar (talk) at 05:53, 8 September 2014 (UTC).

Preliminary review. First, things that are ok:

New – Created Aug 29, nominated Sept 8 = 9 days
Long enough – is 2,300 characters
Within policy – I don't see any editorializing. Sources are cited. There is no close paraphrasing or worse from the cited sources.
Hook – is about 100 characters
Hook – is neutral and does not focus on living people
QPQ – not self-nominated
Image - no image

Second, things that need fixing.

Within policy – 7/8 sources are cited to bare urls, I understand that this formatting should be changed.
Within policy – I don't know who is copying from what, but the sentence "The game's plot sees Johnny Gat and the Saints in search of the leader of the Saints who has been kidnapped by Satan." appears word for word in the imdb page for the game. There are similarly google results for "Five islands make up the city: Shantytown, Barrens, Downtown, Forge, and the Den, all surrounding Satan's tower on a middle island."
Hook – I think the hook might be interesting, but I'm not sure because the sentence doesn't make sense. (Probably because I don't know anything about video games.) What does it mean to "fill a level"? Is that the same as complete a level? I could see it if this meant "fulfill Satan's Wrath" or "arouse Satan's Wrath" but it seems unclear at the moment.

Third, Help?

Within policy – Three citations are to YouTube videos. Is the reviewer expected to watch all these videos to check for plagiarism? It would be a total of nearly 20 minutes.
Hook – the hook is cited to a 12 minute YouTube video. Can you provide the exact time to check it please?184.147.132.209 (talk) 17:56, 10 October 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I didn't write the article, so I don't have the answers for some of your questions. The IMDB page uses a portion of that quoted line (added in this edit) and nothing else from the article, so it looks to me like IMDB got its line from WP and not vice versa. (You can ask @MAinternational, the editor who added that line, if you insist.) The other results are apparently copying WP, but I think that's self-evident. The hook is a play on words and isn't supposed to tell you exactly what's happening. If you meant its usage in the article, I cleaned that up (level→meter). No, reviewers aren't expected to watch all the videos. I gave them a cursory review when I nominated this and I didn't see copyvio. The hook citation is at 2:46. czar ♔ 10:04, 11 October 2014 (UTC)

@MAinternational and Czar: - Sorry to have kept you waiting, and thank you for the response. I watched the video at 2:46 and it says "the meter has a 'piss off Satan' level, and the more you fill that up the more you progress in your story." So the hook does match this source.

I would like to suggest a tweaked hook, though:

* ALT1 ... that in Saints Row: Gat out of Hell, the player-character must increase "Satan's Wrath" to progress in the game?

I'm leaving the icon as a question mark for two reasons:

- the bare urls in the References section still need to be formatted properly

- I don't know whether a hook sourced to a YouTube video is allowed, since I have seen complaints about hook sources on the Talk page. @BlueMoonset and Crisco 1492: or other experts, can you weigh in on this point? If this is ok, fixing the bare urls should make this good to go. Thank you. 184.147.132.209 (talk) 23:07, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

It's from IGN's official feed. Should be fine. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 23:09, 22 October 2014 (UTC)

The video is from a reliable source (WP:VG/RS), so it should be fine. Also I don't think there's any DYK mandate to use non-bare URLs. They're going to be flushed out of the article eventually anyway, so I would rather not expand them right now. I prefer the main hook as I find it more hooky. Appreciate the review czar ♔ 03:55, 23 October 2014 (UTC)

Czar, there is indeed a DYK mandate regarding bare URLs. WP:DYKSG#D3 is quite clear: References in the article must not be bare URLs. If you want this to qualify, you'll have to do something about them. Maybe the new Reflinks tool can handle this task for you (I haven't yet used it myself): User:Zhaofeng Li/Reflinks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:27, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Over 100 DYKs and I've never seen that invoked. Anyway, thanks—done now. Highly recommend that new Reflinks, especially as the old tool is broken. I updated the guideline. czar ♔ 22:28, 26 October 2014 (UTC)

Ready. Could the promoter please choose between the two proposed hooks?

Thanks Czar for all the work. I'm sorry for my slow responses but hope there is still time to use this before Halloween, if this was your intention.184.147.131.89 (talk) 16:03, 30 October 2014 (UTC)