Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Halo 3 Original Soundtrack

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted 18:17, 6 May 2008.

Halo 3 Original Soundtrack

[edit]

My first album article, but I believe I've exhausted the reliable sources to use in making it as comprehensive as possible (plus it's longer than my last nom!) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:05, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've got to work on my evil laugh more with you. Scout's Honor that my next FAC won't have anything to do with a video game (actually, that's probably a lie, I want to promote Halo (series) soon... but perhaps the next one after some work?) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:11, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You know, Pikachu is a GA, while the games, Pokemon: Diamond and Pearl are FAs. On topic. That article seems good. Meets criteria, though I question why it is so short... --haha169 (talk) 01:13, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oopsies. I deleted the image then, although I think there is a similar one on Flickr which might have the right license, lemme check. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:20, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, i couldn't find one. I've removed the thumbox. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 01:25, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Schade, thanks ЭLСОВВОLД talk 01:27, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, copyright holder of the image here. While I personally don't see Wikipedia as "commercial use", I've read the image policy and I understand that Wikipedia does not want to risk using "non-commercial" CC images. For this reason, I've changed the license on the original photo to allow commercial use. Feel free to include this image back into the article. bluejuh (talk) 03:05, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Added. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 11:51, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 19:29, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Links all worked. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:40, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both Kotaku and Joystiq are well-known video game publications, have editors and staff writers (although often they serve as mirrors for content.)- listed as sources by WP:VG. UKMusic is being used for an interview. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 16:18, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
What exactly makes them RS though? To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:27, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Both of them are blogs, but well-notable ones with staff writers. Kotaku was mentioned by CNET[1] and other web-pubs such as Gizmodo[2] Joystiq has partnered with other publications including Engadget[3] and was recognized by Forbes as a "best of the web" site[4]. Haven't you been asking this of other VG FA's recently? Come on, mate, you got's to remember this stuff! ;) --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 19:24, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have been asking it, and no one's actually replied with reasons. Usually I get "The video game project says it's reliable". It's not that I'm not remembering, it's that no one is answering... Ealdgyth - Talk 19:32, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, sorry then :\ Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:42, 27 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, so what it boils down to is... Joystiq and Kotaku are blogs. Reasonably well known and respected blogs, but blogs. Are they at least written by the same people all the time or do the authors rotate around? If the same author does them all the time we might be able to work out something because the author is a respected video game journalist, etc. If the authors rotate though, it's going to be more difficult, and it would have to be justified on an author by author basis. I know some stuff about video games, but hey, I mainly play MMORPGS and strategy games, first person shooters are something I leave to the spouse. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:27, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I would say they are. Joystiq's Dan Dormer, for instance, writes for The Escapist,[5] while Kotaku's Mark Wilson has written for other publications such as Gizmodo.[6] --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:13, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Do both of them write those respective blogs all the time or do they have other authors? It's still looking kinda borderline to me. Sorry to be a pain, but... Ealdgyth - Talk 14:17, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The Escapist is a webmag, and he's written multiple items for them, but it's obviously not a full time gig. Both appear to be contributing authors to a variety of publications. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 14:26, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Obviously I'm not making sense here. (it's early in the morning and I'm still on my first cup of caffeine, plus the whole HRC FAC mess warped my brain) What I am trying to ask is for Joystiq. Is Dormer the only person who writes for Joystiq? Likewise, for Kotaku, is Wilson the only one who writes for Kotaku? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:45, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
No. There are multiple authors for each. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 14:50, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for being so paitent. Okay, so for these particular articles, they are probably reliable because the particular authors are reasonably well known in the gaming community and the facts don't need to meet BLP standards, correct? But we can't take this as a blanket "joystiq" or "kotaku" is reliable (yet). Does that work for you? Ealdgyth - Talk 14:53, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Sounds fine. I'll point this out to the folks at WP:VG. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 19:22, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments.

  • In the Professional reviews area; is scorenotes reputable?
  • "The score reached the Billboard 200" - billboard needs italics, 200 doesn't
  • "and broke the top twenty best-selling soundtracks and independent albums listings as well." - perhaps "and also broke..." instead of "as well"
  • The Background section uses "O'Donnell" LOTS and other stuff ("he..") very little...it's a bit hard to read...fix please
  • The music sample should probably use one of the templates we generally use for this sort of thing...see Diorama (album) for a random example of what to use
  • Reception section should go before track listing and personnel
  • "release in a Bungie podcast" - podcast has a capital P in the previous section...streamline
  • Can any of the commentary in the Reception section go in the infobox?

dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:11, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Moved the sections, removed the scorenotes link (I didn't add that), fixed the grammar and podcast capitalization. The Background section uses O'Donnell lots because in many cases I can't change it up to 'he' without being ambigious; I changed it in one or two places. As for the music sample box; the templates are ugly and waste space. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 20:07, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Support. Everything seems OK now. dihydrogen monoxide (H2O) 09:13, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Halo_3_Original_Soundtrack&oldid=1138462201"