Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Lumines: Puzzle Fusion/archive1

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 archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 8 August 2021 [1].

---

Lumines: Puzzle Fusion

Nominator(s): Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

This article is about the 2004 Puzzle video game developed by Q Entertainment. I'm willing to address any situation in order to get it to Featured status. I'm hoping that everything can be addressed.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:54, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Aoba47

Addressed comments

I love video games so I am very happy to see an article on one in the FAC space. I am not particularly experienced with video game articles (and there are much more qualified editors in that field), but I want to at least try my best to help you with this FAC. My comments are below: I would encourage you to add alternative text for the images. I am not sure if it is 100% required for a featured article, but I still think it would best to add regardless. For this part, After listening to one of Mondo Grosso's songs, he requested songs, of the lead, I would avoid repeating "songs" twice in the same sentence. I know this is rather nitpick-y, but I think it helps to keep the prose engaging. done In the past, I have been told to avoid sentence structures like the following, with critics praising it for integrating gameplay and music. I have seen notes in FAC reviews to avoid structuring sentences like "with X verb-ing" so I would encourage you to revise those out of the prose. I do not have any real issues with them, but it is a note that I have seen rather often. Done This part, and many stated it being addicting to play, from the lead sounds a little off to me. I think stated it was addicting to play reads a little better (at least to me). done, this one is connected to the prior fix. For this part, becoming the first entry of a series, of the lead, I think it is a perfect opportunity to link to the Lumines article since I do not think the actual series is currently linked in the lead. I would link it in "a series". I would also make sure the main series article is linked in the body of the article. And by "the body of the article", I mean the rest of the article after the prose. I am not sure what the real term for it is to be honest. done I would link port in the lead and the body of the article. done I have a question about this part, A sequence of 2×2 blocks varying between two colors. Do you think it would be beneficial to explicitly say what these two colors are in the prose? The colors change between levels. This is another nitpick-y comment so apologies in advance. When I first read this part, "Challenge, Time Attack, Puzzle, and Vs mode", I thought the capitalization of "Vs mode" looked off. I checked the source, which says "Versus mode" instead. I know that both mean the same thing, but I think it would be better to say "Versus mode" instead to just stay consistent with how it is represented in the citation (and how it is likely represented in the game itself). done I have a clarification question about this sentence: The maximum score in Challenge Mode is 999,999 points. What happens if a player reaches this limit and continues to score points? I am guessing that it just would not register, but I would be curious if you knew. I do not think it needs to be specified in the prose, but it was just something I wanted to ask you. Correct. it will simply stay at 999,999. For this part, The game's subtitle "Puzzle Fusion" reflects that the game's music is essential to the game, I would avoid repeating "game's" twice in the same sentence. I would add a citation at the end of this part, which was developed in a year by a staff of four people, to really clarify what is being used to support this. I am assuming that Citation 7 is the one used to support it, but I think it is best to make it absolutely clear to readers. done, I actually found a different source that says 6. so I'll use that. I would link Walkman. It might also be worth linking headphone jack (which should linked in both in the body of the article and the lead for consistency if you decide to do so). I would also link casual gamer, dance music, and techno in the "Development" section as I think these links would be helpful for readers. done I am not entirely sure what "Dream Machine" means. Since it follows the Walkman quote, I am not sure if it is another type of media player, or if he is just saying that it was his ideal console for the game. Some clarification here would be greatly appreciated. done, I opted to be more direct and replaced it with "ideal device" I was rather confused by this sentence: After choosing to develop games for the PSP, Mizuguchi was inspired to make a puzzle game with music. The previous parts led me to believe that Mizoguchi purposefully chose the PSP to develop the game because he already wanted to make a puzzle game with music and he chose the PSP because of the headphone jack. But this sentence makes it seem like the concept was developed after the console choice. Could you clarify this for me? I changed it to merge with the initial comment so it doesn't cause confusion. For this part, and the concept of Lumines was used instead, shouldn't Lumines be in italics or is it referring to something in the game itself? I don't know how I missed that. I am uncertain if the first sentence of these two are necessary: Mizuguchi recalls hearing the song "Shinin'" while looking at the stars; it inspired him to ask Yokota to use the theme of a show with music and visuals. Earlier in the paragraph, information about Mizoguchi hearing and being inspired by this song is already present. I think the "looking at the stars" part is an unnecessary detail, but I can see a rationale for including him talking to Yokota. I might just remove the first part. Mizuguchi's timeline of when he heard the song during game development can get confusing based on reliable sources and his own word of mouth. But I'll adjust that soon.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 22:12, 21 July 2021 (UTC) I hope that my comments are helpful so far. I have read up to the "Release" section. I do not see any major issues. I find the prose to be very engaging and it is really great that you were able to find so much information on the development as I honestly would not have expected that much from a puzzle game like this. Let me know if you have any questions. I will read through more of the article tomorrow and add more comments then. Apologies for doing this piecemeal. I just want to make sure I do a thorough review. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 19:21, 21 July 2021 (UTC) Thank you for the responses so far. Let me know when everything has been addressed. Also, please do not use the "done" template as its use is discouraged for FACs. Aoba47 (talk) 02:31, 22 July 2021 (UTC) @Aoba47: I believe I addressed the final concern. Is there anything I didn't address yet?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2021 (UTC) Thank you for addressing all my comments so far. I will complete my review by the end of today or tomorrow. Aoba47 (talk) 19:02, 22 July 2021 (UTC) In the first paragraph of the "Release" section, there are three sentences in a row with "released". I would encourage you to change up one of these instances to avoid repetition. I would revise this part, It's due to these updates, to avoid having a contraction as they are not allowed in a Wikipedia article. done There are several instances of "released" in the "Soundtracks" section and I would add some variation. done This sentence, Multiple reviewers praised it for its combination of music and visuals and was described the game as addicting., has an instance of citation overkill as it currently uses five citations. I would either bundle the citations or find a way to avoid having so many citations. i'll find a way to break it down. Tetris and tile-matching video game are both linked twice in the article when they should only be linked on the first instance. I would avoid any duplicate links in the article. done I am a little confused on how citations are attributed in the prose for the "Reception" section. There are instances where the author is named directly in the prose, but other instances where an author is not named in the prose. I would be consistent with either way. done The "Reception" section includes negative reviews for the game, but these are not discussed in the lead. I would encourage you to briefly bring up the negative critiques there. done I do not think the "See also" section is necessary. Mondo Grosso is already mentioned in the prose, and I am not entirely sure how Eri Nobuchika relates to this game so I would instead clarify that in the prose. done. I do not see Eri Nobuchika referenced in the article at all now? Aoba47 (talk) 04:21, 24 July 2021 (UTC) Eri NObuchika is an artist, but she only performed some of MOndo Grosso's songs that were included in the article. I couldn't find a way to add her in seamlessly. If you think that is important to add, I can look into it.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 06:46, 25 July 2021 (UTC) While I do not think it is required for a featured article, I think it is always nice to have the citations in numeric order. I decided to move the refs down on the reflist to make It easier to edit. I have two questions about this part, an exploit was discovered that allowed for custom firmware to be installed. Was this "exploit" ever corrected? Also, wouldn't this be considered a bug more so than an "exploit"? Based on the information. it doesn't sound like a bug, but a hack. But i added a second ref that clarifies. Thank you for the explanation. Was this ever addressed though? Did they (if possible) find a way to stop this hack as it does seem pretty major? Aoba47 (talk) 01:13, 24 July 2021 (UTC) It looks like it was resolved within the month.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 06:46, 25 July 2021 (UTC) This should be the rest of my review. I will re-read through the article once all my above comments are addressed to make sure I did not miss anything. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 20:20, 22 July 2021 (UTC) I think the reception section is one of my weakest points. But if you see anything that could improve it, let me know.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 18:49, 23 July 2021 (UTC) For the citations, I would add translations for the titles in foreign languages. I am not sure if it is required or not, but I think it would be helpful. done Avoid having words in all caps in any of the the citations' titles unless it is an acronym. For instance, I would type out "Best Handheld Game" for citation 64. done Apologies for adding to the review. I just wanted to bring up two points about the citations. Other than that, this is my full review and once everything has been addressed above, I will be more than happy to support based on the prose. Aoba47 (talk) 04:20, 24 July 2021 (UTC) @Aoba47: I believe I addressed everything to the best of my ability. let me know if it can be better or missed something..Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 07:54, 25 July 2021 (UTC) I am uncertain about the prose in the "Reception" section. It is rather repetitive in certain areas, and I think would benefit from further revision. I would encourage you to look at this essay (Wikipedia:Reception) if you are not already aware of it. I've reviewed the essay before and thought I did a good job implementing the advice given last time. I'll revise it once again. One of the hardest aspects about Lumines is that the majority of the reviews can be extremely straightforward. The majority of the reviews are treating the combination of the music and gameplay as a single feature rather than separate aspects. There's no story mode, or lore aspect. I managed to find three common factors in the reviews (for the PSP): Common comparison to Tetris and tile-matching video games, using words like "addicting" or "Zen" to describe the game, and praise for the combination of Audio and visuals. If you have additional specific advice on Reception, that would be appreciated. Reception sections are very hard to write. Here are some specific things to watch out for. For instance, there are two sentences in a row that have When reviewing the PS2 version and When reviewing the mobile version, so it is a little repetitive there. I would add more sentence variety as a majority of the sentences appear to be written like "X publications said Y opinion". The paragraphs themselves are well-structured around a specific theme, but I would look at the sentence structures in particular. Aoba47 (talk) 01:09, 24 July 2021 (UTC) @Aoba47: can you give an example of alternatives to "X said Y"?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 20:31, 25 July 2021 (UTC) I will use the second paragraph of the "Reception" section as an example of this "A said B" repetition. Aside from the topic sentence, all the sentences start with the publication name and then go into their opinion about the game. This gets rather repetitive quite quickly. I know that it cannot be avoid completely, but I think vary the sentence structure would make this paragraph more engaging rather than reading like a list of critics and their opinions. For another instance, this repetition of sentence structure is present in the fourth paragraph, and is particularly noticeable when two sentences in a row start with IGN. I am not suggesting you change everything, but I think it would be beneficial to go through each paragraph in this section to see if you could add some variety to the sentence structures. Aoba47 (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC) Also, you use "didn't" three times in the "Reception" section. The article should not have any contractions unless they are part of a quote, and none of these three "didn't" instances are part of a quote. I would look throughout the article and remove any other instance of contractions (that are not part of quote). Aoba47 (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC) I also have a rather nitpick-y remark, but it is something I noticed while re-reading this section. At the end of the third paragraph, you use "criticized" in two sentences in a row, and I would change out one of these instances to avoid unnecessarily repetition. Aoba47 (talk) 22:22, 25 July 2021 (UTC) I hope the current changes suffices. I varied the sentence structure a bit more. If you need me to make anymore adjustments, please feel free to add to your review. I do more better when I have an idea of how to fix it. So if you have any potential suggestions, they always help me.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 01:23, 26 July 2021 (UTC) Below are some specific examples that could use further improvement. I appreciate that you put in more sentence variation, but unfortunately, I do not think this section reads particularly well. Here are some examples: This part, stated that if they were removed, it wouldn't be half the game it currently is, still contains a contraction, which should be removed. The wording overall is rather awkward and would benefit from revision. In this part, thought the audio was more superior, "more superior" is not correct. It should just be "superior". It is also not clear what Eurogamer is saying the audio is superior to. Are they saying the audio is superior to the gameplay? More superior to what? Clarification here would be helpful. For the first paragraph, I would move the IGN review to the bottom so it goes from the positive reviews and ends with a mixed one. It seems a little off to transition from Eurogamer's positive review to IGN's mixed review and then flip back into the positive reviews. For this part, GamePro opined it reaches the rank of Tetris and Bejeweled., "opined" does not seem like the best word choice here. I would replace it with something else. I appreciate how the second paragraph ends with the negative reviews (i.e. GamePro and Pocket Gamer), but I would use some sort of transition to make it read better. This part, they helped place the game among the top ranks of mobile games, is rather repetitive and I would revise the first instance of "game" to avoid this. This sentence, Despite being well-received, a common criticism from reviewers was the absence of an online multiplayer feature., is not grammatically correct. The beginning phrase "Despite being well-received" is being used to describe the next part, which in this instance is "a common criticism", and that does not make sense. This part could use further revision. Unfortunately, I think the prose in the "Reception" section falls short of FA quality, and it would benefit from a comprehensive copy-edit. The rest of the article is very well-written, but after re-reading this section in particular, I still have issues with the prose. I will not oppose this FAC, but I will stop my review here and hopefully other editors will discuss this further. This may just come down to my inexperience with video game articles. Apologies for ending my review here. Best of luck with this FAC. Aoba47 (talk) 02:38, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I'll address as much as I can and go from what you provided. It's a shame you decided to end your review with the belief of it falling short of FA quality even after I address your concerns. I also want to note that this isn't necessarily a video game issue. Lumines: Puzzle Fusion (along with its sequels) is one of the hardest articles I have ever worked on. How much information can be found on a tile-matching video game? It's almost like getting Tetris into a featured article. It's a challenge for sure, but one I will try to overcome. Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 03:36, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aoba47: I made some bigger changes to help break up the Reception. After constant reading, I realized 5 paragraphs in a single section is too much. I also implementing ShooterWalker's advice. Do you believe it is in a more acceptable condition? Or do you think there are any more adjustments that can be made?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 16:52, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• The "Reception" section does look better, but I still do not think the prose is on the level expected for a featured article. Below are some further issues I can see:

• For this part, Eurogamer thought the audio was superior, it is not clear what Eurogamer is comparing the audio to. They are saying it is superior to something, but what is that something.
• These two parts, did not consider the missing tracks a complete loss and did not find the game fun at all, seems too informal for a Wikipedia article and I would revise them.
• This part, comparing the rumble feature to Rez's trance vibrator, does not really make sense to me. It assumes that the reader already knows about Rez, to the point of knowing what a "trance vibrator" is, and I have not played or heard of the game before so this part needs further context for unfamiliar readers like myself.

• I appreciate your work on the article and your dedication to it, but I would prefer to wait to hear from more reviewers for now. Aoba47 (talk) 17:58, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

@Aoba47:I guess it's hard to accept that it's not at FA quality if you can't define what is missing or flawed. I made the adjustments you requested. I even clarified some statements. But at this point I hope you can define FA quality is as I'm someone who is doing their first FAC, and it's discouraging. If there's an article you could even link that you find meets FA quality Reception even if its not a video game, that can help me a lot.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:37, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

Image review

• Don't use fixed px size
• Check that all images include alt text
• File:Lumines.jpg has an incomplete description - for example there is no information on source
• File:Lumines-roundabout-screenshot.png needs a much stronger FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:45, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Nikkimaria: I believe I addressed your concerns. Does it suffice with Fair-use?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 18:04, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• Cover image needs a more expansive purpose of use. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:50, 22 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Nikkimaria: It was replaced with png version. But i believe the purpose suffices now. what do you think?

• That's better. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:17, 24 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Nikkimaria: I replaced the gameplay with a 15second gif that I created myself with the same fair-use information as before. I was curious if this was acceptable. If not, I can always remove it.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 06:22, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

• It would need a stronger FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 11:57, 3 August 2021 (UTC)

@Nikkimaria: i did my best to update FUR on the latest image. If you believe it can't meet FUR, let me know.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 16:27, 4 August 2021 (UTC)

Support for prose, from Shooterwalker

Going to give this a review, and see how far I get. Stay tuned. Shooterwalker (talk) 01:56, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Lead

• "The game was praised for integrating gameplay and music, noted for being addicting to play, and was nominated and awarded "Best Handheld Game of 2005" by multiple outlets." -> "The game was praised for integrating gameplay and music, and for its addictive gameplay. It also received several nominations and awards for "Best Handheld Game of 2005" by multiple outlets."
• "The ports were not given the same amount of praise as the original; the mobile phone version was commended for introducing new features but was criticized for its poor sound quality, while the PS2 version for lacking content from the original, or lack of new content to earn the Plus in its title." -> "The ports received less praise than the original: the mobile phone version was commended for its new features but was criticized for its poor sound quality, and the PS2 version was criticized for removing content from the original."
• This is generally well written and off to a good start.

Gameplay

• "A square is created when a group of 2×2 blocks of the same color is created on the playing field" -> you use the word "created" twice in the same sentence
• the "time line" might be confused with timeline, and might need be defined in the summary of the gameplay

Development

• "which was developed in a year by a staff of six people" -> this fragment doesn't flow from the last part of the sentence. Might be easiest just to make it into two separate sentences
• "Originally, Mizuguchi wanted to make a Tetris game with music but issues including licensing meant it was not possible at the time and the concept of Lumines was used instead" -> "Originally, Mizuguchi wanted to make a music-heavy Tetris game, but licensing issues meant this was not possible, leading him to create a new concept for Lumines."
• "He discovered "Shinin'" by Shinichi Osawa (Mondo Grosso) during a summer camping trip in Okinawa, inspiring him to request Yokota to implement themes of a show with music and visuals and requested Osawa to include four tracks that would be sequenced with the theme of a party beginning at sunset and ending at sunrise." -> this sentence is quite long and could probably be split into two shorter, clearer sentences

Release

• "original version and introduces Arcade mode" -> "original version. It also introduces Arcade mode"
• "The WildTangent and Steam versions include a mission mode and skin edit mode that was introduced in Lumines Live! and the Steam version has 21 unlockable skins and a portion of Time Attack, Puzzles, and Missions" -> you should split this sentence too

Soundtracks

• This section is well written, but appears to be entirely sourced to primary sources and WP:VENDORs. Are there any secondary sources that have covered the release of the soundtrack?

Reception

• "if they were removed" -> not clear what they are suggesting would be removed. maybe just rephrase this whole sentence.
• "The game and its ports were recurrently compared to other tile-matching video games by reviewers with Tetris being the most common" -> "Reviewers frequently compared the game to other tile-matching video games, particularly Tetris."
• " GamePro opined it" -> "GamePro opined that it"
• "The port, Lumines Mobile for cell phones was also well-received by critics" -> "The phone port Lumines Mobile was also well-received by critics"
• "but most noted the overall quality outweighed it" -> "but most felt this was outweighed by the game's quality overall."
• "complained the way" -> "criticized the way"
• "Pocket Gamer, in particular, criticized both the visuals and sound, describing the on-screen visuals impair the background artwork and deduced the sound doesn't do the Lumines concept justice" -> "Pocket Gamer, in particular, criticized that the on-screen visuals impair the background artwork and concluded that the sound doesn't do the Lumines concept justice"
• "The lack of Lumines II features was not considered a flaw according to Eurogamer due to it intending to be a port of the original, and not a sequel." -> "Eurogamer did not criticize its lack of features from Lumines II, as it was a port of the first game."
• "but not for those who already played previous titles" -> this is sort of implied from the rest of the sentence and can be removed to keep things concise
• "Hardcore Gamer praised the music remaining to be exquisite, with multiple being among their favorites" -> this sentence is unclear. Multiple what? Favorite among what?
• "GameSpot noted the switch version of the game isn't the best-looking game in the series but looks better than the prior handheld releases and is compensated with cleaner animation with less slowdown" -> "GameSpot noted that the Nintendo Switch version of the game looks better than prior handheld releases due to its cleaner animation, but is still not the best looking game in the series."
• "Nintendo Switch version was also praised by Eurogamer, describing it as euphoric, immersive, and compared the rumble feature to Rez's trance vibrator" -> "The Switch version was also praised by Eurogamer as "euphoric", comparing the rumble feature to Rez's trance vibrator."
• "Not every song was considered a hit according to Nintendo Life" -> "Nintendo Life felt that the songs varied in quality"
• I am wary of overuse of the word "addictive", which isn't necessarily a good thing. But I recognize that this was a buzz term 15-20 years ago, and if that's what the sources say, that's what they say.
• "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion won several awards, including the 2005 Spike TV Video Game Awards for Best Handheld Game, GameSpot's 2005 PSP Game Of The Year, Electronic Gaming Monthly's 2005 Handheld Game Of The Year, Game Informer's "Top 50 Games of 2005" list" -> "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion won several awards, including the 2005 Spike TV Video Game Award for Best Handheld Game, GameSpot's 2005 PSP Game Of The Year, and Electronic Gaming Monthly's 2005 Handheld Game Of The Year. The game also appeared on Game Informer's "Top 50 Games of 2005" list."
• "half a million" -> "half a million sales"
• "including emulators" -> can remove this to improve flow

Sequels and Follow-Ups

• "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion was followed by several sequels, becoming the first game in the Lumines series" -> "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion became the first game in a series, as it was followed by several sequels."
• "the same new modes" -> same and new seems like a contradiction, and there's probably a clearer way to say this
• "Lumines II specifically also offers pre-existing videos from famous music artists such as Black Eyed Peas, Gwen Stefani, and Hoobastank and a Sequencer mode" -> "Lumines II specifically offers a Sequencer mode, and also offers pre-existing videos from famous music artists such as Black Eyed Peas, Gwen Stefani, and Hoobastank."
• Even though two titles were developed at the same time, you don't need to pack their release into the same sentence, especially since they were separate releases. It gives you an chance to write a clearer summary of each game, instead of mixing two different games into the same sentence
• "VS" -> did you mean "versus"?

The article is in good shape and could be on its way to FA with a little more work. Let me know if you have any questions, and we can just keep working through it. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:55, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shooterwalker: I was able to apply 90% of what you requested. The other aspects in the reception I was wary of because of Aoba47's review. Although coming to the conclusion that it isn't FA quality. The advice was still given to avoid "X said Y" statements. I'm not sure what made it fundamentally flawed to the point that it can't be worked on. So I made an effort to made sure to mix up the sentence structure to instead "REviewer X said Statement Y" I would use "Statement Y was also made by reviewer X". If it repeats. Since Aoba47 finished their review, do you believe there's any advice I should follow that still applies?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 09:47, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I also want to add that the reception paragraph for "Lumines Plus" is the hardest for me to revise. Not sure how to organize it concisely and cohesively. So If you have any advice on that specific paragraph. I would greatly appreciate it. I know it doesn't look amazing right now and i'm willing to revise it.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 10:31, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

Admittedly the prose could still use some work, but I'm willing to give it all one more pass to help you get it there. There are many sections of the article that are WP:FA quality, and with patience, the other sections can match it.

Second pass

• "He described the PSP as an "interactive Walkman" and considered it the ideal device due to it being one of the few handheld video game consoles with a headphone jack at the time, allowing it to be played with high-quality sound anywhere." -> "He described the PSP as an "interactive Walkman" and considered it the ideal device for his game, due to it being one of the few handheld video game consoles with a headphone jack and high-quality sound."
• "Mizuguchi wanted to develop a challenging, audio-visual puzzle game that was less daunting to players than his previous titles Rez and Space Channel 5 to attract casual players." -> "To attract casual players, Mizuguchi wanted to develop an audio-visual puzzle game that was less daunting to players than his previous titles, Rez and Space Channel 5."
• "Originally, Mizuguchi wanted to make a music-heavy Tetris game, but licensing issues made it not possible at the time, leading him to create a new concept for Lumines." -> Originally, Mizuguchi wanted to make a music-heavy Tetris game, but challenges with the license led him to instead create a new concept."
• "Yokota experimentally constructed a rhythm beat-by-beat in time with the movement of the game's timeline bar." -> "Yokota experimented with musical rhythms that matched the speed of the game's timeline bar."
• "Yokota initially thought the game would be limited to techno and dance music, and had doubts about the project because of the lack of musical variation" -> "Yokota initially thought the game would be limited to techno and dance music, and worried that the project lacked musical variety."
• "Nakamura demonstrated solutions to the problem because he was capable of constructing a rich variety of songs built on a deep understanding of the game design" -> "Nakamura was able to overcome this problem by constructing a rich variety of songs, based on a deep understanding of the game design."
• "Both Nakamura and Yokota swapped ideas to make the necessary adjustments to the development." -> I'm not sure this sentence says anything that isn't obvious. I suppose what makes this interesting is that the composer had a real impact on the game's development? I'd try to rephrase.
• "In March 2018, Enhance Games, the studio founded by Lumines: Puzzle Fusion producer Mizuguchi, announced Lumines Remastered[b] for Microsoft Windows, Nintendo Switch, PlayStation 4 (PS4), and Xbox One for release in June 2018." -> This might be easier to read as two sentences. (e.g.: one sentence about the release, another about the studio's foundation and history)
• "that was originally downsampled " -> "that were previously downsampled"
• "the visual effects were remade and certain blocks were redesigned" -> "certain blocks and visual effects were redesigned"
• "Mizuguchi felt it was appropriate to test Lumines with this haptic gameplay feature" -> "Mizuguchi felt that the haptic gameplay feature would add something new to Lumines."
• "if they were removed, it would not be half the game it currently is" -> the way this is phrased makes it sound odd. If you removed the music and visuals, I'm not sure it would be a game at all.
• "Eurogamer thought the audio was superior, calling it "the real star of the show" due to additional beats implemented in the gameplay" -> "Eurogamer thought the audio was superior, explaining how the player's actions build the musical elements to a crescendo, making it "the real star of the show"."
• " GameSpot praised..." -> "GameSpot also praised..." or "Similarly, GameSpot praised"
• The four stage analysis of IGN is a little wordy and confusing, and doesn't really summarize their opinion of the game. I would look somewhere else to find their main point.
• "GamePro proclaimed it reaches the rank of Tetris and Bejeweled." -> "GamePro proclaimed that it reaches the rank of Tetris and Bejeweled."
• The first paragraph of the later releases section feels out of place, and the second paragraph would be a better way to start it. In fact, I'm not sure you need to bring up Tetris again at all.
• "The phone port Lumines Mobile was also well-received by critics Many reviewers complimented the new features introduced." -> The phone port Lumines Mobile was also well-received by critics, who noted the game's new features."
• PS2 should maybe be the full Playstation 2
• "However, praised the addition..." -> "However, they praised the addition..."
• "The absence of new features was disappointing to IGN and believed the "Plus" moniker did not describe the game's content." -> "The absence of new features was disappointing to IGN, who argued the "Plus" moniker was misleading."
• "The lack of Lumines II features was not considered a flaw according to Eurogamer due to it intending to be a port and not a sequel. Instead, they were more critical of the missing songs from the original, and the inclusion of new tracks making the game too long to play." -> "Eurogamer was more critical of the missing songs from the original, and felt that the new track selections made the game too long to play."
• "GamePro did not find the game fun at all, claiming the music would break concentration on the gameplay." -> "GamePro did not find the game fun at all, claiming that the music distracted from the gameplay."
• "Hardcore Gamer praised the music remaining to be exquisite, with multiple songs being among their favorites." -> on further reading, I don't think this is the best summary of what they said, and could be rephrased with something more clear and impactful
• "totaling over half a million" -> "totaling over half a million sales"
• "The games were followed up with Lumines Supernova," -> "The games were followed by Lumines Supernova,"
• "Another sequel titled Lumines: Touch Fusion was made for iOS devices; this game has all of the features of the original except for the Versus modes, and players use touch controls to move and rotate blocks." -> "An iOS game called Lumines: Touch Fusion was made for touch controls, with all of the features of the original except for the Versus modes."
• "The following sequel titled Lumines: Electronic Symphony" -> "A follow-up titled Lumines: Electronic Symphony was"

I know that's a lot, so just do your best. The article is coming along. Shooterwalker (talk) 13:08, 26 July 2021 (UTC)

I believe I address almost everything. The one I didn't do yet was the PS2 version due to it already being mentioned in full with (PS2) next to it within the "Release" section of the article. But, if you still believe it is detrimental to the FAC, I won't fight you on it and will revise it.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 06:50, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

Wrap-up

This looks good. Giving it one more quick look. I see a few sentences that read awkwardly:

• "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion was the first game developed by Q Entertainment, a company founded by designer Tetsuya Mizuguchi following his departure from Sega which was developed in a year by a staff of six people" (the last part about its development time feels tacked on, and may as well be rewritten as its own sentence.)
• "The subtitle "Puzzle Fusion" was meant to reflect the music aspect as much as the game itself" (I realize you're quoting the article, but the article is unclear about what "the game itself" means. You're better off using this to describe the variety of music styles, and the way the music is reassembled through gameplay.)
• "Hardcore Gamer praised the music for being able to be recognizable and enjoyable, and noted multiple songs being among their favorites" -> "Hardcore Gamer praised the music as enjoyable, with multiple songs among their favorites"

I appreciate your patience and hard work. There is always room to improve the prose even further, but I think those last few issues will get this to featured quality, by my evaluation. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:34, 27 July 2021 (UTC)

@Shooterwalker: I applied the changes. Let me know if any additional changes need to be made.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 01:53, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

Thanks for putting in all that work. The article is significantly better on the whole. I can support based on the prose. If you have time, Accolade (company) is also well into its second try for its featured article review, and could use another set of eyes. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:54, 28 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Shooterwalker: Apologies for interrupting this review, but I just wanted to let you know that a featured article candidate and a featured article review are two very different things and are not used interchangeably. Aoba47 (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• Comment - Consider adding the English pronunciation to the lead. - hahnchen 09:46, 30 July 2021 (UTC)

• @Hahnchen: I added the name pronunciation. What do you think?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 00:08, 31 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments by TarkusAB

The writing quality is just not there. In the lead alone, I found these issues:

• As players progress through the game, it transitions between skins, affecting the colors and music. - What transitions between skins? I'm not sure what this means
• debut work - not really a "debut" because he already was known for his work at Sega. Not the right word to use. This sentence makes it sound like he did grunt work at Sega, which is not true.
• Mizuguchi originally wanted to create a Tetris game with music but due to licensing issues, he was unable to and instead created Lumines. Originally, Mizuguchi wanted to make a music-heavy Tetris game, but licensing issues meant this was not possible, leading him to create a new concept for Lumines. - You repeated the (almost) same sentence twice.
• Mizuguchi was inspired by the PSP, one of the few handhelds on the market that had a headphone jack. - Inspired in what sense? Inspired to develop for it? Did he already pick out the system, and the headphone jack inspired the game design?
• After listening to one of Mondo Grosso's songs, Mizuguchi requested multiple of them to be included in the game and sequenced into a theme of a night-long party. - When I read this, I was lead to believe that Mondo Grosso's music was a significant part of the game. But, he only contributed 4 tracks, he is only mentioned once in the article, and he is not listed as the composer. Not sure why this is in the lead.
• Multiple ports were released including for - the phrasing released including for sounds unnatural, I don't think "including" is needed
• The game was praised for integrating gameplay and music, and for its addictive gameplay. Repitition of the word 'gameplay'
• The ports received less praise than the original: the mobile phone... I don't think that's a correct use of a colon
• The remastered version was received positively The phrasing 'received positively' feels unnatural
• The word 'criticized' is used three times in the third paragraph
• becoming the first entry of a series. It sounds ominous to not give the name of the series, even though it's the same name as the game.

There are many other issues with the writing across the article. Just from skimming around:

• unnatural phrasing or sentence patterns: Lumines: Puzzle Fusion became the first game in a series, as it was followed by several sequels. - So since it was followed by several sequels, only then, it became the first game in the series?
• Grammar issues: It was released digitally on Xbox 360 via Xbox Live and began distribution - Games don't "begin distribution", publishers or distributors do. Games are the ones being distributed. A physical double LP version was made available for also for - for also for
• lack of professional vocabulary: Due to the constraints of the PSP's sound system What is meant by "constraints" and "sound system"? Are you talking about the speakers? Are you talking about the system's drivers to process sounds through a game engine? What is constraining about it? Lack of tracks? You can definitely play MP3s on the PSP so there is no shortage of what is possible in terms of musical variety. Takayuki Nakamura composed music and Katsumi Yokota worked on music and graphics. - this reads pretty weak and is not engaging, especially since two of them worked on music and that was the best wording you could muster up here. "worked on" is vague. I don't know the specifics of what they contributed, but something like this would be better, for example: "Takayuki Nakamura composed the music with assistance from amateur musician Katsumi Yokota." This properly establishes who was in charge and Yokota's naivety. Since you don't talk about the graphics until later, mention that Yokota did the graphics at that point, perhaps. Thesauruses are your friend.
• lack of clarity: The music was developed with the ability to be changed by the gameplay. This is just such a...empty sentence that doesn't tell me anything. Well first, music is not developed, it is written/composed. That is, unless you are talking about the programming of how the music tracks are handled? Hmmmm, not sure what you are trying to say. How does the music music change exactly? In gameplay, you just mentioned tempo changes, but in the next sentence you seem to imply that tracks can come in and out? I believe what you are trying to say around here is something like this --> "He carefully considered his composition methods, as dynamic gameplay changes would trigger tempo shifts or muting of individual audio channels."
• words repeated unnecessarily (3x sentences starting with Yokata back-to-back)
• Mixed issues Yokota experimented with musical rhythms that matched the speed of the game's timeline bar. We've already established that it's music and Yokota we are talking about. Is "timeline" one word or two? You are not consistent across the article. "Synchronized" is better word than "matched". --> "He experimented with rhythms that synchronized with the time line bar's movement across the screen."
• Punctuation Puzzle mode challenges players to create pictures using blocks In Versus mode

Looking at the FA criteria the article seems to meet everything but 1.a. (well-written: its prose is engaging and of a professional standard). It's not engaging, and doesn't feel professional. Looking at how many fixes were already implemented above, and seeing as I'm still finding silly mistakes, I'm a little concerned. Did this get a peer review before nominated for FA? Did it get a copy edit from the GOCE? I'm not seeing on the talk page that it got either. The problems I identified above are just examples; I am not asking for these fixes to be implemented now because I think there is much more work needed. I think this is pretty far off from FA. TarkusAB^talk/contrib 12:41, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

@TarkusAB:. it did go through the guild of copy editors once when going through GA review, but I ended up having to edit over it as the previous one didn't do a good job. But I'll see what i can do to improve it even if it doesn't meet FA. Thank you for your review.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 13:22, 6 August 2021 (UTC)

Oppose from Gog the Mild

Sorry Blue Pumpkin Pie, I appreciate the huge amount of work you have put into this, but the prose is a long way from 1a. I think that this is best withdrawn to work on this aspect - there is, IMO, more needed in this area than should be done during a FAC. @FAC coordinators: in the view of my comments and those of other reviewers you may wish to consider archiving this anyway to be brought up to standard off-FAC with a view to a re-nomination. Gog the Mild (talk) 13:44, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

@Gog the Mild: very well. I won't feel too upset about it not meeting FA, especially since the only problem that is being mentioned is 1a. If you could just tell me some tips or advice that you think is a common mistake during the writing process? Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:18, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

If only it were that simple. I am afraid that it has quite a few errors of quite a few different types. I doubt that you are going to fix it on your own. If you relist it at GoCE/R, mentioning that the prose seems to be the only thing preventing a consensus to promote, then Reidgreg or Jonesey95 may copy edit it themselves, or ensure that it is steered towards an editor who understands what is required for FAC. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:48, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Well I'm always willing to learn and improve.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:25, 7 August 2021 (UTC)

Okay, I think I'll treat this as a withdrawal and close it so you can work on it away from the pressures of the FAC process, including GOCE and perhaps Peer Review after that, and then you could look at another nomination here. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:51, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

I have finished copy-editing the article. I am not familiar with FAC, but if prose was preventing this article from reaching FA status, it should be fine now. – Jonesey95 (talk) 14:54, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

• Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 14:52, 8 August 2021 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.