Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Guardian Legend/archive1

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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 02:23, 3 February 2009 [1].

The Guardian Legend[edit]

Nominator(s): MuZemike

I think this article is comprehensive enough for inclusion as a Featured Article. Extensive work has been done to improve this article on a rather obscure video game since its rather poor state here. Several other editors have greatly assisted in copyediting and tone, and I think is very well–written and in a neutral point of view. Article has been through three peer reviews before its GA review, and it is currently assessed as A–Class by WikiProject Video games. All images displayed are of fair–use and are labeled accordingly. The article has been very stable within the past with virtually no edit warring happening within the past six months. Nearly all the information is referenced via inline citations. The article is small compared to other video game FAs, but I am hoping that the article's quality makes up for that. MuZemike 18:51, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments -

Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 16:39, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 19:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I have removed the wayofthegeek source and the corresponding statement in the lead. The reference to GameFAQs falls under WP:VG/S#Situational sources, which stipulate that such references only be used when no other reliable sources can be found to verify the release date. The only other two sources that I can find that can verify the North American release date is at GameSpot and from Nintendo itself. Otherwise, there is nothing in any other reliable sources regarding the Japanese and European release dates or publishers. MuZemike 20:10, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
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. Please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 20:14, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I was going to go into detail about GameFAQs, but the entry at IGN here verifies the release dates as well as GameSpot here, which no longer makes by previous comment moot, and also verifies the information adequately. MuZemike 20:33, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think they both updated their stuff very recently: I didn't see the hi-res box pictures on GameSpot 'til now, and IGN added game images on October 2008(!). I think it's great to see the big sites paying more attention to older games like this one. --an odd name 20:44, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
So the GameFAQs citations are gone? Ealdgyth - Talk 22:05, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, replaced by GameSpot. --an odd name 22:24, 14 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your non-free images need stronger rationales, or alternatively to be removed. In particular, File:Guardian Legend Japanese Box Cover.jpg is an alternate box cover which doesn't really receive any commentary or discussion in the text, so it seems nonessential to me. Also, the purposes of File:GuardianLegendLabyrinthExample.png and File:Guardian legend vtjog.png are described as "to identify and illustrate..." - identification is already provided by the cover art in the infobox, and illustration is not allowed per WP:NFCC #8. If the images are particularly important to explaining the gameplay (I think at least one of these probably is, and perhaps both) then that claim needs to be made more clearly, and the images referenced more directly within the prose of the article. (ESkog)(Talk) 16:59, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I have reworded the purposes in the non-free rationales of all three images in question (I'm not very good with this image stuff as you can see). Also, lower–resolution versions of the two boxarts have been uploaded to comply with WP:NFCC #3. MuZemike 17:57, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I tried to justify the screenshots further, by giving examples of elements unique to each gameplay mode. The Japanese cover is discussed in section "Development". --an odd name 23:21, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • That looks quite a bit better. You might consider moving the Japanese cover up into the Development section so it is nearer to the commentary. I can see how that might bork up your layout in other places though. (ESkog)(Talk) 23:30, 15 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I tried to address some lingering style issues (raised in the manual and Tony1's Advanced editing exercises). See if they actually improve things. --an odd name 01:05, 16 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Dabs; please check the disambiguation links identified in the toolbox. Also, pls review WP:PUNC (logical punctuation), WP:MOS#Captions for punctuation on sentence fragments, and the use of endashes on month ranges in citations. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:36, 17 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments
    • "self–destruct"..."non–linear" I corrected these two examples of where hyphens should be used, not en-dashes. Needs correction throughout the article though.
    • "The game follows a lone protagonist, The Guardian, in her quest to stop a large alien-infested world named Naju before it reaches the planet Earth. The Guardian must destroy that world by activating ten safety devices scattered throughout it and then engaging its self-destruct sequence. The player, who assumes the role of The Guardian, is able to explore the alien world in a non-linear fashion to find these safety devices and thus save Earth. Different weapons can be acquired during the course of the game to combat the hostile aliens who inhabit Naju." Lots of redundant ideas (in bold) here that can be combined/cleaned up for tighter prose and to free up space in the lead. The "it" in "throughout it" makes for awkward rhythm. "Its" meaning the planet's self-destruct sequence?
    • "it has since been renowned" Renowned is great as an adjective, but I don't think I've ever seen it used as a verb in modern times.
    • "multiple-genre game, which set a standard for other games with multiple gameplay elements such as Xexyz, ActRaiser, and Sigma Star Saga to follow." Taxing repetition...consider recasting. Problematic "which" here...it's modifying "the game", which is all the way at the beginning of the sentence. "to follow" is unneeded. BuddingJournalist 14:19, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • I think I fixed those issues; please check again. --an odd name 19:05, 19 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • Lead is crisper. You now have more room to summarize other aspects of the game, if warranted. BuddingJournalist 00:22, 20 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'll throw this question out here regarding the dabs to the other reviewers that SandyGeorgia originally asked and that I tried to clarify on her talk page here. I looked at TGL (disambiguation), and it seems logical to me that TGL should point to the dab page while removing the dab on the top of the article (and also that TGL (Technical Group Laboratory) should probably be moved to Technical Group Laboratory while we're at it). Comments/thoughts? MuZemike 01:49, 21 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I think that makes quite alot of sense. TGL (Technical Group Laboratory) is strangely named. Salavat (talk) 13:45, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All completed. Dablink removed as shown here. MuZemike 15:31, 22 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment - Please specify the individual EGM and Famitsu scores, and not just an average. - hahnchen 02:09, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • The EGM scores are 6/5/6/7, and I have added them to the article, but the individual Famitsu scores are not currently known. Rg998 (talk) 06:01, 28 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose
  • "the player takes control ofcontrols the "
  • The first paragraph of "Gameplay" seems to be the game's Plot. Perhaps create a new section for the Plot?
  • "weapons; these include the" – "weapons: the" – a colon
  • "upgrades for the guardian in" – Why is this lowercased?
  • "obtained after defeat of a boss" – "obtained after defeating a boss"

There are some prose issues like the above, which need to be resolved. Gary King (talk) 17:10, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Edited those five. The US game manual uses "the guardian" once on p. 3, but "The Guardian" in most other places (including a clear Beatles "The" on p. 10), so changed to the latter. --an odd name 01:07, 3 February 2009 (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/The_Guardian_Legend/archive1&oldid=1138473193"