Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/List of Metroid media

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

List of Metroid media[edit]

Done some work with this list, want to know what needs improvement for a possible FL candidacy. Thanks. igordebraga 02:02, 26 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Swap Metroid Prime Pinball and Metriod Prime Hunters to make the Prime section chronologically in order. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:41, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It's sorted by release date. Gary King (talk) 00:45, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Also, should't you say that Metrion Prime 3 is the first game in the series on the Wii on its notes section? GamerPro64 (talk) 01:04, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Good idea, done. Also, after working on this article recently, I'd like to point out that it is still in need of major work. A peer review at this stage is very premature in my opinion. Gary King (talk) 01:09, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
How can I know what else is needed in this article? And also, compare it to other featured lists, to see if it as lackingas you say. igordebraga 02:18, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The introduction definitely needs to be expanded. And all of the notes need references. Gary King (talk) 02:20, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Shouldn't the unreported Metroid movie be added to this list? GamerPro64 (talk) 04:16, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Haha, I think unreported information should be left out. -- Noj r (talk) 05:59, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Where's Metroid Dread? GamerPro64 (talk) 22:47, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like it's still rumored. There is no set release date, recent announcements, etc. Gary King (talk) 00:29, 2 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Review by Noj_R

Lead

  • "Metroid is a video game series published by Nintendo and originally created by the R&D1 development team." - the R&D1 dev team is a complete mystery to readers unfamiliar with Metroid -> "originally created by Nintendo's R&D1 development team."
  • "on August 6, 1986, which was later released" - I think this a bit better -> "on August 6, 1986, and was later released"
  • "consists of ten video games, comics and manga adaptations, and video game soundtracks released on audio CDs." - You mean there are ten video games, ten comic and manga adaptations, and ten soundtracks?
  • "including the eponymous Metroids." - I've played almost all the Metroid games, the pirates pursue the metroids almost exclusively -> "particularly the eponymous Metroids."
  • "The series' gameplay contains elements from shooter, platforming, and adventure games, and the series is notable for its non-linear" - "Series" and then "series" again -> "The series' gameplay contains elements from shooter, platforming, and adventure games, and is notable for its non-linear"
  • But there is also two "ands" then, "and adventure games, and" - you might want to fix that.

List

  • "by connecting Metroid Fusion to Metroid Prime," - How do you connect two game together?
  • Shouldn't the games be listed by release date? The metroid prime games are listed separate from the rest.
  • "The PAL, Japanese and Player's Choice versions are different" - Different how?
  • "Set between Metroid Prime and Echoes" - I cant decide if this is trivial or not.
  • "First game in the series to have downloadable content." - Is there really downloadable content? I know the source says so, but I have the game and do not recall anything extra being available via a download. Consider this, downloadable content and a Wii channel are different. If downloadable content refers to the Wii Channel, I believe it is misleading and should be reworded or removed.
  • "Two-CD set, one with the soundtrack of each game." - poor language, try "Two-CD set; each disc contains soundtrack" or something similar.
  • "Consisted of three short stories across that issue, themed after but not directly adapting the game" - I believe this is better, "Consists of three short stories across one issue, themed after, but not directly adapting the game" or something similar.
  • What is up with references 35 and 36? No publishing or author information.

Conclusion:

Looking pretty good. I hope my comments were helpful. I look forward to reading this article in the future. Cheers, -- Noj r (talk) 05:20, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
All done Gary King (talk) 05:31, 4 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Dabomb87 (talk · contribs)

All done Gary King (talk) 01:07, 6 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]