Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Metroid Prime
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 00:58, 26 February 2008.
[edit] Metroid Prime
- previous FAC (04:16, 23 October 2007)
- previous FAC (14:00, 15 December 2007)
- Check external links
- User:igordebraga Did tremendous work on this article, and it seems that every critique from the last FAC was addressed but it did not pass for some reason. It is comprehensive, well written and well sourced. Third times a charm! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:13, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
- Co-nominate and Support. I would wait a little bit before re-re-nominating (asking someone to copyedit since that's what most people complained in the FACs, and the so-called experts are really slow), but I wasn't bold enough. Everything you comment in this FAC, I'll try to fix. And if this fails, (*knock, knock, knock*) I'll try again. igordebraga ≠ 22:28, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
A few things to be straightened up before I support.I've reviewed this article many times, and I feel that it's reached a featured point. However, a few problems need to be straightened out:
-
- In the gameplay, we have: "and shooting foes, with the addition of a "lock-on" mechanism that allows circlestrafing while keeping focus on the enemy." I think it could be better rendered as "and shooting foes with the help of a 'lock-on' mechanism that allows circlestrafing while staying aimed on the enemy."
- In the items section: "You can also use a "soft mod" device such as Action Replay or Gameshark to do this or other things." First-person is an absolute no-no.
- In the plot section: "Prime has an extensive use of storyline." I think "use of" is best omitted; it seems rather redundant.
- The image fair use rationales should mention the article the fair use rationale is for, so "Fair use rationale for Metroid Prime" would be the correct way to write the section title.
- Would it be okay to find something about the speedrunning? Specialized communities are mentioned, but no source is given.
I'll be checking to see if improvements are made, although if I forget to check (which is quite possible), it would be good of you to reply to me. bibliomaniac15 00:00, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- All concerns addressed! Let us know if you notice or have others. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 02:01, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Changed to Support. Good job, Igordebraga and Judgesurreal. The article really has improved over the ages. bibliomaniac15 02:47, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
*Comment. Criterion three concerns:
-
Image:M_screen017.jpg and Image:Morphball.jpg both say “The image is used to illustrate the game's gameplay.” Please explain why two fair use images are needed to accomplish this. WP:NFCC#3A requires “As few non-free content uses as possible are included in each article and in Wikipedia as a whole”.The license on Image:Metroid_Prime_Pinball_gameplay.jpg allows fair use for “identification and critical commentary on … the computer or video game in question”. As the game in question is Metroid Prime, fair use of a screenshot from Metroid Prime Pinball is not supported. NFCC#8 concerns, as well.ЭLСОВВОLД talk 04:10, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
-
-
- I removed the Pinball image, since your right it's not strictly necessary. As to the other question, as you can tell from the article, the issue of whether the game would be in a first person perspective or 3rd person was a huge source of fan reaction before release, so clearly the picture of the first person perspective image is crucial. The morph ball is the only time in the game that you play in the 3rd person, so I'm not sure that it's entirely necessary. What do you think? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- The morph ball is to show different gameplay aspects (example), while the pinball one was just because one of the FA complaints was lack of images - so I added two, the one Judge removed (illustrated Legacy, how inspired a "reimagining") and the sketch one (illustrates Development, no description necessary). igordebraga ≠ 04:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- To fully articulate my concern, the real issue is the lack of specificity of the purposes. Having never played the game, I’m not qualified to comment on the importance of the ball/perspective, or lack thereof. If it really is essential to our understanding, that’s fine; the rationales, however, need to be very explicit in their articulation of the significance of their respective contributions. As they exist now, the stated purposes are identical; if showing gameplay is all they’re meant to do, one would suffice. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 19:28, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- You can see more than one picture for varied gameplay modes in Zelda: Wind Waker and Zelda: Majora's Mask(one for regular gameplay, one for instruments that take a large play) and all the Final Fantasy FAs (one for overworld, one for battle; one in particular has 4). And the Morph Ball is mentioned twice in the gameplay section - first on having a different camera, and then a description on how it works. The image helps illustrating both aspects. igordebraga ≠ 21:52, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Those were not necessarily screened for FU and, in fact, appear to be in violation. They are, however, not pertinent to this article or discussion. If you’re pulled over for speeding, pointing out that other cars were also speeding, even if true, does not absolve you of the violation. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 22:06, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- So, we just need to describe its use in the fair use rationale? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 21:58, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Let's just cut the morph ball image, its not that important to fight about, the first person image is the crucial one after all. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- If there's disagreement, as I said, I'm not necessarily saying that one has to go. I'm just trying to get across that the rationales, as they stand/stood, indicate(d) that the images fulfill the same purpose. If one image contributes significantly above the contribution already made by the other, that just needs to be spelled out. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 22:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I put the morph ball back and I changed the two rationales to include how specifically they are used. Feel free to fix them if they are wrong, but I tried to be specific as to how they are used. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:31, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- If there's disagreement, as I said, I'm not necessarily saying that one has to go. I'm just trying to get across that the rationales, as they stand/stood, indicate(d) that the images fulfill the same purpose. If one image contributes significantly above the contribution already made by the other, that just needs to be spelled out. ЭLСОВВОLД talk 22:27, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Let's just cut the morph ball image, its not that important to fight about, the first person image is the crucial one after all. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 22:18, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- The morph ball is to show different gameplay aspects (example), while the pinball one was just because one of the FA complaints was lack of images - so I added two, the one Judge removed (illustrated Legacy, how inspired a "reimagining") and the sketch one (illustrates Development, no description necessary). igordebraga ≠ 04:54, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I removed the Pinball image, since your right it's not strictly necessary. As to the other question, as you can tell from the article, the issue of whether the game would be in a first person perspective or 3rd person was a huge source of fan reaction before release, so clearly the picture of the first person perspective image is crucial. The morph ball is the only time in the game that you play in the 3rd person, so I'm not sure that it's entirely necessary. What do you think? Judgesurreal777 (talk) 04:43, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
-
- Support Looks good. Epbr123 (talk) 10:22, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Support Excellent work on the article. Comandante Talk 00:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)
Comments:
- "becoming one of the highest reviewed games of all time." I know what's meant, but this is ambiguous and a bit awkward. This could mean a game that has received the most reviews. Please reword.
- Please conform to WP: DASH. Spaced endashes or unspaced emdashes.
- "which protects Samus' armor against heat, allowing to enter volcanic areas." Prose isn't great here
- "Among these are the Morph Ball, which allows to roll into narrow passages and drop energy bombs" Do you mean "which allows Samus"?
- "and allowing to swing from them across gaps." As before; without it, it sounds ungrammatical
- "The percentage of collected items and Scan Visor logs unlock art galleries and different endings." The percentage itself does nothing—it's just a value. Rewrite to make clear that these unlockables are dependent on the percentage.
- "Manipulation of the game's physics can allow knowledgeable players to receive items earlier than intended, or to bypass collecting them, a challenge known as sequence breaking." I'd omit this. Some guys (or girls) broke the system. So what?
- "The player can also use a "soft mod" device such as Action Replay or Gameshark to do these things." Again, worthless and seems to infringe upon WP: GAMEGUIDE
- Plot's too long for my liking, but this is just a stylistic preference of mine—there are some FAs with larger plots than this.
- "because Nintendo "couldn't come out with any concrete ideas". Shouldn't you mention who said this?
- "Director Mark Pacini said Retro tried to make the game in a way the only difficult parts would be boss battles," Shouldn't there be that after "the"?
- Don't leave the last two sentences as standalone paragraphs as they're too short.
- Possibly too much weight is given to the game's sequels.
- The external link to Mobygames is questionable by looking at how bare the page is
- You have to external links to the game's soundtracks, yet, to my knowledge, these soundtrack aren't even mentioned in the article.
- Why have you linked speedrunning twice consecutively in the last sentence of "Reception"?
- Refs are inconsistent—some are "forename","surname" while others aren't.
- If you can find an alternative to ref 4, then use it.
A decent article, but there are errors, as well as disappointing prose. I hope that this helps. Ashnard Talk Contribs 17:16, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Ok, all the corrections are done, and here are a few responses:
- 1)Dashes suck! :) I think I got them all, this article was way over dashed before.
- 2)The sequence breaking sentence is related the speedrunning, so I elaborated in that sentence.
- 3)I looked over the plot, but there isn't a lot of unnecessary detail, like descriptions or things like that, so I left it as is.
- 4)I trimmed out a sentence of the legacy section, talking about how Prime Hunters was multiplayer, not really relevant. I think it's pretty concise, but let me know if you see something that could go.
- 5) I checked, and the soundtrack is mentioned in a sentence, though it doesn't go into detail.
- 6)Speedrunning is linked twice, once as the general topic, and once to the section of the article dealing with Metroid, as this a major speedrunning game.
So let me know your thoughts, and if there are more corrections. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:59, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- Personally, I don't feel that the reference to speedrunning adds anything to the understanding of the game, but that's just me. As I've said, the plot's probably okay, I'd just personally prefer something more brief. Thanks for making so many amendments, though. As I've said before, I don't think that the prose is up to the job, but I'll have a go at rewording some parts if I have enough time tomorrow. Thanks. Ashnard Talk Contribs 22:42, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'll cut that sentence as speedrunning is already mentioned below, and look at the plot again. Once you do your rewording when you get the chance, let me know if you notice any more prose issues that we can tackle. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I shaved a bit off the plot. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:12, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- I'll cut that sentence as speedrunning is already mentioned below, and look at the plot again. Once you do your rewording when you get the chance, let me know if you notice any more prose issues that we can tackle. :) Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:02, 21 February 2008 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
