Talk:Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots has been listed as one of the good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Rise of Nations: Thrones and Patriots article.
Article policies

A request has been made for this article to be copyedited by the League of Copyeditors. The progress of its reviewers is recorded below. The League is always in need of editors with a good grasp of English to review articles. Visit the Project page if you are interested in helping.
Add comments

Contents

[edit] older entries

Somebody should improve this article. I can't do it all by myself. 10:40, 5 June 2006 (UTC)

Actually, stop doing it, the article is supposed to be informative in a encyclopedic way, not a damn game faq. Every little change youve made has made this article worst than what it was before (supposing you added the quotes and several unnecesary listings). OPTIMAL information is what we seek here, not quantity of information. How do i know this?, try to get a GA nomination, theyll tell you the same thing.

[edit] Improvements.

I put a bit about the cold war underneath the new conquer the world campaigns list. I play the game myself, and found the cold war a gripping campaign. Would you say I did it justice, or do I need more info? ElGenius 17:34, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

It's sufficient, though we should bear in mind that all the T&P Conquer the World scenarios introduced significant and unique changes in some form, with the Cold War being the most complex. --Scottie_theNerd 04:05, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

O.K- what do you think would happen if we had a seperate part for the C.T.W campaigns, so we could describe each in detail? ElGenius 17:52, 9 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't think CtW is notable enough to warrant that kind of detail. --Scottie_theNerd 00:52, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

Fair point. Do you think a picture of the senate building or the new nations would be appropraiate? WE have to add something to make this article bigger! ElGenius 15:45, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

The best way to start off would be to look at major review sites (IGN, GameSpot, etc.) and gather together what points are most commonly praised or criticised. I definitely agree on fleshing the article out, but remember that Wikipedia is based on verifiable information, and we need to be wary of WP:NOT. We can't chuck in everything we know about the game, but we can convey information that is proven notable by third-party sources. --Scottie_theNerd 15:57, 10 September 2007 (UTC)

[edit] image

there is no image cover. help Xelas211 (talk) 03:05, 9 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA Review

GA review (see here for criteria)

This is a nice piece of work and it makes all of the good article criteria. Here's a checklist of how it makes the criteria.

  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS):
    Well organized and easy to read.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    The sources are extensive and cover all parts of the article.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Short article, but it covers a great deal of information and is broad in its coverage.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Fair use rationales are fairly solid.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Good work, keep it up. Redphoenix526 (Talk) 02:58, 14 March 2008 (UTC)