Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games/Peer review
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 Skip to current requests |
This page is for adventure games that need input in order to become at least an example article, or even become a Featured article candidate. It is aimed at half-developed articles that require further expansion, and you believe the community can play a major part not only in editing directly the article, but also giving creative input.
Before adding an article, check whether the peer review is the best place for it. For stubs, the Adventure gaming collaboration of the week is more suitable.
Adventure Requests for peer review are listed here to expose articles to closer scrutiny than they might otherwise receive. See Style and How-to Directory for advice on writing great articles. Or look at the discussion of the perfect article and try to reach as close to as many of those ideals as possible. If an article needs extensive work, please list it on Pages needing attention, Requests for expansion or Cleanup. Please list article content disputes on Requests for comment rather than here.
Note: Peer review is the process of review by peers and usually implies a group of authoritative reviewers that are equally familiar and expert in the subject. The process represented by this page is not formal peer review in that sense and articles that under go this process cannot be assumed to have greater authority than any other.
Contents |
[edit] Instructions
[edit] How to make a request
- Anyone can request an adventure game related peer review here. When posting your request, include a brief description of the kind of comments/contributions you want, and sections of the article you think need to be reviewed. The best way to get lots of reviews is to reply promptly and appreciatively on this page to the comments you do get.
- Procedure for adding nominations:
- Add the parameter
peer-review=yesto the {{advenproj}} template on the article's talk page (not the article itself) to let other editors know that the article is being peer reviewed. - From there, click on the bold link that appears in the new peer review notice. This will open a page to discuss the review of your article.
- Place ===[[name of nominated article]]=== at the top.
- Below it, write your reason for nominating the article and sign by using four tildes (~~~~).
- Place {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games/Peer review/name of article}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page.
- Finally, if the article is under the scope of WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games, transclude the specific request on WikiProject MMOs Peer Review page.
[edit] How to respond to a request
- Scan the list of requests below, and if one catches your fancy, follow the link to the article and read it. If you think something's wrong with the article; i.e., it's too long, there's no lead section, poor grammar/spelling, factual errors, etc., post a comment in the appropriate section on this page.
- If the issue is trivial and/or you have the time and knowledge to fix it, it is advised that you make an effort to resolve the issue. If you do so, please make a note of it on the page to keep others informed about the article's progress.
[edit] How to remove a request
- To free up the page for active traffic, and to make peer review a more dynamic and valuable process, you are invited to move inactive requests to the current archive link. Inappropriate listings, listings untouched for a month, and articles that have gone on to be listed under Wikipedia:Peer review or as featured article candidates can and should be removed, as well as apparently forgotten requests where the requester has not responded to comments (if you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts). Please see the request removal policy for specifics.
- After removing the listing from this page, replace
peer-review=yeswithold-peer-review=yesin the {{advenproj}} template on the article's talk page. - If your request is removed, please feel free to put it back at the top of the list later.
[edit] How to resubmit a request
- Procedure for requesting a brand new peer review request:
- Move the peer review page to Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games/Peer review/example/Archive1
- Edit the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Adventure games/Peer review/example, remove the redirect.
- Resubmit the request and make a note where the old request is via a wikilink.
[edit] Requests
[edit] Wikipedia:Peer review articles
The following were nominated to standard peer review, but deal with adventure games, so are also shown here using the magic of templates.
[edit] The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess
Hello, everybody! This article is looking pretty good so far. The only things we need to do now IMHO are to copyedit and any other problems in this article. I was considering getting this nominated for FA again, since the last FAC didn't work. This article needs a lot of work for this article. I consider it the best game article and certainly the best of Wikipedia IMHO. May the force be with you... Sjones23 17:57, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
P.S. Also, any recommendations in improvement shall be appreciated. Thanks. Sjones23 18:02, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
this game is cool--S200048 19:23, 10 June 2007 (UTC)s200048
Any ideas on improving this article? Thanks. Sjones23 20:50, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
No response yet, huh? Well, I guess this will have to wait until anyone responds or puts an Automated PR response. Sjones23 22:32, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
- Duuude, calm down. It's a big article, and PR isn't terribly active. That having been said:
- The lead needs some work. It's currently one medium-big paragraph followed by a one-sentence paragraph, and basically says "It was delayed, released, released, and rated." The lead should cover all major points of the article, not just the development history. Sales numbers?
- There's a bit of difference between the "approximately 100 years" in the article and the "few decades" stated in the source it cites.
- Consider organizing the plot in a manner other than that revealed to the player (which leads to a lot of short, choppy "Link does this, Zelda explains that, Link and Midna go, etc" sentences, and often introduces characters before they've had a proper description). Most of our plot-heavy FAs (Final Fantasy) go setting, characters, story. Majora's Mask goes setting, story. Most also put gameplay before plot, but this is mostly a style issue.
- The gameplay section, the items section in particular, is perhaps too devoted to specifics. I think one sentence per item is too much. How you go about condensing it is your choice, but take a look at our FAs to get an idea of what detail is appropriate.
- You've got a {{cite}} tag in the TP on Wii section.
- Lastly, make sure you've covered everything from the previous FAC. I see a lot of my comments mirror theirs.
- That should be enough to get you started. Nifboy 22:43, 11 June 2007 (UTC)
- That should work, Nifboy and thanks. Anyone else? Sjones23 22:05, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
Just to let you know that this is the second peer review, the first is at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess. Sjones23 02:44, 17 June 2007 (UTC)
- Any other things? Sjones23 16:17, 19 June 2007 (UTC)
- Some sections lack adequate referencing, ex Game Play, Collectibles, Abilities, and Music. I'd recommend trimming the plot section down even further, remove anything that is not needed or break it up into Setting and Plot section. It would also be a good idea to cite the Wii/GC official guide. Consider ripping out the last section of the sales section, unless you can cite it. The article would also look better if the two sentences paragraphs were merged with other more substantial paragraphs.
- Other than that, everything looks great. Being a huge LOZ fan, I'd like to help clean the article up, but I'm kinda busy pushing the Michael Barrett article up to GA status. --â–ºShadowJester07 09:30, 21 June 2007 (UTC)
[edit] Archives
WikiProject Adventure games Peer review archive
