Wikipedia:Peer review/Wario/archive1

Wario[edit]

It has a lot of information, and other than game descriptions (and I know, the game descriptions should be trimmed), I'd like to know what else there is to do. -- A Link to the Past 21:50, August 2, 2005 (UTC)

Well, there isn't anything major that I can see directly; however:

The article is written very much from the perspective of someone introduced to computer games, and it might be a bit confusing for readers who don't know too much about how they work (e.g. "power-ups" are mentioned without reference to what they actually are).
The content of the article is well thought out, but some work will need to be done in making the tone of the article a touch more encyclopedic - I understand, however, this is difficult to do for computer games. The article is definitely written from a gamer's POV, and although there are no NPOV issues as such it should present the article matter in a more observational way.
The level of detail gone into about game descriptions and plots is a bit too high. Some of the information could do with summarising and/or condensing to make the article a little more readable.
References - I understand this is difficult for computer games, but in general all articles on Wikipedia should have references cited as per Wikipedia:Cite sources to avoid the appearance of original research. Claims made in the article should have some reference to other sources for verifiability.

That said, however, it is an excellently presented article in general, and provides a good summary of the factual matter being discussed. Clearly, a lot of hard work has gone into the article, and I am convinced the issues above shouldn't be too difficult to solve. Feel free to drop a note on my talk page if you need any further assistance. --NicholasTurnbull 23:20, 10 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]