Talk:Age of Empires Online/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 03:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)

Hi! I've been asked to review this article and i'm privileged! It's the first video game related article i've ever reviewed and i chose to do it because i'm a long time player of Age of Empires and i have the knowledge to take this job. I'm a little busy as of today (May 21, my birthday), so i'll start the review on the next few days. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 03:23, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Ok, the article will be the longest i've reviewed to date, so it'll take a while... -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Before starting with the review, i'll take a couple of days to read and be sure i undestand the guidelines related to videogames, as i'm not too knowledgeable yet to them. I think i can properly start the review by the end of this week. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 23:25, 22 May 2012 (UTC)
 * I will start the review and writing notes by Sunday 27 May 2012. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 04:45, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Main section
Comment: I think the second paragraph needs to be totally rewritten, as it's very detailed on some topics and might lack information about some gamplay points. Remember that the first paragraphs here might do what the lead does for the article, summarize all the basics that will be explained later on the sub-sections. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 17:10, 27 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Also, we need references covering this topic. We now that gameplay is like common sense, but some references are needed. Examples: Age of Empires II: The Age of Kings and Test Drive: Ferrari Legends. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 17:12, 27 May 2012 (UTC)

Units

 * Paragraph 1


 * Paragraph 2

Comment: At this point, a copy-edit is recommended. I'll go through the entire sections and subsections leaving comments of what does not meet the criteria. As of now, it may be clear the article fails criteria 1(a), may fail words to watch from 1(b); I don't believe it fails 2(b), since the guideline says "direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are likely to be challenged" and none of those are valid on the gameplay section (yet); and it fails 3(b), since (as of what i've carefully read) it goes into unnecesarry gameplay details. Notwithstanding, i will review the entire article to leave all that needs to be done documented for a future GA nomination. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 04:47, 28 May 2012 (UTC)

Buildings

 * Paragraph 1

--

Second opinion
I would just like to point out some major issues with the article that, if I were the reviewer, would result in a quick-fail. The current reviewer can decide whether they would like to give the nominator time to correct these problems. I hope I'm not stepping on the reviewer's toes here, but I had noticed these things just before the review was claimed. I've also pasted the GA criteria below for reference. --Teancum (talk) 16:29, 25 May 2012 (UTC)


 * The Gameplay section is roughly 3x bigger than your average video games good article, yet it has only five references. I submit that this is both excessive content (fails criteria 3b and WikiProject Video games guideline WP:GAMECRUFT) and that it's exceedingly poorly referenced (fails criteria 2 entirely).
 * Some references have no formatting whatsoever, and others are missing crucial items such as publish dates
 * The External links section goes after the References section (though this wouldn't cause a quick-fail, it still needs to be moved). The Steam link should also be removed to comply with WP:BIAS.
 * The See also section is redundant. All of those links are found elsewhere in the article or are unnecessary fluff
 * The Reception section states things like "GameSpot gave the game [x] score". This should reference the author of the article. For example: "Justin Calvert of GameSpot gave the game [x] score"
 * There are two dead links that could possibly be recovered using The Wayback Machine
 * Section headings should have only the first word capitalized unless it's a proper noun
 * Prices are not to be included in articles, as these are both subject to change and region
 * Numbers under 10 are to be spelled out
 * Citations must go after punctuation, and there should not be any spaces between that punctuation and reference
 * There are a few spelling errors such as "gamemode" (game mode) and "develepors" (developers)
 * Acronyms such as PvP should be explained the first time around and spelled out; they should also include a wikilink where applicable and then have the acronym in parenthesis afterwards. The acronym can the be used from that point on. For example: "player versus player (PvP)

Hey, thanks for your comments. I really appreciate the notes you've left above. Just one detail: Per the GA criteria, the WikiProject Video games guideline must not necessarily be met to reach GA, and past experiences i had show me they must not be required on the review. Notwithstanding, every point you've written is right. The gameplay section is kind of too much estensive and i've also noted the references I'm not sure about failing the article yet. I'll take a closer look to document every detail that doesn't meet the criteria, which is what the nominator wanted to be done when asked me to review the article. -- Hahc21 [ TALK ] [ CONTRIBS  ] 20:59, 25 May 2012 (UTC)
 * Comments


 * I just briefly looked over this possible candidate for GA. I have never played this game, and at first glance, I feel the majority of the content in the gameplay section is WP:OR. There is no supporting citations for most of this information, and that alone should quickfail the article. I propose the gameplay section be slimmed down/cited or this article should remain B-class. Chilled616 (talk) 07:37, 2 June 2012 (UTC)


 * The article will remain B-Class. As of now, I have some 5 grounds to fail/QF the article. I'm just going through it and writing what needs to be done because the user who nominated the article for GA asked me that favor, and i have no reasons not to do it. -- Hahc21 [ <font color="RED">TALK ] [ <font color="GREEN">CONTRIBS  ] 07:50, 2 June 2012 (UTC)

Verdict
Ok, i have no time right now to continue filling in issues on the article. I mean, as of now, the article fails several criteria, and i will fail it for that reason. In the future, i'll write on the talk page all issues that need to be resolved.

-- Hahc21 [ <font color="RED">TALK ] [ <font color="GREEN">CONTRIBS  ] 02:33, 6 June 2012 (UTC)