Talk:Freedom Planet/GA1

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

Reviewer: Czar (talk · contribs) 02:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

I've read through parts of this already pre-GAN, so I'll review it this weekend czar ♔   02:12, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria Please respond below my signature so as to leave the original review uninterrupted.
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * a few clarifications requested
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * some unreliable sites, though
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * direct quotes need direct citations
 * C. No original research:
 * I think this is okay but watch the liberty in which you paraphrase a review, e.g., how positive it is ("felt positive overall") unless the author or a secondary source says so
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * good work
 * B. Focused:
 * I do think there are focus issues, especially in the plot, but not enough to hold up the nom. I trust that you'll do what you think is best.
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Your best article yet, if I may say so
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Your best article yet, if I may say so
 * Your best article yet, if I may say so


 * I think this article is mostly ready to go, but in this review I'd like to stress one thing: weight. I'm not sure why the type of animals and names are in the lede unless it is important to the game in some way I do not yet understand. (Why not just say three anthropomorphic animal player characters?) I haven't played the game, but unless there are cutscenes that aren't mentioned in the article, I imagine that the plot plays as much of a role here as it does in the 2D Sonics. Consider that right now the Plot section is much longer than the Gameplay. This insinuates that the Plot is of equal if not greater importance in the overview of this game. I would recommend cutting the Plot in half, but that recommendation is outside the scope of the GA review and just a friendly suggestion for your consideration.
 * I've added a small mention of that. I do have to stop you there, though; the plot is a large part of the game and it's way deeper than just "get the Chaos Emeralds and stop Eggman with your friends" - it may be modeled after the 2D Sonics in gameplay, but the plot's more on the level of Sonic Adventure 2. Not all characters have all the same cutscenes, so there's even more than you'd get in just a single playthrough. The characters all have dialogue and personalities so I really don't think it's appropriate to just say that there are three in the lead; it seems that you mostly work with games that don't really have stories so you might not be used to having to cover that. And the lead doesn't even mention that there's an energy crisis between three warring city-states that the three player characters get caught in or anything, which it probably could. I mean, I don't want to sound angry, because that totally isn't my intent, but I feel strongly that the plot should be represented about as much as the other standard categories for this article. Tezero (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Which is why I left it your call. It's fine for GAN minimum standards czar ♔   01:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * "fast-paced" in lede has no citation in text
 * Done. It's covered in everything that compares it to Sonic, so I've done that. Tezero (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Link fangame in lede, health meter, life, gelatinous, wall jump, double jump, boss
 * There's no page on double jumps, the concept of lives is covered in the Health article, and I don't know what I'd link "gelatinous" to. Done the rest. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Excellent job with Gameplay
 * Thank you! I think it's because I pretty much wrote it all at once and worried about citations later - most of it's cited to the game itself (I don't think there's any original interpretation there so it should be okay) - so I developed it more naturally than I have in the past. Tezero (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * "Lilac's maximum health is seven leaves, Carol's six, and Milla's four." WP:VGSCOPE? How about they differ in health gauges.
 * Eh, that doesn't give a sense of about how much a leaf helps or attacks might hurt. I tried "The characters' health gauges range from four to seven leaves", but that's just more vague while taking up the same amount of space. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * What matters more than the "energy cube" is what it does
 * Figured it was obvious, but done. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I still don't know what an "energy cube" is but okay czar ♔   16:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * A... cube made of energy. Tezero (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * "Milla; she" → "Milla, who"
 * Done. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * "In Adventure Mode, the player does not select a character from the beginning, but early on when Lilac and Carol temporarily split up." Unclear
 * Reworded. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Would be worth describing time attack in the text
 * What's there to explain? Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * What it is... czar ♔   16:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Done by you. Tezero (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Tablets?
 * What about them? Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * They're left unclear in the text: "There are also collectible tablets that are dispersed throughout levels and place artwork in a gallery that can be viewed later." Do you use them? Do they unlock stuff? How about, "Dispersed throughout the levels are collectible tablets that unlock gallery art for later viewing." Remember your audience czar ♔   16:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Oh. I thought unlocking artwork was clear by the verb "place", but reworded. Tezero (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * My head is spinning by the third ¶ of the plot. A bit too much detail? Or see my original comment?
 * Maybe I can cut the plot a little. It's been condensed to about half of what it was already, but I suppose a little more can go while preserving comprehensibility. Tezero (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * "The game was the brainchild of Stephen DiDuro—known online as "Strife" and, for this project, GalaxyTrail—who also served as lead programmer." Recast. Strife may be better as a note, and the sentence is a little awkward as is. Also decide when he will be DiDuro and when he will be GalaxyTrail because I don't understand why the latter is used later ("GalaxyTrail is currently saving up money").
 * Fixed. I'm just sticking to DiDuro all around because he really isn't even referred to as GalaxyTrail very often. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Pull quote rambles a bit—try reducing?
 * Done, but is it considered bad form to use an ellipsis in a pull quote? Tezero (talk)
 * Not at all czar ♔   01:24, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Fantastic work—really impressed


 * Reception: You know how I feel about WP:ITALICS: "Online magazines, newspapers, and news sites with original content should generally be italicized". I'll leave it up to you.
 * Prerelease is one word
 * Done. Tezero (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * If you can avoid a "[sic]" or two by recasting, you should.
 * Done. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * Direct quotes need direct citations (WP:MINREF)
 * ...Where aren't there any? Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * I see at least two remaining in Prerelease czar ♔   16:06, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * Okay, I know you prefer it this way, but I really don't think it's widespread outside your work. I mean, I randomly picked Dishonored, an FA that passed pretty recently, and there are a bunch of instances where this is not done. Same with Flotilla and Secret of Mana, two other FAs I randomly remember. I can do it if you think there's a reason it should be here and not in those other articles, but I think it disrupts the flow of the text more than anything else. Tezero (talk) 16:19, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * That's fine then. It's how I was instructed to do it in my first GAs and it's by the letter of the guideline, but in any event IAR. ♔


 * Statements like "my only complaint thus far is that the foreground in the demo level is quite bland." should be paraphrased (with the punctuation on the outside, if quoted)
 * Done. Tezero (talk) 07:28, 7 September 2014 (UTC)


 * The ugly: Gamescape, MeriStation, Nerd Reactor—they don't look reliable. (MeriStation looks the best of the bunch, for what it's worth.) However, I know you did due diligence by bringing this to WP:VG/RS and only opinions (no facts) were sourced to the articles, so I'm going to let it be for now if you insist on keeping them. However, I don't suggest that you do, and I don't think it'll fly at FAC.
 * I don't insist on it, but all else being equal I'd rather keep them for now in case one or more of them is determined reliable at WT:VG/RS. Thanks for the honesty, though. Tezero (talk) 01:16, 7 September 2014 (UTC)

As I said, I think this article is a clear pass, but I'll leave the review open for a bit to address some of the clarity stuff and if you have any responses to my points czar ♔   00:00, 7 September 2014 (UTC)
 * czar ♔   16:49, 7 September 2014 (UTC)