Talk:Ghost in the Shell (video game)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Niwi3 (talk · contribs) 20:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

I am happy to review this article. However, I see a number of serious issues that need to be addressed before the article passes a GA review.


 * Lead
 * "is a cyberpunk video game developed by Exact for the PlayStation" - Use video game genres instead of visual/narrative genres.
 * ✅ by someone else. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * The lead does not summarize adequately the body of the article since it does not contain information about the gameplay and development.
 * The phrase "The game had received mainly positive reviews for its graphics, animation, and music, including its unusual wall-climbing mechanics with some negative targeting its tedious gameplay and low difficulty" needs some copyediting to make sense.
 * ✅ Just added today by Niemti. That is not my fault. Though easily fixed. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Gameplay
 * The general reader does not know what a "think tank" is.

✅
 * The section is incomplete: What is the game? an RPG? a shooter? an action adventure? How does the player progress in the game? By completing levels? objectives? Are there any bosses? Does the Fuchikoma have health? What is the difference between using Machine-guns vs Bombs? Overall, this section leaves more questions than answers.


 * Plot
 * Who is Aramaki? Motoko? Batou? Sawamura? An article must not assume that the reader is intimately familiar with its topic.
 * I don't know how much is really necessary for this; you do not interact or control them - they have no backstory and play no significant role. You are asking the equivalent of a backstory on Yoshi for Super Mario World; I can do this if you want though. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:07, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Cast
 * I personally think this section is unnecessary, mainly because some voice actors are unknown.
 * The names are all in the credits, but they are not specifically drawn to the cast members by names in the credits. There is no harm in having it as it is another aspect of the game. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Development and Release
 * I would suggest merging both sections into one two-paragraph section called "Development and release".
 * ✅ Already. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:54, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Who developed this game? The content of the lead and infobox should appear in the body of the article.
 * T*HQ -> THQ
 * ✅ From the article, "Though always formally called THQ, the company typically traded as T*HQ in video games' box arts and instruction manuals." Though it has been fixed already. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Production I.G. -> Production I.G
 * ✅ The first usage is linked. Per WP:OVERLINK every usage should not be linked. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * "The North American release date was on October 31, 1997. The European release date was on July 1, 1998." -> The game was released in North America on October 31, 1997 and in Europe on July 1, 1998.
 * ✅ ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:24, 12 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Related media
 * This section should come after the reception section.


 * Reception
 * I would suggest adding Template:Video game reviews to better organize this section.
 * I sorta disagree about this; wouldn't it just be a template for the sake of adding a template? Lucia, any thoughts? ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)


 * Convert the section to two paragraphs close to the same length (one for audio/graphics and the other for gameplay).
 * I remember i added a gamefan review in here. was it by any chance removed? If so, i'll look in the history but i'm pretty sure i added it in.Lucia Black (talk) 23:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Could you please grab it? ^-^ ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:11, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * References
 * Inconsistent date formats ("3 September 2013" in ref 11, "May 23, 2003" in ref 23, "2013-07-06" in ref 28, etc).
 * ref 21 is a dead link.
 * ref 11 and 21 are the same.
 * ref 28 lacks author and date.
 * ✅ Referencing date formats are not a GA issue, but I can fix them quick enough. Also... Ref 21 is not dead. 11 and 21 are not the same and I don't see which one it is. Could you tell me besides mere numbers, they seem to have been swapped about. The GameSpot one, #18 did go 404, but I provided the archive. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:34, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Ref 11 and 16 (gamespot review) are the same.Lucia Black (talk) 23:43, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * ✅ Thank you. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 23:56, 12 November 2013 (UTC)

In conclusion, there are enough significant issues in the article in that merely placing on hold is not going to do any good, so I am going to fail this GA nomination soon. Please, feel free to re-nominate once the issues have been addressed. You may also wish to request a peer review before you re-nominate so that everything is good to go. If you have any questions on these points, or if you think I'm being unreasonable, please ask. --Niwi3 (talk) 20:40, 12 November 2013 (UTC)
 * I tried to discussion on Niwi3's talk page, he replied on mine, but doesn't seem to want to discuss it now that he's set on it being failed. I just got home and took care many of the issues already. After waiting so long, it just seems a waste to have this failed over a bunch of already fixed issues that took less than half and hour to correct. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 00:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry for waiting so long to respond; it was 2 A.M. when I posted my last comment. In any case, there are still issues that need to be addressed: the gameplay section needs to be expanded and therefore referenced. After that, you are welcome to re-nominate the article. --Niwi3 (talk) 11:14, 13 November 2013 (UTC)

I didn't add this phrase to the intro, LB did. Yes, there are bosses, and a health bar (and a bar for machine gun heating, if I remember correctly). --Niemti (talk) 00:47, 13 November 2013 (UTC)
 * Sorry! It's fixed and I've put it up for GAR. ChrisGualtieri (talk) 16:31, 16 November 2013 (UTC)