Talk:Lords of the Earth/GA1

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

Reviewer: Harrias (talk · contribs) 09:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this shortly. Harrias (he/him) • talk 09:49, 31 March 2023 (UTC)

Images

 * 6a. Symbol confirmed.svg both images have appropriate license templates, all okay.
 * 6b. Symbol confirmed.svg both images are relevant and suitably captioned.
 * Not a GA requirement, but consider adding alt text for the images.
 * Done! Airborne84 (talk) 23:04, 5 April 2023 (UTC)

Prose

 * 1a. Symbol confirmed.svg generally good, but some queries below.
 * "Diplomacy is also frequently an important—sometimes indispensable—part of gameplay." Could do with some explanation of exactly what is meant by "diplomacy" here. Just general interactions and "deals" with other players, or formal treaties etc. which form part of the game?
 * Done. Airborne84 (talk) 01:01, 8 April 2023 (UTC)


 * There's a bit of unnecessary repetition between the two parts of the Play-by-mail genre section. Most glaring is "to the PBM game Empyrean Challenge, once described as "the most complex game system on Earth"." with "The next big entrant was Superior Simulations with its game Empyrean Challenge in 1978.[11] Reviewer Jim Townsend asserted that it was "the most complex game system on Earth" with some large position turn results 1,000 pages in length." I'd recommend simplifying the first to "..from the relatively simple to the extremely complex." There's also a little bit of re-tread between the first paragraphs of each part, regarding the mechanics of how PBM works in terms of mailing moves etc.
 * I'll note that this section is word-for-word from the Hyborian War article, a Featured Article. If you feel strongly about this, I will change it, but multiple editors judged it OK. Please advise.
 * The "most complex" quote only appears once in the prose of Hyborian War, and twice in the prose in this article. It should not feature twice. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 11:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * You are right. I missed this. I took your suggestion. Please advise if any other concerns here. Thanks. Airborne84 (talk) 13:42, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * All good now. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 14:03, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * "In 2002 there were more than twenty active campaigns run by multiple gamemasters globally. By 2002, the game.." Starting consecutive sentences with "In 2002" then "By 2002" feels clunky and repetitive, particularly after the previous sentence had started "In 1995".
 * Edited. Airborne84 (talk) 23:29, 5 April 2023 (UTC)


 * "..to Game 42." Is "Game" synonymous with "Campaign", or are they different terms? Could do with explanation.
 * Synonymous. I edited this. Airborne84 (talk) 01:15, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * "..barbarian or seafaring, secret nations, religious groups, and merchant consortia." Why the "or" at the start?
 * Struck. Airborne84 (talk) 23:31, 5 April 2023 (UTC)


 * "..campaigns have started in periods from 2000 BCE to 1400 CE. The 1st Campaign was set in the mid-1800s.." Is this not contradictory? Especially when the article goes on to say "By 2002, 1st Campaign gameplay had progressed from the year 1000 to 1752 CE."
 * Fixed. Airborne84 (talk) 01:31, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Are "1st Campaign" and "Campaign 1" the same thing? Because with the use of capital letters (see below) they seem like formal terms, and being different, it isn't clear if they refer to the same thing or different things.
 * I went with a consistent "Campaign 1" since that follows multiple sources. Airborne84 (talk) 01:34, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * 1b. Symbol confirmed.svg Although I have raised some issues below, none actually fall under the MOS sections required for GA, so can only be recommendations.
 * Per MOS:ORDINAL (which isn't a GA requirement), use "first" rather than "1st". Same for "Campaign 1".
 * Same as above. Airborne84 (talk) 01:34, 7 April 2023 (UTC)


 * Similarly, unless there is a single formal term for a campaign or game, they should take lowercase. Again, not a GA requirement, though I do feel it would improve readability.
 * Addressed. I only use capitals when stating "Campaign 1". Airborne84 (talk) 00:52, 8 April 2023 (UTC)


 * "..around Cavalry, Infantry, Warship, and Siege capabilities." No need for capital letters.
 * Fixed. Airborne84 (talk) 01:11, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * "In the game, players can "found universities, build cities, create trade routes, massacre populations, enforce religious conversions, engage in both overt and covert warfare, forge alliances, break treaties, and sometimes suffer the dread dynastic failure, when their nation implodes". Ideally, attribute the quote inline.
 * Attributed. Airborne84 (talk) 01:11, 6 April 2023 (UTC)


 * 3a. Symbol voting keep.svg My only main concern here is that the most recent references for the game itself seem to be from the early 2000s. Do we have anything more recent. Ideally an estimate of how many active games are in play, roughly how many players, whether they have been any further additions or adjustments to the rules.
 * Mostly no. There are no articles on this in Suspense & Decision, the PBM magazine that has been running in the 21st century, other than a short descriptive entry in a list of PBM games (which doesn't add much) within the past year. I did add an update on the latest revisions of the rulebooks from 2006–2007 in the Development section. But nothing beyond that of note that I could find, either in secondary sources or on the website. Airborne84 (talk) 02:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Okay, well if there isn't source material, we can't do much about that. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 11:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * 3b. Symbol voting keep.svg Probably fine for the GA requirements really, but too much unnecessary name-checking of other games in the Play-by-mail genre section, which feels excessively long in proportion to the article to me.
 * If agreeable, I'd like to keep the links. One of the reasons why I run these through GA/FA is to get visibility on the genre. As far as the relative length of the section, as noted above, this section passed FA review as part of Hyborian War and represents the best example of writing on the topic here on Wikipedia. It could certainly be that the rest of the article, at GA quality, should be brought up to FA standards, but that is another project. I'd prefer not to try reducing the FA quality of this section to match the GA quality in the rest of the article. Airborne84 (talk) 00:57, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * The GA requirements don't specifically cover this, so I won't object here, but I would at FA. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 11:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)


 * 4. Symbol confirmed.svg No issues.
 * 5. Symbol confirmed.svg No issues.

That's a wrap, I'll stick it on hold pending responses. Harrias (he/him) • talk 20:25, 2 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Greatly appreciate the detailed review ! I think I've addressed all the areas you mentioned. Happy to continue revisions if needed. Standing by. Airborne84 (talk) 02:11, 8 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Just the one outstanding issue regarding the repeated quote. Harrias  (he/him) • talk 11:07, 10 April 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks . Please advise if any other concerns to address. Airborne84 (talk) 13:43, 10 April 2023 (UTC)