Talk:Segagaga/GA1

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

Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 19:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

I'm absolutely calling dibs on this one, not to mention I probably owe you a couple of favors, Namcokid47. Expect me to work on this over the next couple of days. Red Phoenix talk  19:14, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I knew somebody would cover this one eventually! I look forward to your comments. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 19:19, 31 March 2020 (UTC)

Comments

 * We use Sega Taro in the body and Taro Sega in the lead. Need to pick one and keep it consistent.
 * Fixed.
 * The budget was small, with Okano claiming it was "less than a hundredth" of Shenmue. While this is probably accurate, it's a bit tongue-in-cheek as a comparison: Shenmue cost over $50 million and was ridiculously expensive by video game standards, and a hundredth of that is still $500,000. I would either try to express it was a bit of an "off" comparison (if you have it sourced anywhere), or just express that the budget was small.  There's not enough space in the lead to express that the comparison was to the most expensive video game in history at this point.
 * I've seen publications bring up this fact, and while it may be true it does seem pretty strange of a comparison. I included it anyway since I imagine others would try to add it in, but I've gone ahead and removed it. Changed to just "it was made on a small budget".
 * development teams will increase the player's stamina and "creativity", detrimental to later sections of the game. Are both of these detrimental? That's sort of how it reads at the moment.
 * Both of these have a massive impact on the later portions of the game.
 * Towards the end of the game, Tarō pilots a starship known as the "R-720", a nod to the R-360 arcade cabinet, into outer space that features a shoot'em up level reminiscent of Thunder Force — Tarō will fight various mechs designed after older Sega game consoles, such as the Sega Genesis and Master System. This sentence runs on. I would break it up a bit.
 * Fixed. You're right, it does run on.
 * Do your sources say "Sega Hitmaker" a lot? I'm doing research on AM3 now, but I haven't seen a lot of "Sega Hitmaker", just "Hitmaker" or AM3.  If your sources say it though, or you feel it's unclear, it's not an issue.
 * The AM3 article has a redirect for "Sega Hitmaker", and I've seen other reliable sources refer to it as "Sega Hitmaker" to help specify it, so I think calling it "Sega Hitmaker" is fine.
 * Cool. Then it's fine with me ;)
 * Whenever you have the author's name in reviews, use it. Saying "Hardcore Gaming 101" and "they" is less accurate than "Kurt Kalata of Hardcore Gaming 101 and "he", for example.  If a review has an author's name on it, it's important to stress it's that person's opinion—although it's okay to say it's the publication's if the article does not have a writer's name on it or says "staff".
 * Fixed this. I need to use this more.
 * I don't think there's anything wrong with it, but I'm not personally a fan of repeating the same ref over and over through a paragraph unless it's interrupted by a different ref. That being said I won't hold you back over this difference in style, but it's something worth considering.
 * I do this just for the sake of proving that everything is verifiable. It shows that everything in the article is correct and backed by a reliable source, and also helps prevent people from adding bogus info or made-up nonsense.
 * That's fine; as I said it won't be a blocker. It's not a policy so I won't enforce it as part of this GA review, but you may want to have a look at WP:REPCITE, just as food for thought. (It also has a suggestion if you want to go with it but still prove it's all verifiable.)
 * Reference consistency: what template are you using that's putting the magazine publisher in front of the name of the publication? That's odd.  Also, I'd say if you're going to put the language of the source in the reference (and I agree, it's a good idea), make sure to do that for all the sources.  I see some Japanese ones that don't note they're in Japanese.
 * I didn't decide to include the Japanese language parameter in these since I felt it was just pointing out the obvious. Of course a Japanese ref is gonna be all in Japanese. I added it in anyway, though, so who am I to complain.
 * I appreciate you fixing it. It may seem obvious to us, and I would say you and I and quite a bit of the video game editing community could pick out Japanese against other languages, but not all readers will look at the characters and go "Ah! That's Japanese!"  At least we shouldn't assume that.

Aside from that, I see a few more run-on sentences but I will correct those myself today. They will be easy enough to do without introducing confusion. Otherwise I think we're there. Good work. Red Phoenix talk  19:50, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * I believe I fixed everything. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 23:46, 31 March 2020 (UTC)
 * All right, everything looks good. I gave a little more feedback above, but nothing that's actionable.  I also did a little more touchup on the article, and I'd say we are at GA status.  Great work.  P.S. I look forward to your finishing of the review for Altered Beast soon.   Red Phoenix  talk  00:30, 1 April 2020 (UTC)
 * Well gee, maybe you'll get it today? Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 01:24, 1 April 2020 (UTC)