Talk:Space Gun (video game)

Assessment -- 08/17/2009
Overall this is an excellent start to the article. Kudos for your hard work. Definitely gets a Start-class.

Some suggestions to move forward:
 * 1) Combine the Music, Versions/Ports, and Imaging sections into one Development section
 * 2) Copy / Paste the template below into the top of your review section.  It'll give the reviews a much cleaner look.  I filled in a few to give you an idea of how it goes.
 * 3) Consider making the Reception section a bit more prose than just a list.  Paragraph form looks cleaner and is easier on the eye to read.  If you have any text whatsoever to take from (scans of the magazines, etc) try adding in some of what the reviews said, possibly even direct quotes
 * 4) Take a look at Template:Infobox VG to see how you can take a lot of the notable people in the credits and add them right into the info box.
 * 5) Change the Notes section to References

Overall a great start! Keep moving forward! --Teancum (talk) 01:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I have made the recommended changes above, should this now be re-assessed to see if it would be worth of a C-class article? AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 11:21, 19 August 2009 (UTC)


 * I made some executive changes in addition to your excellent updates. Most C-Class articles are much longer, but I don't think there's a lot of text to flesh out here.  Flesh out the intro a bit more and talk about the modern ports and give release dates there (since they weren't ported in 1992).  Mention the type of game (shoot em' up) in the intro as well, even though it is mentioned in the Gameplay section.  Find any and every reference you can.  See if you can find exact dates for releases, get references for the ports to modern systems (when they were released, etc).  Really the reference section needs to bulk up to ~18-20 or so and you're good. You're really close, just a bit more!  --Teancum (talk) 12:08, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * You can find the Sega Master System release date here, the PS2 date (Taito legends) here, Xbox date here etc. Hopefully that helps. You might also Google the designer's names and see if you can find cool stuff related to the game. --Teancum (talk) 12:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * When I get a bit more time I'll have a go at all this. Thanks for all your help and advice. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 13:20, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The updates look good. I'd say just get in the Sega, PS2 and Xbox release dates w/refs and you're C-class! --Teancum (talk) 18:06, 19 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Release dates for modern ports added and referenced. Should now get a C-class? Could possibly do with a bit of clean-up first though. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 10:24, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * Nice work. I hope you don't mind, but I made some final cleanup edits.  You might take a look at the difference to see what I've done.  Welcome to C-class! --Teancum (talk) 11:36, 20 August 2009 (UTC)
 * It's looking really good now, it's been good working with you on this. I may try to do a bit of delving into the reviews again to try to make more points about the horror aspects to it as the article is also listed in the Project Horror section.  What do you reckon? AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 12:05, 20 August 2009 (UTC)

Horror review
I'm going to rate this a C-class as well. It's got a lot of information but it's a bit overtly off in following the Manual of style. Items inside the quotations do not need to be in italics. The lead talks about a lot of gore which isn't discussed in the article and well, it doesn't seem important unless reviewers brought it up or that it caused some controversy or something. Don't be worried about discussing the game's horror-themed content to boost it's quality up with WP:Horror, if it's aliens attacking people in this fashion, I'll have good faith that it's a horror themed without playing the game. WP:SF might want to be added this project too. Great job with the article! Andrzejbanas (talk) 12:45, 22 September 2009 (UTC)
 * Can you run me through the perceived grammatical errors, so I know where I am going wrong in future. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 10:50, 23 September 2009 (UTC)

User manual
Is there anybody out there who owns this game that can provide details of what is contained within the user manual? Are there lists of enemies, locations etc? AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 12:52, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Try World of Spectrum's page, under the 'additional material' heading there's scans of the box and a typed-in copy of the manual. Someoneanother 13:20, 13 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I have already tried there and there is no information that would be of use. I'm thinking that there may be different information in the manualks for the different versions, e.g. the Sega Master System version that was actually ported by Taito. Thanks anyway. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 13:26, 13 October 2009 (UTC)

Mid-October review
I did a whole bunch of copy editing (probably still not perfect), and I think it looks much improved. I definitely think this is still a C-class article. There's a lot of work to go before B-class is feasible, especially where items 1, 3, and 4 are concerned. My last two edits were to remove a bunch of content that I don't see as necessary (and fix the refs after that), so I'd suggest reviewing that first if you disagree. Essentially, a lot of the content was either quoting review after review or unrelated to the subject at hand. With that being said, what remains looks pretty good. Some feedback on these changes would be welcome before I make some more cosmetic tweaks. ~ Amory ( u •  t  •  c ) 03:18, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
 * I certainly think it reads a lot better but as per the comments in the discussion above (Assessment -- 08/17/09) it asks to find every reference possible and include them in the article. I was working on getting as many sources referenced as possible and thought I had done this.  I guess it's a matter of every editor has an individual preference.  A member of Project video games is set to look at the article again so they may put stuff back in. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 07:58, 15 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Well, I'm one of those too... ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 03:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Review comments by
 * The lead
 * Not up to snuff, but the lead should be saved for last anyway.
 * Plot
 * This section should summarize the story, so a direct quote from the instruction manual should be paraphrased.
 * The sentence about the similarities to Aliens feels like to would fit better in the "Reception" section.
 * The sentence about the cut scenes should be moved to the beginning of this section or mentioned in the "Gameplay" section. Something like, "Between levels, animated cut scenes progress the story."
 * Development
 * Single sentences can't stand as a paragraph. They should be integrated into a paragraph of similar content.

That's all I have time for now, I'll post more later. (Guyinblack25 talk 23:01, 15 October 2009 (UTC))


 * I have made a few of these changes. I still think the whole thing could do with expanding, as I had originally done, but obviously if the concensus is not to then I will accept that. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 08:14, 16 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Consensus is always for more content, but as long as it is relevant content. A lot of stuff I removed was redundant, for example, or went into (interesting) details about subjects that should be mentioned in their own article (if there is one).  That's all that we/I are/am saying, definitely NOT that you should stop trying to improve the article. ~ Amory ( u  •  t  •  c ) 03:09, 17 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Looking better, here are more comments. Also, I suggest checking out Time Gal. It's another Japanese arcade game that is more well known for its home ports.
 * Plot
 * Now that this section is so short, I think it makes sense to integrate it into the "Gameplay" section.
 * Gameplay
 * Since the arcade game came first and all the ports are derived from it, I think this section should primarily describe the arcade gameplay. Differences specific to the ports can be described as side notes with parenthesis, commas, and emdashes.
 * I'd reword the first sentence to give the uninformed reader more context. It should set the stage for the rest of the gameplay info: "Space Gun is a side scrolling shooting game where the player views the on-screen action from a first person perspective."
 * Trim redundancy and split for easier reading: "In addition to the standard rapid fire weapon , there are also four other major weapons : that need ammunition collected for them - a flamethrower, grenade launcher, freeze bomb and blade bomb. Weapons require ammunition to use, which can be collected in the stages. "
 * The sentence about the reviewer's opinions towards the gameplay should be in the "Reception" section.
 * Development
 * I would lead this section with information about the arcade game and include some technical details like "The game features raster graphics on a CRT monitor and amplified stereophonic sound. The visuals are reflected into view via a mirror in the cabinet."
 * Again, sorry about the disjointed review, but I'm out of time tonight. (Guyinblack25 talk 04:26, 17 October 2009 (UTC))
 * I've made the suggested changes and added a few more in, I would like more suggestions and comments on where to go next with the article. I'd like to think that it can one day get up to GA status. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 14:30, 20 October 2009 (UTC)
 * More comments
 * Gameplay
 * Splitting the large paragraph in two would improve readability.
 * Plot
 * I still think the plot can be integrated into the gameplay, but your call.
 * Tweak to give more context: "The game is set in a fictional future (in the year 2039 ), in which humans have once man has begun deep space exploration."
 * This sentence can go: "Unknown dangers await weary travellers and explorers." It reads more like a sales pitch on the back of a movie or game cover.
 * Why and how is the solider responding to the distress call? If this info is not available, then this section needs some rewording.
 * No need to mention the player in this section. Gameplay requires a player's perspective, plot requires an observer's perspective. Instead describe the soldier as the story's protagonist.
 * This sentence should also sounds like a sales pitch: "The fight is not confined to the ship's corridors as battles spill over onto the planet's surface." I suggest rewording it.
 * Development
 * Commentary about the cabinet should not go here. Specifically: "The cabinet for the arcade game is considered to be of a rather unique design..." Just describe the unique design to the reader, they can decide if it's unique or not.
 * "Cocoon" doesn't need to linked to wiktionary. Links should give the reader more understanding of related terms. When I clicked on it, I expected to see a page about "alien cocoons".
 * The comment about "eerie soundscapes" seems borderline in my mind. Generally something like should have a source to back it up, but I've seen some similar statements before that didn't. I suggest sourcing it or removing it to be safe.
 * Trim and tweak: "...Ocean Software had made several port s ed the title to home gaming systems..."
 * Give better context: "Due to different the hardware limitations of the home systems ..."
 * Developers can only do one port to a system. So unless Taito released different versions on the Master System, "ports" should be "port".
 * Trim redundancy: "made use" or "make use" should almost always be "use". It's more concise and direct.
 * Taito Legends vol 1 → Taito Legends
 * I'm still going through the old reception content. Hopefully I'll post back later today. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:13, 20 October 2009 (UTC))
 * Last bit
 * Reception
 * Most of the content in this version seems fine to me, it just needs some reorganization and copy editing.
 * Give more info about where the review comes from: "Jon Pillar of Your Sinclair described the game as... or Advanced Computer Entertainment reviewer Gary Whitta stated...".
 * All instances of a magazine's name should be in italics.
 * Personally, I try to avoid using direct quotes too much. Try to paraphrase the reviewer's comments. Instead of "more than a bit yukky" say that "the game features graphic violence".
 * Organize the content in sections/paragraphs. Start with the general reception about the arcade game and then follow it up with reception about the ports. Info about the ports should stay focused on the quality of the conversion and aspects that are specific to the port. A paragraph about the gameplay would be a good finish.
 * References
 * Unfortunately, some of the references don't seem to satisfy WP:RS. They are technically fan sites that do not have well established methods of editorial oversight and/or aren't regularly cited by other reliable sources. See if you can find replacement citations (either from your current list of citations that are reliable or from new sources) for the following sources:
 * Arcade History
 * Arcade game task force seem to support the use of Arcade History so I would be tempted to leave it in. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * World of Spectrum (citing a home version's manual should be a suitable replacement.)
 * I agree with this, and it should be quite simple to do. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Video Game Music database
 * Some help finding different souces for this would be appreciated as I think the information is interesting but cannot find another English language source to back it up. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * BlameTheControlPad.com
 * I agree with this but again I am struggling to find a more official alternative. I don't want to remove the content though, as I don't want to assume that the reader knows that there would be differences due to system limitations. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Hall of Light - the database of Amiga games
 * Incorporating the suggestion below about the magazine reviews, this should remove the need for the Hall of Light reference anyway. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 08:44, 21 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Any magazine reference should use cite journal, which also has a parameter for urls. Also, any website linked should be official online postings of the magazine's content. Like GamePro or Game Informer printing a review in an issue then posting it on their official websites. Most, if not all, of the magazine reviews cited in this article link to unofficial fan postings, which technically are copyright violations. In short, keep the magazine citation, just remove the url.
 * All website citations should have at least "url", "title", "publisher", and "accessdate".
 * Unfortunately, some of the sources being cut might trim down on the content in "Development". Hopefully this won't hurt the article too much. Once the reception section is cleaned up, the article might be able to pass GA; depends on how much of the development section remains. Either way, the article is a big improvement over what it use to be. Keep up the good work. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:36, 20 October 2009 (UTC))
 * The Arcade History Database was added there over 5 years ago, I'd say it doesn't meet today's standards. After searching the site, I didn't find much in the way of establishing its own reliability. If you can find other reliable sources that regularly cite Arcade History as a sources, then that can establish it as reliable. Since it's only used to cite design credits and a release date, it's probably fine to remove it. The KLOV sources lists the release year.
 * In regard to the BlameTheControlPad site, do any of the home version reviews comment about the different audio-visuals? A single source doesn't have to explicitly state "the ports have different audio-visuals". Multiple sources about the individual ports can be used to back up the claim.
 * I didn't find much about the music. I'll try another sweep to see what turns up. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:20, 22 October 2009 (UTC))

←(Un-indent) Found some brief reception about the game in Taito Legends. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:35, 22 October 2009 (UTC))
 * A bit more added and it now reads a lot better. I still can't seem to find a reliable source to replace the Arcade History reference, so any help with that would be good. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 09:37, 26 October 2009 (UTC)
 * Some more points.
 * Links to smspower.org and ysrnry.co.uk should be removed as they are copyright violations. The Your Sinclair ones can be unlinked, but the SMSPower should be replaced with a citation for the game's back cover.
 * Citations are meant for contentious statements. The staff hardly seems like contentious information to me. I think it is fine without a reference. If you're really concerned about it, you can also remove the staff credits altogether. I don't think they add much to the article.
 * Maybe rename "Development" to "Development and history" to better cover the different type of content in the section.
 * The reception table content needs some formatting: "| Amiga Format | 69% |". All magazine titles should be in italics. The dates and issue number are already in the citation so it only clutters the table.
 * The "Reception" section needs more organization. I'll see if about copy editing it. Can you provide the links to the reviews here?
 * All video game titles, like Line of Fire, Operation Wolf, etc., should be in italics.
 * I came across a webpage that has a more accurate screenshot of the arcade. That would be better than the Amiga version currently in the article. It's an animated gif that shows three screenshots, so take your pick.
 * (Guyinblack25 talk 15:44, 26 October 2009 (UTC))

Link to reviews here. I like the arcade screenshots but have no idea how to take just one image out of the gif file. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 09:39, 27 October 2009 (UTC)

More reviews;  

I have changed a few of the citations to  to remove the copyright infringements, and taken out the Arcade History reference as I agree with the lack of contentious information. I have also done a bit more formatting to try to bring the article into line with others. I'll do a bit more work but until it is copy edited I am running out of ideas to move the article forward. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 10:04, 27 October 2009 (UTC)


 * Development section -
 * as per, I included extracts of an interview with the designer for the ZX Spectrum version about the development for the system. I think this could be an interesting inclusion if it could be worded properly. I also think the information about the cover disk could be used but this may not be neccesary. Your thoughts please. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 14:03, 29 October 2009 (UTC)


 * I don't know if there's too much more that can be done from my end. There may well be more reviews on Japanese language websites but as I do not speak the language it is difficult for me to tell.
 * I think a bit of copy-editing could be done now by a fresh pair of eyes before the article gets put up for re-assessment. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 17:15, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Cabinet image
I think that as the cabinet for the arcade version of this game has been described as "quite unique" by KLOV that an image of it would benefit the article. The only image I can get my hands on is from this game's entry on KLOV, but I cannot find an applicable licence when attempting to upload it. On the KLOV trademarks and copyright page they say that images are available for limited non-commercial and commercial use but this is not acceptable on Wikipedia. My question really is: Are we able to use images from KLOV? Or is there somebody out there who can provide a free use image of the Space Gun cabinet? AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 21:06, 2 December 2009 (UTC)
 * I think this answers part of the question; Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Archive 56. Now just to find somebody who has access to a machine that is willing to take a photo and freely licence it. AirRaidPatrol 84 (talk) 21:17, 2 December 2009 (UTC)