Talk:Spindizzy/GA1

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

Reviewer: –MuZemike 21:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * Prose issues
 * In the lead, Players must navigate ... and feature action and puzzle game elements. → Do players feature action and puzzle game elements? Reword that so that you're properly referring to the game.
 * In the Gameplay section, Players navigate the probe through the stages to explore the world within a time limit. → Isn't a stage a portion of this vast world, which they must explore in a limited amount of time. If I'm incorrect in what I'm reading ignore; otherwise, please tweak that sentence accordingly.
 * In the Development and release section, However, the company ... to Shirley and Electric Dreams. → Try and rewrite that sentence without the "however" in there.
 * In the Reception and legacy section, I'm not sure that the material after that emdash in Reviewers drew comparisons to Marble Madness is needed in there. That following sentence, while relevant to the article and probably fits somewhere, may not be the best fit there.


 * Other things to remember

Just a reminder to italicize all instances of the title even in the citations. The same goes with WP:DASH usage.

On hold pending the prose improvements. Otherwise, while being short, it is decent prose-wise in general, the images are good and fair-use rationales fine, and everything has consistent citations and is verifiable.
 * Conclusions

A couple of things I would recommend though for further improvement and expansion:


 * If there are viable external links that can be added, add them.
 * I noticed that Spindizzy Worlds is not terribly large, either. I think it's very well possible when that article gets built up that it could be merged into this one without much problems (that's my opinion, though) to create a more comprehensive article on the series of games.

–MuZemike 21:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)


 * I made some edits per your suggestions above. Here are some replies to your review:
 * Since I never played the game, the gameplay section was difficult to write. The game world is divided into separate screens, which most reviews called "stages". I tried to convey that in the section, but admit I'm ignorant to what would be the best way to do so.
 * I split the Marble Madness release info between the "Development" and "Reception" sections. Hopefully it flows better.
 * I've always been confused about the italicizing of game titles in citations. WP:CITE, MOS:TEXT, and MOS:TITLE do not clarify this point. My concern is that the magazine title is also italicized and I want to avoid confusion. If you think this is not an issue to be concerned about, then I won't worry about it.
 * The dash usage in the title was taken directly from the  tags from the webpages. If the common practice is to switch out the regular hyphens with the en dashes, then I'll make sure to do so from now on.
 * I did not come across any external link that looked reliable.
 * I considered a merge, but noticed that Spindizzy Worlds received a number of reviews and felt that a decent C-class article could be written. Depending on the development content out there, B-class and even GA might be possible. But like you said, depending on the content, it might benefit both articles to merge. However, I don't think it's necessary at this time.
 * Let me know what else I can do for the review. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC))

Passed. Looks good. As far as the titles in the citations are concerned, one FAC reviewer hounded me for that on a recent article. I think consistency in titles is the key there. –MuZemike 16:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)