Talk:The Sims 2: Open for Business/GA1

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

Reviewer: Epicgenius (talk · contribs) 00:21, 14 September 2023 (UTC)

Hi vat, I'll leave some comments soon.

Prose, POV, and coverage

 * Lead:
 * 1st paragraph: Multiple new advancement systems are added, such as talent badges, which track sims' progress in business skills; business ranks, which measure a business's success based on its company loyalty; and business perks, gifts or skills granted to a sim for running a successful business. - After reading this sentence, I feel like the word "business" sounds strange to me. Anyway, I'd suggest adding "which are" before "gifts or skills" to match the sentence structure of the rest of the sentence.
 * 1st paragraph: building options - Like physical buildings?
 * Knew you would say that :) Yes, architectural design/"build mode" (as opposed to normal play) is a fairly big draw of the series, and OFB had a lot directed at that specifically alongside its more obvious additions. I'm trying to figure out a way to express that without getting too jargony (e.g. not explicitly writing "build mode"). Vaticidalprophet 17:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Could you briefly summarize the background and development sections in one sentence? Or is there a reason you didn't summarize that section? (I'd say the same of the Soundtrack section, but it's not that important imo.)
 * Nah, just missed that. I'll see what's worth adding. I have some memory of trying to find a way to slot in the product placement thing and failing. Vaticidalprophet 17:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Added a little. Vaticidalprophet 15:50, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Background and development
 * I see Manual of Style/Video games recommends putting development after gameplay. Not a big deal - I assume there's a good reason you put background/development first.
 * 1st paragraph: amongst all platforms and installments - "Installments" being devices, I assume?
 * installment, most particularly in its "part of a published or broadcast serial" sense. I don't know if I agree with our friends at Wiktionary that this is a specifically-American spelling. Vaticidalprophet 17:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Oh, that kind of installment. I thought it was like a computer installment or something. – Epicgenius (talk) 18:54, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * 1st paragraph: It expanded upon the original game's features, introducting elements such as an aspiration system based around short-term and long-term goals, expanded character and neighbourhood customization, and the ability for sims to raise families, age, and progress through generations - A few things here.
 * "Introducing" is misspelled.
 * The commas after "goals" and "customization" should be semicolons, since this is a serial list where an individual item has commas, per MOS:SEMICOLON.
 * Fixed both of these...embarrassingly, that typo is in three articles. I'll get the others. I considered structuring the list with semicolons when first writing it and decided it wasn't long enough to justify them, but if MOS Sez, that's not the kind of MOS point I fall on my sword over I'm too busy arguing about capitalization . <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 17:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * 3rd paragraph: the in-game easel, which allowed sims to make and sell paintings - the easel being an object in the base game?
 * 4th paragraph: in in-game storylines - This wording sounds a little weird to me.
 * So this is tricky. The Sims is a sandbox game, but TS2 in particular has prominent premade storylines. I naturally think of them in jargony terms ("premades") and there are essentially no good secondary sources discussing them in enough depth to have clear terminology, but as comes up here, they were discussed by secondary sources and do need to be included. So I'm at the admittedly ugly "in in-" wording right now. I'll think about it. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 17:53, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ended up removing this clause from the sentence. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 15:51, 16 September 2023 (UTC)
 * More later. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:13, 15 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Gameplay:
 * 1st paragraph: on community lots they own - So like a land lot?
 * 1st paragraph: due to its ability to let players control - "since it let players control"?
 * 2nd paragraph: Talent badges are ranked as "bronze", "silver", and "gold" - I presume from lower to higher ranking.
 * I found the pet brick thing funny, by the way.
 * 3rd paragraph: Business Perks; perks include - I feel like this can be reworded as "Business Perks, which include" to avoid repetition.
 * 4th paragraph: conical roofs alongside existing flat ones - Unless these roofs are physically next to each other, I'd reword "alongside" to "along with".
 * More soon. – Epicgenius (talk) 02:30, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Fixed repetition and overwriting in Special:Diff/1175766865. "Community lots" I'm trying to figure out a non-jargon for; it's...basically anything that's not a sim's house. "Along with" feels ambiguous to me about how long the flat roofs have been around for? <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 23:01, 17 September 2023 (UTC)
 * "Community-owned lots", perhaps?As for conical roofs alongside, how about "in addition to"? – Epicgenius (talk) 14:15, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I've trimmed the mention of flat roofs entirely, because I couldn't rephrase it a way I was happy with and while trying to do so realized readers can probably guess that houses had roofs before OfB. I'm not sure "community-owned lots" is right -- it's not the term the game uses, and they aren't owned by anyone in particular. (wikiasite:sims:Community lot gives the necessary context; I almost want to interwiki-link it.) <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 22:45, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Soundtrack:
 * No issues to note.
 * Reception and legacy:
 * Lol at the quote "Thankfully, they haven't yet released The Sims: Sexual Harassment Lawsuit, so that's the only problem."
 * 1st paragraph: Since its release, Open for Business has seen use as an educational tool for business and mathematics students - Is this use particularly widespread, or are you saying that at least one school has used the expansion as a teaching tool?
 * 2nd paragraph: Adams' review should be "Adams's review" per MOS:POSS. Did Adams praise anything in this expansion?
 * 2nd paragraph: Dave Kosack at GameSpy considered Open for Business so deep - Not sure if "deep" is the right word - this sounds a little off to me.
 * More in a bit. – Epicgenius (talk) 15:43, 21 September 2023 (UTC)
 * @Vaticidalprophet, this is awkward. I was trying to resume my review but somehow got sidetracked onto The Sims 2 expansion packs because I mis-capitalized a word. Is there a reason why this article, and the other Sims 2 expansion pack pages you created, aren't in Category:The Sims 2 expansion packs? – Epicgenius (talk) 19:13, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * They should all be in the category page -- if they're not that's because I missed them, so should be added. The list itself is a mess -- it's the product of a single editor making unilateral merges several years ago, but not doing anything to produce a list afterwards (i.e. the list is just a 6000-word straight-down merge of a bunch of articles that at the time were in poor enough shape that they looked like they should be merged, rather than any attempt at either improving the underlying articles or creating a consistent list). There are a ton of redirects, which should all be retargeted where the articles have been rewritten (and the list should be rewritten once the articles are done), but I can't keep track of all of them because they were all automatically retargeted, so I'm just trying to find the relevant ones when I can. Checking redirs on the list would make it easy, but not quite as easy as you might think, because there were a lot of fairly unrelated ones (e.g. redirs for minor characters). <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 19:39, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the explanation. So, to clarify, do you wish to add this page, and the three other expansion packs you created, to Category:The Sims 2 expansion packs? I've retargeted some of the redirects to the four articles that you already created.On another note, I notice that some of the titles listed on Category:The Sims 2 expansion packs have categories, despite being redirects to the Sims 2 expansion packs page. For the four expansion packs that have standalone articles, I think we should move the categories on the redirect pages to the standalone articles. For example, the categories on The Sims 2: Open for Business (old) should be moved to this article. I know this technically is not a GA criterion, but it would help reduce duplication. – Epicgenius (talk) 20:15, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Ye-es, the redirect categories should definitely be fixed -- my bad. I didn't know no-redirect moves preserved those. No-redirect moves are weird. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 20:27, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Great. I will resume this review soon - I only have to review the rest of the reception and legacy section, do some spot checks, and check for copyvio/close paraphrasing . – Epicgenius (talk) 22:18, 22 September 2023 (UTC)
 * Contemporary reception:
 * 3rd paragraph: while the former proposed a housewares retail business - To clarify, this does not exist in the expansion? If not, that's a shame - this idea sounds cool.
 * Oh, this is totally a thing you could do -- and you could run that exact knight-themed one. Is there a way to make "this is totally a thing you could do" clearer? <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 12:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Probably "while the former, taking advantage of the various clothing options, proposed a housewares retail business called "Bath Knights" where employees must dress in knight costumes" or something like that? – Epicgenius (talk) 14:44, 5 October 2023 (UTC)
 * 4th paragraph: In particular, several found the expansion failed to clarify that a business's opening hours are determined by manually flipping an open sign to closed and vice versa - If the sources go into this, I think it may be good to clarify whether the businesses are closed by default when a player creates a business.
 * I'm pretty sure it does, though I honestly never liked running OfB businesses that much, so that's not firsthand :) I don't know that they make it clear, though. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 12:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * 6th paragraph: third highest-selling PC game of 2006 - Does this mean the third-highest-selling PC game (i.e. two PC games released in 2006 had more sales), or the third highest-selling PC game (i.e. prior to this expansion's release, two games held the title of "highest-selling PC game" in 2006, both of which were beat out by this expansion)? If it's the third-highest, I'd add a hyphen.
 * Hyphen added. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 12:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Later reception:
 * 1st paragraph: Since its release, Open for Business has remained the subject of critical attention. - You only mention one later review, though.
 * hm. I think 'critical attention' can be interpreted more broadly than only reviews and also include analysis more generally, but this is arguable. <b style="color:black">Vaticidal</b><b style="color:#66023C">prophet</b> 12:13, 2 October 2023 (UTC)
 * That's it for prose. I will do spot checks next, by tomorrow hopefully. – Epicgenius (talk) 17:28, 28 September 2023 (UTC)

Images and copyright

 * This article has a single image, which has a valid fair-use rationale. Epicgenius (talk) 22:19, 22 September 2023 (UTC)