Talk:Wisp (Sonic)

Peer Review - April 2014
Comments by CalvinK(talk): I have had a good read of this article and I had no knowledge of the subject matter. As you are looking to potentially take it to FA nomination, I have used the FA criteria to base my review. This should not be taken as a definite pass for FA once the issues have been corrected - the ladies and gentlemen at the FA review are much more experienced than I am.

Some things to think about are as follows:
 * "They debuted in the Wii/Nintendo DS game Sonic Colors in 2010, where Sonic can use them as power-ups while he rescues others from Doctor Eggman, who plans to use them for a mind control ray." To me this is a very difficult sentence and could do with being tidied up a bit. It might be worthwhile to break it into two longer sentences just to make it a bit clearer. Other than that, the lead paragraph is good.
 * That table. I appreciate what you're saying about it and at this time can not think of any way around it. I would certainly give a very brief few sentences in that section before the table, perhaps something along the lines of "there are x different types of Wisps".
 * Sources are good. Reception section is balanced.
 * Media is non-free but adequate rationale has been placed.
 * Stable article

It is an engaging read and I felt it was well written. I would say all you need to is tidy up that sentence in the lead, and do something about that table (at the very least add a sentence in that section!) and it should be OK at FA Nom. Calvin (talk) 18:16, 15 April 2014 (UTC)

Some slight minor edits
I've just been following the progress of this since my peer review. I decided to change the section with the table and I have decided that 17 should be expressed in words. WP:MOSNUM allows this so long as there are no other numbers in the article that are expressed in numbers. I couldn't find any other numbers expressed as figures, and I think expressing it in words made it appear better.

As for the second sentence in that particular section, it's very confusing to follow. I'm not entirely sure what it is meant to convey so it could do with a rewording to make it easier to read and follow. Other than that, good work, and you have my support at FAC. Just drop me a message on my talk page when it is listed at FAC. Calvin (talk) 17:53, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Think I retooled that sentence to sound a little more natural. Thanks! Tezero (talk) 18:00, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I've just added some extra text to make something clearer, and also to remove the use of "as of yet", as encyclopedia articles should not speculate about what the future is going to be, unless there are reliable sources to suggest future Wisps. As for the last sentence, I think the issue I have is with the word "variously". I think there is a better way to describe it than using the word variously. Alas, I can't think what that word is. Although that did bring up an extra point that might be worth mentioning in the article. Is there any kind of correlation or explanation for the seemingly random exclusion of some of the Wisps depending upon the game and/or console the game is played on? If so, I'd definitely suggest adding it to the article. Calvin (talk) 20:07, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Random exclusion? I mean, some weren't introduced in Colors (and none were in Generations). I'd guess that the Lost World dev team just didn't think some of the older ones would fit in that game, but that hasn't been in any of the coverage I've seen of the game. I can look further, though. Tezero (talk) 20:31, 16 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I say random as there doesn't appear to be any reason as to why some are included in some of the games and some aren't. To be honest there must be a way of tidying that section up to make it a bit more clearer, but it's been a long day and I think it may be worth setting it up for FAC Nomination now and seeing what they may suggest for improvement. Calvin (talk) 20:37, 16 April 2014 (UTC)

Notability
Please see Talk:List of Sonic the Hedgehog video game characters for a notability discussion that pertains to this article and its series czar ♔  04:24, 13 May 2014 (UTC)