User:Npb5183/Choose an Article

Article Selection
Please list articles that you're considering for your Wikipedia assignment below. Begin to critique these articles and find relevant sources.

Option 1

 * Article title: World of Warcraft: Legion
 * Article Evaluation:
 * Lead: Only issue I could find was changing the tense of one of the sentences so that it frames the expansion as not being current.
 * Content: World of Warcraft is a huge game and each expansion adds a plethora of content to the game. The content of the article is on point and covers most of the bases of what the xpac changes or brings to the table. That being said some of the changes or sub topics are very brief in relation to the complexity of the topic they pertain to. One example would be mythic+ which I feel was not described holistically though not incorrectly.
 * Tone & Balance: Wasn't able to find anything to add here. The writing follows Wikipedia's guidelines on being neutral and factual.
 * Sources and References: Not much to add here either though you can always cite some of the live interviews which I don't see listed. In addition while I haven't read them myself I know there are a number of lore endorsed novels which involve the plot of the game itself and hold relevancy. I'd have to do further research to find more on them though.
 * Organization: Checks out with me.
 * Images and Media: Are cited and/or open source to my knowledge
 * Talk Page: Since it's an old xpac it's fairly inactive.
 * Overall: This article has a ton of good information about the xpac and the game itself. That being said this is a huge topic and I'm sure there's a decent amount of content to add if I put more time into it.
 * Sources:
 * I've been playing World of Warcraft since I was a child and was among the top 1% of players during the Legion expansion including mythic raiding experience. I utilized this basis alongside the World of Warcraft official site and WoWHead which I will link below. WowHead is a gaming wiki similar in scope to Wikipedia but focused solely on World of Warcraft. It operates on the same premise and has a longstanding history with the wow community.
 * https://www.wowhead.com/legion-database
 * https://worldofwarcraft.com/en-us/story/timeline/chapter-30
 * https://wowwiki.fandom.com/wiki/World_of_Warcraft:_Legion
 * https://wowwiki.fandom.com/wiki/Patches
 * https://wowwiki.fandom.com/wiki/World_of_Warcraft:_Legion
 * https://wowwiki.fandom.com/wiki/Patches

Option 2

 * Article title: World of Warcraft: Battle for Azeroth
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead: Lead is solid, informative and gives you the information about the expansion someone might be looking for at first glance.
 * Content: As I stated about the previous expansion these are huge content updates involving a very large virtual world. As a result there's a ton of content and information of arguable importance. That being said this article does a good job of summarizing the highlights of the expansion.
 * Tone & Balance: Nothing of serious note here. That being said some of the information about plot etc could be refined some as it could be argued as projecting importance on certain events.
 * Sources and References: Nothing to add here
 * Organization: Nothing to add here either
 * Images and Media: Media is cited and or open source
 * Talk Page: I was surprised to see there wasn't a lot going on in the talk page
 * Overall: Overall this article is a lot better than I think it's rated. That being said if they wanted to get deep with things it is definitely lacking.
 * Sources
 * Refer to my sourcing for "World of Warcraft: Legion"
 * Sources
 * Refer to my sourcing for "World of Warcraft: Legion"

Option 3

 * Article title: Warcraft III: Reforged
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead: I do not like some of the statements made by the lead of this article. For starters it almost feels like Blizzard touched up this page rather than someone in tune with the Blizzard community. While the factual information presented is accurate if not "misleading". It only has revamped textures as the cutscenes are merely upscaled in resolution and were not reworked as promised during a live Blizz Con Q&A. Beyond this it is stated the game was met with mixed reviews. A simple google search disproves this statement as consumer responses were extremely negative on average with a number of gaming reporters echoing the same sentiment.
 * Content: Since I don't own the game but did play the original extensively I cannot comment on everything without either purchasing the game myself or doing some extensive research. That being said the content of this page is limited at best. It has almost no coverage of the game itself and instead really just gives you some very basic external facts such as release date etc.
 * Tone & Balance: I feel the tone of this article is not in touch with the community response.
 * Sources and References: I didn't go through every source but for an article to have over 20 sources with so little information present is certainly a good sign.
 * Organization: Can't really comment on something so small there isn't really organization. It does go from a broad overview to specifics though so that's at least good.
 * Images and Media: Checks out unless I missed something.
 * Talk Page: Someone vocalized the same stance as mine about the "mixed reception" but overall not a lot going on here.
 * Overall: This is probably one of the weakest Wikipedia pages I have seen in awhile. It has very little content and a lot of content gaps. That being said I'm not as familiar with the game so I'm reluctant to tackle it as a novice editor.
 * Sources
 * On metacritic, a rating website, Warcraft 3 holds one of the lowest if not the lowest ranking ever with a .06 user average score with ~35,000 reviews. Keep in mind this rating is out of 10. Beyond this I have experience with the base game so I know some of the premises of it. Many of which are not included in the article. It really doesn't touch on the fact the game is a real time strategy in any depth which should probably be the focus of the article since it's about the game itself.
 * https://www.metacritic.com/game/pc/warcraft-iii-reforged
 * https://www.pcgamer.com/warcraft-3-reforged-controversy/
 * https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/warcraft3/23411981/warcraft-iii-reforged-developer-update
 * https://news.blizzard.com/en-us/warcraft3/23411981/warcraft-iii-reforged-developer-update

Option 4

 * Article title: Diablo III: Reaper of Souls
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead: After reading a number of other leads this one seems pretty solid. It's up to date, lists dates and supported systems etc.
 * Content: There's a ton of content around the plot which people have put a pretty solid amount of work into. That being said some of the gameplay systems listed as sub topics are very short. Some of which being only a sentence or two. Which could be expanded upon without much difficulty.
 * Tone & Balance: The plot takes a pretty informative tone and does a good job of being objective. I wouldn't say it's perfect but as a novice editor I wouldn't really know where to start in cleaning it up. Since a lot of this content is subjective it's in a fairly grey area for me.
 * Sources and References: Plenty of sources and references listed. None of the ones I checked were broken though for the sake of time I didn't try them all. Some of the sources were gaming journalists and magazines but in this sector of content I feel it's almost unavoidable.
 * Organization: Organization seems fine as it follows an inverted pyramid structure. Small surface knowledge at the top and plot/content underneath with subtopics.
 * Images and Media: Checked out as far as I could tell
 * Talk Page: Almost nothing posted here. Doesn't seem to have been any controversy or simply not many editors have taken time with the article.
 * Overall: Better than most of the articles I've put here but far from perfect. There is room for some minor additions to flesh out systems and such but overall most of what I know about the game is already included.
 * Sources: As someone who grew up with Blizzard games Diablo was one of their titles I spent time on. While by no means an expert on the game I am familiar with its systems, playstyle and overall premise. These understandings were supported and referenced though the games fandom wiki and Blizzards official site.
 * https://diablo.fandom.com/wiki/Diablo_III
 * https://diablo.fandom.com/wiki/Diablo_III:_Reaper_of_Souls
 * https://eu.diablo3.com/en/reaper-of-souls/
 * https://eu.diablo3.com/en/reaper-of-souls/

Option 5

 * Article title: Escape From Tarkov
 * Article Evaluation
 * Lead:
 * The lead for this page is fairly short and does not completely describe the objectives of the game. For example it states that players fight each other for loot, which is an aspect of the game but not the complete focus. For example players will engage different AI known by the community as SCAVS, RAIDERS and BOSSES.
 * Content:
 * Overall it seems fairly solid though it lacks much depth. For example only one benefit of the hideout is listed which is the player SCAV cooldown reduction. Beyond this it should probably be included that player SCAVS do not just spawn with equipment but also rare items such as labs access keycards etc. Since the ballistics system in the game is one of it's major selling points it would also probably be relevant to touch upon. Many of the systems in the game which set it apart from other FPS games like Call of Duty are not touched upon in enough depth. Since this is low rated article content gaps are to be expected.
 * Tone & Balance:
 * Tone and Balance are fine from what I saw though some of the article could use some reformatting just to allow more some more expansion. Everything I saw was presented in a straightforward and non-convoluted manner.
 * Sources and References:
 * The sources used are questionable but the topic itself doesn't really have a lot of perfect sources outside of patch notes. From what I could see the official podcasts with Nikita (head developer) were not included so added some information from these would help to add some credibility.
 * Organization:
 * Since the article lacks so much content I don't have any issues with its organization. This is subject to change.
 * Images and Media:
 * The images are fine but there are not exactly a lot. I could look to add some screenshots of my own since I own them but I'm not sure if it's really needed.
 * Talk Page:
 * Not a lot going on here yet
 * Overall:
 * This will probably be my article of choice since it's constantly being updated and changed which provides a lot of room for updates. Beyond this I've played the game and am fairly familiar with its systems which will help with sourcing credible information and ensuring that it is up to date due to the nature of games being in "beta".
 * Sources
 * The only sources I used for this as of right are my own experience playing the game verified by Tarkovs Gamepedia linked below
 * https://escapefromtarkov.gamepedia.com/Escape_from_Tarkov_Wiki
 * https://www.pcgamer.com/escape-from-tarkov-is-a-daunting-and-savage-evolution-of-battle-royale/
 * https://escapefromtarkov.gamepedia.com/Ballistics
 * https://escapefromtarkov.gamepedia.com/Ballistics