Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wrath of the Darkhul King/archive1

Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wrath of the Darkhul King

 * Nominator(s): Aoba47 (talk) 01:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Buffy the Vampire Slayer may have found critical and popular acclaim, but the same cannot be said about this video game adaptation, which received generally negative reviews and has largely been forgotten. It is a fairly standard action platformer in which players navigate platforms while solving simple puzzles and fighting enemies. For the story, Buffy Summers must once again stop a big bad from ending the world, but this time the main villain is a demonic warlord. Although the game itself is fairly generic stuff, I still really enjoyed the process of researching, writing, and revising the article.

I originally worked on this article in 2019, when it received a very helpful GAN review from, and as evidenced from the talk page, I have had many, many false starts on doing further work on the article. Thank you to, , and for their help in the latest peer review. As always, any comments would be greatly appreciated. Aoba47 (talk) 01:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Image review (pass)

 * the images are licensed appropriately, include alt text, and provide context where appropriate. Pseud 14 (talk) 02:10, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for the review! Aoba47 (talk) 02:30, 12 January 2024 (UTC)

Gog the Mild
Recusing to review.


 * Citations: why are some words in bold?
 * I had use a citation similar to one from Paper Mario: The Origami King. I believe they put the items in bold as they appear that way in the credits, but I can see how it would be unnecessarily distracting so I had removed them. Thank you for pointing it out as I use Wikipedia in dark mode so it is not something I notice. Aoba47 (talk) 21:38, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * No problem. I did wonder. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * " is a 2003 action platformer" will I suspect mean little to many readers. Possibly state that it is a video game before specifying the sub-genre? Similarly in the main article.
 * I have added game after the "action platformer" descriptor as that is how video game FAs format this. Aoba47 (talk) 21:43, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Sadly Wikipedia doesn't do precedent, and is not a reliable source. The MoS "The first sentence should introduce the topic, and tell the nonspecialist reader what or who the subject is, and often when or where. It should be in plain English." IMO the current one doesn't do this. (And "action platformer" does not IMO meet MOS:NOFORCELINK: "Do use a link wherever appropriate, but as far as possible do not force a reader to use that link to understand the sentence. The text needs to make sense to readers who cannot follow links.")
 * For starters, I am not using Wikipedia as a source. What you are saying would mean that every single Wikipedia article about video games would have to define the genre in the first sentence. That would not only ruin the prose, but it has not been done in any of the video game FAs, see Oxenfree, Paper Mario: The Origami King, and Panzer Dragoon Saga for examples. In the first sentence, readers can understand that "action platformer" is a type of video game; if they want to know more and cannot access the link, they can go down to the "Gameplay" section to get further clarification on it. This is an unnecessarily strict application of MOS:NOFORCELINK. I doubt that any FA would meet this type of criteria. Aoba47 (talk) 01:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If you don't care for MOS:NOFORCELINK, consider MOS:LEADSENTENCE, which is also part of the MoS and so policy. It starts "The first sentence should introduce the topic, and tell the nonspecialist reader what or who the subject is, and often when or where. It should be in plain English." and continues "If its subject is definable, then the first sentence should give a concise definition: where possible, one that puts the article in context for the nonspecialist." Readers will not necessarily "understand that "action platformer" is a type of video game"; I didn't. And I don't see how prose is ruined by something like 'Buffy the Vampire Slayer: Wrath of the Darkhul King is a 2003 video game developed by the Japanese company Natsume and published by THQ for the Game Boy Advance. It is a action platformer and was the third of six video games based on the television show Buffy the Vampire Slayer.'
 * For starters, I never said that I "don't care for" MOS:NOFORCELINK. I even said in this same review that I do understand and appreciate how it can be helpful. I am disagreeing on the application of the policy. That doesn't mean that I "don't care for" for it as a whole. I want to be 100% clear on that. It is normal for Wikipedia editors to disagree and have discussions, but please do not imply I said something I did not say.
 * Aside from that, I was under the impression you wanted the genre "action platformer" to be explicitly defined and explained in the prose of the first sentence. That is what I was referencing in how the prose would be negatively affected. I did not read your initial suggestion as meaning to move "action platormer" to a different sentence entirely. I believe the first sentence does identify the subject as a game, which is something that I added during this review to make it clearer in the prose.
 * Speaking of the MOS, there is Manual of Style/Video games, which says for the lead: "The name of the game in bold italics, its gameplay genre, release date, platform, and other identifying information go first." I will just wait and see how other reviewers respond to it. Aoba47 (talk) 19:12, 18 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Just as an additional update, I went ahead and added "video game" to the lead. It is done in the current featured article of the day, Homeworld, and should make it immediately clear to readers that this is a video game even if they are not familiar with the specific genre at play here. Aoba47 (talk) 00:43, 19 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Natsume Co., Ltd. and published by THQ". Why "Ltd" after Natsume, but no "Inc" after THQ?
 * That would be a better question for as they added this part to the article. I had a conversation with them on my talk page about it. I had originally used Natsume as that is used in the game and coverage, but Emiya Mulzomdao recommended Natsume Co., Ltd. to avoid any potential confusion between Natsume Atari and Natsume Inc.. Aoba47 (talk) 21:43, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I would have thought that the Wikilink may do that. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:45, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Same, but I thought it might be best to see what other editors thought of the change as I did not want to force my own opinion on the article. I could revert it back if necessary. Aoba47 (talk) 21:49, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I see where you're coming from, but it leaves me querying the apparent inconsistency. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:29, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * @Gog the Mild I can confirm this was suggested by me. The problem is that when the game was released in 2003, there were two companies known as "Natsume": the Japanese company Natsume Co., Ltd. (currently Natsume Atari) and the American company Natsume Inc. Both of these companies are notable and it's a common mistake to attribute one's works to the other, even within Wikipedia. I spoke to Aoba47 over talk page and suggested an alternative to re-format the links as Natsume, which is what the article currently uses. As an extra measure, I'd also suggest rephrasing a few sentences to "the Japanese developer Natsume", which would let readers know which one the article is referring to. Emiya Mulzomdao (talk) 00:58, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Clever. Yes, inserting 'the Japanese developer/company' would do the trick.
 * Revised. It does create a redundancy in the first line though with "developed"/"developer" being used in the same sentence so that is less than ideal. Aoba47 (talk) 03:08, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ah yes. Maybe replace "developer" with 'company'?
 * Replaced. Aoba47 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "The player controls Buffy through 16 side-scrolling levels". Could this be unpacked a little for a more general audience?
 * I am honestly not sure how to unpack it further without making the prose awkward. I am guess the side-scrolling part in particular needs to be unpacked the most. Do you have any ideas or suggestions on how to do so? Aoba47 (talk) 21:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Rereading, I think the sentence is trying to do a little too much. Maybe 'The player controls the Buffy character as it progresses through 16 levels, using side-scrolling screens'?
 * The suggestion is not correct and in my opinion, it would only introduce further confusion. There is only one screen being used in the game. The suggestion would imply that player is controlling Buffy across multiple screens or multiple Game Boy Advance machines. It may be best to remove "side-scrolling" altogether at this point. Aoba47 (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have removed "side-scrolling" from the lead, and I have added a brief descriptive phrase with appropriate citations to support, but to be honest, I think it is unnecessary. Aoba47 (talk) 20:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Limited to four bosses in the game". MOS:NOFORCELINK: "Do use a link wherever appropriate, but as far as possible do not force a reader to use that link to understand the sentence. The text needs to make sense to readers who cannot follow links." Similarly in the main article.
 * I am honestly not sure how to make this part clearer as I would think that the concept of a video game boss would be pretty well-understood, but I would be more than happy to hear any suggestions. Aoba47 (talk) 21:47, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * When I read it I honestly had no clue what a boss meant. Before clicking on the link my best guess was a specialist meaning derived from Shield boss or Boss (architecture). 'There are just four computer-controlled opponents (bosses) in the game, Natsume ...'?
 * The suggestion would not work because bosses are not the only computer-controlled opponents in the game. I have removed this bit from the lead and added a short part to the first mention in the article, although I admittedly do not think it is the greatest. I do understand and appreciate MOS:NOFORCELINK, but it is not always possible to spell out everything in the prose. Wikipedia is a primarily online platform so I do not see the issue with using links. Different readers will come to different subjects with varying levels of expertise. For instance, I just find it rather odd that you would jump to far more niche meanings (i.e. Shield boss or Boss (architecture)) for a word that is not even presented in that context and not even to the broader supervisor meaning. I would never anticipate that kind of reading. I just find that this kind of stricter adherence to MOS:NOFORCELINK can get into a space that is more frustrating and less beneficial to the site and its readers. Aoba47 (talk) 03:43, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Natsume chose these enemies based on". Chose which enemies?
 * I have modified this part. It is referencing "bosses", which was discussed earlier in the same sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "citing issues with character sprites." MOS:NOFORCELINK again.
 * Would models be a clear word choice? Aoba47 (talk) 01:42, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That would work for me.
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "jumping and double jumping over pits, swimming, and using ladders, ropes, and metal bars." Optional: three times "and" in 11 words?
 * I have replaced one instance with "or" instead. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Buffy solves puzzles ... She can also ... in certain areas, the player must". The switch from Buffy to the player jars.
 * I have done it to avoid repeating either the player or Buffy ad nauseam throughout the "Gameplay" section. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have revised this part, and only kept one instance of "Buffy" when it is discussing the character's move-set. I still do not see how it would be jarring though as the prose had already set up that the player controls Buffy in the game. Aoba47 (talk) 20:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "changes some level entrances". Could this be elaborated a little?
 * Not really. This is the sentence from the lead that is being used to support this part: (The hard mode switches around a few cave entrances and changes most of the puzzle solutions, but it can be completed in an afternoon.) All it is saying that on a certain mode, players enter the level in different areas. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * "on a certain mode, players enter the level in different areas" is a really good explanation. I now know what you mean. Any chance of using it in the article?
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "the Gentlemen's minions". Why the upper-case G?
 * They use the upper-case G because they are both proper nouns that reference a specific set of demons from the show. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * "A proper noun is a noun that identifies a single entity and is used to refer to that entity (Africa; Jupiter; Sarah; Tesla, Inc.) as distinguished from a common noun, which is a noun that refers to a class of entities". So you could, perhaps, have a Gentleman, but it is the gentlemen.
 * I am aware of what a proper noun is. These characters are referenced as "the Gentlemen" on the show. In the game, the player goes up against multiple of them so "a Gentleman" would not even make sense in this context. Aoba47 (talk) 01:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * The two images in Gameplay seem unduly small.
 * I have made them slightly bigger and used the screenshot sizes from video game FAs to see how they do it. It may take a second for it to show in the article. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Also, just to add a quick point, the screenshots are never going to be large as they are an example of non-free media so it would have to be limited by that. Aoba47 (talk) 01:47, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Enemies can be thrown ... through benches". As in Bench (furniture)?
 * That is correct. I have added the link. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Ok. It was clear, I was just surprised - it benches seem a bit arbitrary - and wanted to check.


 * "In the levels, Buffy can find and use 16 types of weapons". Are the first three words necessary?
 * Not really. I was likely being overly cautious. It is not like a reader would think that players could do this while looking at the settings. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "including a stake ... Vampires are primarily killed with stakes". Singular or plural stakes?
 * They are used in two separate contexts. I used the singular in the first instance for consistency. One of the weapons, (a mystical gauntlet), is unique so I wanted to avoid having a list being predominantly plural and then switching to the singular at the end. The second instance is plural because multiple enemies are being referenced. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If Buffy "can find and use" more than one stake, dagger, crossbow etc then they need to be plural in the list. I can see why you would like to be consistent, but it is at the expense of accuracy.
 * Again, this just seems unnecessary, but I have revised it. I doubt a reader would have walked away from that sentence thinking that was only one of each item in the game. Aoba47 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "they can be upgraded, such as combining a torch and a dagger to make a flaming dagger." I am not sure this is the best exemplifier of an upgrade.
 * Revised to "modified". Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Nice.


 * "It was the third of six Buffy the Vampire Slayer video games". It would seem relevant say something about the other five games, or at least the two preceding this one.
 * I disagree. All these games have the same source material. THQ published both this game and the first Buffy game, which is already noted in the article. Aside from that, there is nothing else to note in this article. Each game stands on its own. This particular game does not share anything story-wise or gameplay-wise, aside from the two things already discussed in the article. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "a Slayer destined to fight vampires". Why the upper-case S? "after her Watcher Rupert Giles". And W.
 * Because again, it is a proper noun that references something specific from the show. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * She the definition of proper noun above.
 * Again, I am aware of what a proper noun is. Words like "Watcher" and "Slayer" are presented with capital letters even in the coverage around the show, such as in this book by McFarland & Company or in this chapter published by Palgrave Macmillan. I am just not seeing the issue here. Aoba47 (talk) 01:20, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Buffy encounters the Gentlemen and their minions and later kills them." The Gentlemen, the minions or both?
 * If it’s both, then I’d suggest "..encounters and kills the Gentlemen.." If one or the other, then "kills the former/latter". FrB.TG (talk) 22:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)
 * I have used FrB.TG's suggestion. Buffy does kill both the Gentlemen and the minions. I had used the original wording to avoid the impression that she first sees them and kills them in the same level. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Willow identifies the Baruk demons as". Baruk?
 * I have revised this part to hopefully clarify this point, but that is the name of the demons in the story. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Yep, good introduction.


 * Plot: is this the plot of the video game?
 * It is. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "excavating for the Scepter of Thelios and using it for a ritual along with the talisman." I am unsure how the demons can be both excavating for the Scepter and using it.
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "While starting an extra credit assignment at the museum's Amelia Earhart exhibit". You can't refer to "the museum" at first mention. Introduce it.
 * The game does not name the museum. Aoba47 (talk) 01:28, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * So? '... at the Amelia Earhart exhibit in the museum in Buffy's hometown' or whatever.
 * I added local to the front of museum since Buffy's hometown, i.e. Sunnydale, is mentioned in the sentence right before this. Aoba47 (talk) 21:15, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

More to follow. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:42, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the review, and apologies for any potential edit conflicts. I will get to your comments later today if that is okay with you. Aoba47 (talk) 21:54, 12 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "was published after Buffy the Vampire Slayer ended". Can we make it clear that we are talking about the television series. And "ended". Maybe 'after the series finale of BtVS had aired'?
 * That is understandable. It doesn't help that two Buffy games have just used the title without a subtitle or anything to distinguish it from the show. I linked the series finale episode though since it has an article. Aoba47 (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Because of rules placed on developing GBA games". By whom, and why?
 * The source does not go into further specifics. I tried to find further information on this topic, but unfortunately, I could not find anything. A lot of search ended up with people talking about rules for emulating GBA games. I am guessing these rules were put in place by Nintendo who developed and manufactured the Game Boy Advice. That's the vibe I get from the interview because it sounds like a blanket rule for all GBA game developers. Unfortunately, without a source that more explicitly says that, I cannot further elaborate on this part. As for the why, it may be a case where Nintendo (or whomever put these rules in place) thought that more boss enemies would push the console beyond its limitations, but that is also more speculation on my part. Apologies for not finding more as I would like to know more information myself, but it is also not the easiest thing to look up either. It could be a case where it was just a set of policies that was kept insular between Nintendo and whatever company was allowed to develop for the GBA, and that is why a clearer explanation for this rules are not provided. Aoba47 (talk) 00:34, 14 January 2024 (UTC)
 * That's a real shame, but I guess it can't be helped. Thanks for the diligent research.


 * "GameSpot published a preview of Wrath of the Darkhul King on June 4, 2003. The game was released on June 24, 2003". No need to repeat the year in the same paragraph.
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "Some of them viewed it as adequate". Graphics is plural, which gives 'Some of them viewed them as adequate', which gives "them" twice in three words. Over to you. :-)
 * I have revised this part to avoid the repetition, but let me know what you think. Aoba47 (talk) 21:24, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * It now reads fine, but you have changed the meaning. You sure it still accurately reflects the sources? Ie, that none of them consider the graphics less than adequate?
 * I have modified the sentence further, but I did not change the meaning with my original edit. All I did was combine two sentences. Aoba47 (talk) 00:57, 16 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "a NES game". Abbreviations in full at first mention.
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Looking good. Some comebacks above. If I haven't replied it usually means that I am content with your response. Gog the Mild (talk) 21:01, 15 January 2024 (UTC)


 * "who is one of the composers". Should "is" be 'was'?
 * Revised. Aoba47 (talk) 21:21, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

That's all from me. Gog the Mild (talk) 20:40, 13 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your help. I believe that I have addressed everything, but let me know if I have either missed something or if something in the article could be improved further. Apologies if I came across as rude in my comments. I appreciate your comments as an outsider as it does help to make the article better for everyone. I hope you are having a good 2024 so far. Aoba47 (talk) 00:36, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Comments from JM
Great to see a Buffy FA candidate, even if this doesn't look like the game has received much attention in the Buffyology world! I made a few small fixes which I encourage you to check. My only other question: Is the Herald Sun a decent source? Our article calls it a tabloid, but I don't know. The article looks comprehensive (my efforts to find decent sources not drawn upon have failed...) and it's generally well-written. I'm normally not thrilled about multiple screenshots, but it looks OK in this case. (On my screen, the two screenshots bump into the infobox a little, but it's not the worst thing in the world.) So, once I'm clear about the Herald Sun, I'm happy to support. Josh Milburn (talk) 15:44, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the edits. Maybe one of these days, I will nominate a more impactful Buffy-related article for a FAC, but I wanted to start with something small. I can understand your concern about the Herald Sun source and its usage in a potential FA. I thought it would be appropriate for an entertainment-based topic, but after I did a brief search through the WP:RSN, I found mixed (and to be honest mostly negative) responses to it so I decided to remove it altogether. It is always best to err on the side of caution, and I do understand why a tabloid is not a high-quality source. I would be okay about removing one of the screenshots if necessary. My rationale for including a screenshot of the cutscene was that it was mentioned in some reviews, but it is so far removed from that section that I think the intended effect may be lost. I understand the importance of keeping non-free media usage to a minimum. I hope you are having a good weekend so far. Aoba47 (talk) 19:56, 13 January 2024 (UTC)

Support. I think this is a worthy candidate for FA, and I'm happy to be the first supporter, assuming no issues I've overlooked are identified. While I encourage other reviewers to reflect upon the use of two screenshots, I do think that there is a case for it here. Josh Milburn (talk) 23:50, 13 January 2024 (UTC)


 * Thank you for the support and the kind words. I greatly appreciate it. Aoba47 (talk) 00:22, 14 January 2024 (UTC)

Withdrawal request
Apologies for the ping, but I would like to withdraw this FAC. Thank you in advance. 18:06, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Saddened to hear you have retired. The article has come a long way, and I would be happy to take things over and address future concerns if you would like.--NØ 19:37, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * If you would like to take things over from me, you are more than welcome to do so. You are a great editor, and you will probably do a better job anyway. If you need access to the NGC Magazine source, feel free to let me know. Best of luck with the FAC. I just know this is the right time for me to stop to be honest. Aoba47 (talk) 20:30, 20 January 2024 (UTC)
 * Hi all. First of all, sorry to hear of Aoba's retirement and hope that it doesn't turn out to be permanent -- of course we all have to do what feels right for us. Secondly, we have occasionally had people take over FACs when the nominator has been indisposed but it's generally when the nom is on the home stretch, and that's not really the case here. So I'll archive this and if Marano or others want to work on it outside the FAC process and nominate it in future, so be it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:13, 22 January 2024 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 23:15, 22 January 2024 (UTC)