Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow/archive1


 * The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted 02:20, 1 February 2008.

Castlevania: Aria of Sorrow


Nominating for featured status after a large rewrite and recently acquiring GA status. I will do my best to answer all concerns, comments, and fixes. Cheers,  Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 05:36, 10 January 2008 (UTC)

Here are my comments: Well, I hope that this helps. Thanks. Ashnard Talk  Contribs  18:23, 11 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Ref 52 leads to a site that is reserved for registered uses; is there anyway that this can be bypassed? If there's another site with the same info, I'd replace the ref.
 * "The game takes place in 2035". Perhaps it's me, but wouldn't "is set in the year 2035" be better? The phrase "a game taking place" is ambiguous to me. This may be a persoanl thing, though.
 * The first sentence of the third page is too long, is quite awkward, and is hard to understand, especially "including Castlevania: Harmony of Dissonance, which Aria of Sorrow was produced alongside and its predecessor on the Game Boy Advance"
 * Personally, I'd refrain from using "Many" twice in the last sentence of that paragraph. I don't know, try "multpile".
 * The first sentence of the fourth paragraph could be changed to the view-point of Konami (active?). For example. "Konami released", instead of "AoS was released by".
 * "including but not limited to". I didn't mind this phrase when I first read it, but after the first, it just seemed redundant to me. I don't think you'll be misleading readers by omitting "but not limited to".
 * "The possibility of acquiring a soul from an enemy is random, and the acquisition rate varies between enemies". If we were to use the Wiktionary definition of random, this statement would be oxymoronic. I may be wrong in this interpretation, though.
 * The plot seems too long to me; I feel that alot could be cut out while still retaining the meaning. For example: "Soma is initially unwilling, but leaves when Arikado reveals that he will protect Mina for him." Sentences like these really should be cut out.
 * The first sentence of "reception" could do with a reference.
 * Unless I'm missing something, shouldn't media publishers like Gamespot and RPGFan be italicised? Forget about this one; it seems thatb that only magazines are italicised. Ashnard  Talk  Contribs  22:46, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
 * "Metacritic, a website that averages scores from various video game publications, gave Aria of Sorrow a 91/100 composite based on twenty-nine reviews." I feel that the verb is inaccurate here, since they are not giving or assessing anything, but just calculating scores.
 * "Famitsu, widely considered to be the most respected video game news magazine in Japan,[50][51] and known for its "extremely harsh" reviews," There seems to be a bit of bias here. I've interpreted it as "Famitsu is extremely harsh, but this game got a good score, so it must be great". It just feels like you're trying to sway the readers' minds with this sentence.
 * "with many considering it the definitive Castlevania game for the Game Boy Advance." This needs a ssource.


 * Support - After doing a bit of copy editing, I believe the article meets the FA criteria. It is well written, comprehensive, and well sourced. It also appears that Sephiroth has addressed Ashnard's comments. (Guyinblack25 talk 17:50, 13 January 2008 (UTC))


 * The "random" thing hasn't been sorted out, neither has the last prompt. I still feel that the plot's too long for what's being said, but I won't hold that against this article looking at the plot lengths of other FAs. I just prefer it deeply summarised rather than "X meets Y, and then X goes to destination 1, and then X beats boss Z, and then C consults Y about the mysterious death quote of boss Z". See Fire Emblem (video game), a game which has a much vaster plot than this game, yet a shorter article plot length. Don't worry, I won't oppose as a result of this, as many other FAs seem to have the same style. Thanks. Ashnard  Talk  Contribs  18:38, 13 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments I only read the lead, but what I saw suggests another proofread might be helpful.
 * The use of "garner" with "sales" is odd.
 * The second paragraph is repetitive. All three sentences start with "The game('s)" and the first two begin "The game is set in".
 * "which Aria of Sorrow was produced alongside" Usually I'm not too picky about ending sentences with a preposition, but here is a case where doing so is actually more awkward than the alternative. But either way, the clause is still somewhat vague; what does producing alongside mean?
 * "Aria of Sorrow introduces several new features to the series, including the "Tactical Soul" system, and a new, original storyline placed in the future, as versus the medieval setting of many other Castlevania games." Lots of redundancies and "as versus" is quite awkward.
 * The lead doesn't mention when the game was released. Budding Journalist 19:01, 13 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment - fixes made per the above comments. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 06:07, 14 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Sepiroth, have you asked BuddingJournalist and Ashnard to revisit? Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 23:19, 28 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Yes. Ashnard has noted that he will not support until the plot section is tailored to his liking, but notes that it is a stylistic change that he will not oppose either. I have left a note on BuddingJournalist's talk page. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 07:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Comment There's a strangely worded sentence in the lead: "It was released in North America on May 6, 2003 and released in Japan on May 6, 2003." Perhaps a date was altered in the sentence? Maralia (talk) 00:57, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed. Nice catch. Sephiroth BCR  ( Converse ) 07:45, 29 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.