Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Crazy Taxi (series)


 * 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 promoted 03:02, 26 November 2007.

Crazy Taxi (series)
Self-nomination - Help with several editors have made this article into it's present GA state; article is written to cover the entire series with or without specific individual game articles in mind (originally, it was suggested to merge all the games into this article since the notability of each individual game is very low beyond the first game, despite the overall notability of the series). Article should be stable with the latest port out for a few months without making much of a blip on the video game space. --M ASEM 16:17, 3 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Comment - Looks pretty good, but a few points. I'd remove all of the red links, link The Simpsons Road Rage in the section where its mentioned, and not just the lead. Also "External links" need to go after "References". Gran2 18:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC) ✅ Thanks for the input, redlinks removed and the EL is in the right place. --M ASEM 19:10, 3 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Note, redlinks are not a problem and removal of redlinks is not required for FA status. Sandy Georgia  (Talk) 18:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bole2 (talk • contribs) 18:40, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Nothing about the characters in the game.
 * The characters (both IMO and from sources) are non-notable, I mean, I can list them, but its not like they have a significant influence on gameplay.
 * They are notable enough to have profiles in the game's mannual. Buc 15:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Manual would be a primary source and not sufficient to establish notability for fictional elements. Additionally, since there's no story at all, it would see strange to provide a list of characters.  Its notable you can select them, and other games add more, but not exactly who they are. --M ASEM  13:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "must accumulate the most money" the most of who? who are they competing against?
 * ✅ just changed to "accumulate money"
 * Bit more about the gameplay in the lead.
 * ✅ added a bit more, but going too much more detail I think either requires details that makes the lead too heavy and/or large
 * Not sure the whole soundtrack for each of the games is needed in the series article.
 * As noted, there was a plan to merge all the series articles into this one as, beyond the first, these other games are much less notable than the first; the soundtrack section would reflect that. It could go, though I'd inviscomment it if the merge/deletion of the other pages occur.
 * There should be something about the sound track but the full list should be in the individual game articles. Buc 15:05, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅I'll invisicomment it out. However, the section paragraph on that should remain since Bad Religon/Offspring are notable in the series and their lack in later games brough comment. --M ASEM  13:28, 12 October 2007 (UTC)
 * "(green number in center)" centre
 * It's primarily a game that was mainly big in the United States, it's using American spellings.
 * "bonuses earned from stunt driving are multiplied by the number of passengers in the car" I think "number of passengers in the car multiplies the bonuses earned from stunt driving" is better.
 * "each whom have a different" it's either "who" or "of whom"
 * "(semi-)fictional" why the brackets?
 * ✅ removed semi & brackets
 * "gear shift" Did you mean gear lever?
 * ✅ made to "gear shift level"
 * Is minigames one word?
 * ✅ hyphenated throughout
 * "traffic are represented" is represented
 * It's a grouping of "taxi, passengers, and traffic", I believe it's "are" in this case
 * "can use their own stored" there
 * This is definitely "their" as in "the fans' own music"
 * "made a few attempts" how many is a few?
 * ✅ changed to "has attempted"
 * Ref #16 not entered right.
 * ✅ corrected
 * Surely this article fits into more than one Category
 * ✅ added several
 * Categories for the individual games are not needed in a series article. See for example another FA series page: Kingdom Hearts (series). Only one category. --Mika1h 15:34, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Some ref have .com and some don't, be consistent
 * ✅ .com removed from publisher field for those that had it
 * I think it would be better if the links to the game articles in the "Games" section were incorporated into the text. At any rate they should say "Main article" not "See also".
 * ✅ made the section headers the wikilinks to the games
 * "(which lead IGN to comment that "Including this should be a no-brainer, but many PSP titles don't.")," why the brackets and why the full stop followed by a comma?
 * ✅ removed the full stop and brackets.
 * Order refs numerically.
 * Refs are all done with WP's ref system, numbering is done automatically (there are noted problems with Firefox and multiple columns for this, nothing that can be done through WP)
 * "different places -- seeing how it" why the double hyphen?
 * It's a direct quote from the article, that can't be changed.
 * "with an expected release date in middle of 2003" should be in past tence.
 * ✅ changed to "and had a"
 * "with an expected release date in middle of 2003" should be in past tence.
 * ✅ changed to "and had a"

Buc 15:21, 4 October 2007 (UTC)
 * There's a few comments of those listed above I don't believe are correct fixes but I've made the edits to address the rest; thanks for the input. --M ASEM 03:30, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Comment - "which many have noted as a rip-off of the Crazy Taxi formula". No place for "many people" in Wikipedia :P You'll have name people or magazines (or whatever) that have said that.--Serte [ Talk · Contrib ] 10:14, 5 October 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ - "many" now "game reviewers" with additional refs to back this up. --M ASEM 13:23, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Pass & support Request(s):
 * On the basis that it's good enough.
 * Lead is too long; may wish to break it up into two or integrate parts of it into the second paragraph. Learnedo 06:27, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
 * ✅ First lead para is about the games' release, the second is about the gameplay itself - hopefully that's what you mean... --M ASEM 14:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

Oppose until fixed; it is otherwise worthy of promotion, so is worth the effort. The writing needs sifting through to polish and to pick up glitches such as:
 * "When the player stops near their fare, seconds are added to a gameplay countdown timer, the passenger, also with a countdown timer, gets in the car; the player must then ...".
 * "Crazy Taxi is a series of score attack racing video games, developed by Hitmaker and published by Sega, the first game appearing in arcades in 1999." Not a glitch so much as inelegant and hard to read—the last clause. Perhaps split with a semicolon and use past tense?
 * "Starting with Crazy Taxi 2, the game added the ability to pick up a party of passengers, each who have a different destination." Ungrammatical, and as well, it's the developers who add.
 * "The console games have also featured a set of mini-games that focus more on the driving aspect of the game." Just "... games feature ..."? Otherwise, possibly ambiguous and hard to read. More than what?
 * Weed out most uses of "also"—redundant and clunky.
 * MOS breach in the use of --. Read MOS on hyphens and dashes.

Now they're random issues in one small section. Please coopt new editors to help. Fresh eyes pick up stuff the original editors will never see. Tony  (talk)  23:39, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Have requested a couple fresh eyes to look into copyedits, thanks. --M ASEM 14:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)


 * ✅ (pending additional comments) - have had a few people help work it and removed some of the noted points about (including the excessive use of Also and fixing the dashes/hyphens). --M ASEM 17:09, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Support I've done a little copyediting for you, and fixed the rationales on two of the images to satisfy BetacommandBot. There are two things that someone more involved with the article should look at: Good work. Anomie 12:13, 30 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Consider wikilinking the  field in cite web to allow user date preferences to apply. The template automatically wikilinks   but not   for some reason.
 * Is the first "Gameplay" paragraph also covered by reference 5? If so, consider sticking a &lt;ref&gt; at the end of the paragraph to make it clear.
 * ✅ on both accounts. --M ASEM 14:11, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Reluctant oppose - The article is looking real good. However I feel that some kind of "Development" section should be included before this passes FA. I realize that the series hasn't tried to make leaps and bounds with the gameplay, but there are other aspects that have changed over time. The graphics have varied from game to game and may have used different graphical engines, or whatever technical changes have occured. The inspiration and influences could be mentioned if they can be found. To be honest, I don't think much would be needed. A medium sized paragraph along with maybe the "Soundtrack" and "Legalities" sections as subsection. I believe that will make the article comprehensive. Other than that, I don't have much else to say. It's a good article everywhere else, but that chunk that's missing is kinda a big one. The good news it that some of looks to already be there, just not consolidated into one defined section. (Guyinblack25 talk 20:18, 31 October 2007 (UTC))
 * ✅ (or at least an attempt to be done per any additional comments) - some of the development stuff was floating in other sections of the article, and I added a few more points I found in a couple additional interviews. Please let us know if this is what you are looking for. --M ASEM 21:32, 31 October 2007 (UTC)
 * Support - Very nice, I'd say that more than covers it. You got my support. (Guyinblack25 talk 21:55, 31 October 2007 (UTC))
 * Support - Looked over it, and it's very nicely written and covers everything. Good job!   ✗iℎi✗  (talk) 23:28, 4 November 2007 (UTC)


 * Support Yep everything looks good now. Buc 20:19, 5 November 2007 (UTC)
 * Support impressive work, covers every aspect of the series. igordebraga ≠ 23:28, 13 November 2007 (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.