Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Menacer/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 promoted by Ian Rose 09:07, 19 April 2014.

Menacer

 * Nominator(s): czar  ♔  04:19, 13 March 2014 (UTC)

The "Great Zapper War", one reviewer put it. The Menacer is a light gun that Sega produced in response to the Nintendo Super Scope during the early 90s. As for how "great" the war was, Sega didn't support the gun from the get-go and the peripheral floundered. While in Paris shortly after leaving Sega, the Menacer's creator saw a pile of the item in an electronics store and offered to autograph them. He was told he could autograph every one he buys. This article was the last link in the Sega Genesis featured topic and related discussions led me to propose its merger. Consensus leaned towards merge, but I was intrigued by the suggestion of offline sources. I do enjoy a good personal challenge. The result is the most complete and direct retrospective ever written about this light gun and its place in Sega's history. czar ♔  04:19, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Drive-by comment: There are a few mid-sentence citations. I didn't object to this for GAN, but it's been known to come up at FACs before. You can just stick them after the next comma or period in each case. Tezero (talk) 05:35, 13 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the heads up. If any specific citation is considered confusing as phrased, I'd be happy to clarify. The mid-sentence cites are used to source specific language and I believe abide by all guidelines. czar  ♔  05:53, 13 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Czar. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:01, 14 March 2014 (UTC)

Review by Red Phoenix
Comments from Red Phoenix  let's talk... 01:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'll admit, you got me on the merger discussions with this one, that's for sure. That being said, I certainly don't mind that considering what it's become, and I'd be glad to throw in my help in helping it to reach FA status.  As a note to FAC delegates, I am not a significant contributor to this article.


 * If "Menacer 6-game cartridge" is the official title of the pack-in game, it needs to be italicized in all uses.
 * The break between the first and second paragraphs under "Games" doesn't seem to make sense, since the second paragraph continues about more games which the first one ends on.
 * Is there anything to be said about the Menacer's decline and lack of success? This differs from the reception section's critical commentary, and probably would be a worthwhile plug into the Development section, which in itself feels a little thin (especially the last paragraph).  Sales figures or comments about it being a commercial failure that are sourced would be helpful.
 * The note about the Radica knockoff seems out of place in the Reception section. I'll leave it up to you on how you'd like to handle it, but I have two suggestions: 1. Given the suggestion above about expanding on Menacer's development and history, Development could be reformatted into a History and the Radica note could be tagged there, or if there are more creations, 2. Create a new subsection underneath reception as a "revival" section, but that isn't practical if that's the only one so far.

Image review
 * File:Menacer_six-game_cartridge_screenshots.png - Are all six of these from the 6-game cartridge? The reason I ask is because there's a good chance there may be six different copyrights if not, and still possible even if so, and that's probably not going to fly with WP:NFCC.  I would suggest to be on the safe side to go down to a screenshot of just one of the games.
 * The other three images all look fine. I don't have any concerns with the two light gun images, as they do appear to be user created and the right information seems to be put into place.  The Genesis image is an Evan-Amos, one I'm familiar with in my work on Sega consoles, so I know that's good.

Source review - spot-checks not done Red Phoenix let's talk... 01:50, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I have no concerns with source reliability at all here. All of the sources appear to be reliable, including from sources listed at WP:VG/S.
 * Formatting looks good, but some of the web-obtained sources don't have retrieved dates, specifically a few from the subscription services. Do you have these to plug in just to keep this uniform?
 * Thanks, RP. From all of the sources I've read, I can only remember AllGame (for purposes of cataloging) and that Digital Spy article referencing the six-pack like it had its own title. The rest did not refer to it as a standalone Cartridge but as a bundled cartridge with no distinct title. I kept "6-game" instead of "six-game" and lowercased the "cartridge" for this reason, but I can change it if someone has better logic. The ¶ break was for readability—I've removed it. The only published commentary on Menacer post-release was opinion-based and included in the reception. There was no formal announcement of discontinuation or something to the effect of a "decline" (well, you know, the launch was the decline). Since the Radica was the one-off "legacy" section, I thought it fit best wrapped into the reception. If there is more "legacy" in the future, the section can break out, but I think it makes more sense there than in a history or development section. The screenshots are all from the six-game cartridge and should be registered as part of the same single unit. Since the minigames receive individual commentary, I thought it followed to picture each individually. Which web sources are missing retrieved dates? I double-checked but they all appear to be there. If a database-retrieved ref is an offline source in its own right and the completely paywalled direct URL would serve no good, I left the ref unlinked. czar  ♔  04:40, 25 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick response. Here's my take on some of this so far: in regards to the 6-game screenshot, I'm still concerned.  However, I'd like to ask for a second opinion.  If someone like, an expert image reviewer, could stop by, that would be awesome.  I'd like someone with more experience in copyright than I to take a look.  If most sources don't refer to the 6-game cartridge as its official title, I'm good with no italics.  I still worry a little bit that the Development reads a little awkwardly with its short paragraphs and there's not much "development" in it; actually, as I read Reception, the last two paragraphs I think kind of play into its "history" and could go together with that section as well—I do know what you mean on the difficulty of video game hardware that launches and declines right away, Sega Nomad is a great example of one.  In regard to the paywalled sources, those would be what I was referring to because they were retrieved from Internet services, even if they are print.  Even if it is paywalled, I don't see why the link wouldn't serve any good—certainly there will periodically be readers coming across the article who have subscriptions to the services listed and would like to read the article, but the absence of these URLs is not a deal breaker to me and I wouldn't oppose on the basis of not having them.   Red Phoenix  let's talk... 01:02, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Cool. I left a note on Masem's talk for a vg editor opinion on the non-free image. Do you have a suggestion for the dev section? I still don't think a rearrangement for a history section would be expedient based on the two sentences that also fit in Reception. I suppose we'll see what others think. czar  ♔  01:48, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm sure I could whip one up on my sandbox given some time. I'm a little busy right now in real life at least through the week, but I think I could take a stab at it and show some nice results.   Red Phoenix  let's talk... 02:04, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * My gut feeling is that all 6 are too many given how non-notable the games are and how little it generally devoted to the gameplay. Two or three, the ones that best exemplify the gameplay involving a lightgun, as well as the general quality of the graphics for that system, may be the better option. --M ASEM (t) 03:55, 26 March 2014 (UTC)
 * I'm fine with the amount of screenshots, but would much prefer you just fired up an emulator and took screenshots instead of using a poor quality magazine scan. - hahnch e n 04:02, 27 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Six is okay, as long as it is a collage (like this) as it helps show the "range" of such games. However, I agree that it needs to be 1) clearer (with an emulator, perhaps) and 2) smaller... no need to go 900 px tall. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 07:50, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * If you do use an emulator, I really recommend Fusion, in TV Mode (CVBS) with Filtering enabled. That way it looks 100% accurate as to how the game would actually look played on a TV. (I have compared this on my TV switching between a console input and my PC input).-- Sexy Kick  09:14, 28 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks, all. Updated (smaller, from emulator), if you want to take a look czar  ♔  02:57, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks really good to me.-- Sexy Kick  04:20, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Nice, considerable improvement (though I question the use of PNG; the rendering is quite different on Wikipedia) — Crisco 1492 (talk) 09:06, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Is that to say that I should delete this one and upload a jpg? czar  ♔  14:31, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * It would display clearer in the article, yes (compare the flying birds at Fulvous Whistling Duck: jpg, png). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:40, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Done. Thanks for your help czar  ♔  15:24, 29 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Replacing lossless PNG with a lossy JPG because you're not a fan of Wikipedia's current thumbnail generator seems short sighted. - hahnch e n 01:41, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * I somewhat agree, but Manual of Style actually suggests the same thing Crisco suggested.-- Sexy Kick  01:48, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Manual of Style/Images - The PNG format is useful for storing graphics that contain text, line art, or other images with sharp transitions. Image_use_policy - Software screenshots should be in PNG format. - hahnch e n 04:04, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Ah, image use policy was what I was looking for. I read what MoS said about jpeg and gave up right there. I could have sworn PNG was for software screenshots, but I couldn't find the policy. I wasn't going to say something without a policy to back me up, so I just let it be. Thanks!-- Sexy Kick  04:27, 6 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Last question, otherwise I'm ready to support: Do you have any more in regards to Mac Senour's finding of the unsold stock or information on the Menacer in 1994? I ask for two reasons: 1. right now the detail of Mac Senour finding the unsold stock seems awkward and out of perspective and could use clarification as to why this is relevant; was it unsold because it wasn't selling well, or just because they had a bunch?  Does it say something about the success of the Menacer, at least in Senour's eyes?  This can be accomplished by adding a cited quote if you have one.  2. From the chart of game release dates, it's apparent that there are games into 1994 for Menacer, but the detail stops at 1993 with the EGM note and restarts in 2005 with the Radica Games release.  Maybe it's as simple as saying there were those one or two releases that used the Menacer in 1994, and that will again help with completeness of the article and the section.   Red Phoenix  let's talk... 00:13, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * There has been no other comment by Mac Senour in sources reliable or unreliable, nor from the rest of the staff. I liked his anecdote as an open question—most things that die out don't have extended commentary on why they died out. Updated history with a single line about the last known released games (while avoiding OR), as recommended. Thanks for your help czar  ♔  05:05, 30 March 2014 (UTC)
 * Looks good. I've done a hair of reorganization, if you don't mind, in light of the missing detail from Mac.  I've read the interview article over; he really doesn't say much more than that, but I went ahead and slipped in the bit about him being told he could autograph each one he signed, and separated Senour's info from the console history as a whole for the paragraphs to flow better.  Red Phoenix  let's talk... 14:24, 30 March 2014 (UTC)


 * Support - Well done!, I really have to give you credit for this one.  I wouldn't have believed it could ever be this good.  All of my nitpicky concerns have now been addressed and I'm ready to lend it my full support.   Red Phoenix  let's talk... 14:24, 30 March 2014 (UTC)

Comments from Tezero

 * "though Will Smith of The Hawk Eye estimated fewer" - How much fewer?
 * "These two peripherals led to arcade light gun game ports for home consoles" - Is this relevant for the first paragraph of the body text?
 * Less strikingly, is the first paragraph at all relevant to its section?
 * "The Menacer has no power switch and automatically activates when aimed at the television,[8] and powers down after 30 seconds without input.[3]" - A little awkward; I'd put it down like "The Menacer has no power switch; it automatically activates when aimed at the television[8] but powers down after 30 seconds without input.[3]"
 * "Sega did not plan any other first-party releases for the Menacer. Senour recollected that "they laughed when I proposed more."" - Not major, but I'd separate these by semicolon rather than period.
 * "GamePro reported its release to be in late October,[6][15] but Mean Machines wrote that the Menacer was released in December.[5]" - I'd prefer something like "The Menacer was released between October and December" or "The Menacer was released in the fall of 1992".
 * The first paragraph of Games is a bit long. I'd suggest either trimming it to two-thirds its current length or putting the games in bullet-point format. (This isn't forbidden if used sparingly.)
 * Reception could use a few topic sentences. As it stands, it has the stilted air of being organized by reviewer, even though for the most part it isn't.

That's about it. Sources and images look acceptable, and the article's plenty complete and reads well for the most part. Nice job; I wasn't sure this article would even stay sovereign at first. Tezero (talk) 01:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review. I've addressed your concerns apart from the semicolon (I'm in the Kurt Vonnegut school of semicolons). Also we can't use "fall" due to WP:SEASON. czar ♔  04:12, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Support. You've improved the article in ways I didn't even suggest but that are nonetheless helpful, and I'm now comfortable ranking it among the best Wikipedia offers. Tezero (talk) 04:31, 3 April 2014 (UTC)

Next steps
Is this support sufficient? czar ♔  15:26, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

I am just about ready to voice my support of this article myself, but I was wondering if you saw our recent comments about the PNG for software screenshots thing?-- Sexy Kick  15:51, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yep, but I thought it wasn't actionable. I had tried both the PNG and JPG shots and the JPG looked materially better. We called Crisco in as an image expert, so I went with their suggestion for now. I can always swap formats from the original PSD in the future, if need be. czar ♔  16:30, 13 April 2014 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I think Crisco just wasn't aware of the "png for software screenshots" codex. That's the only outstanding issue in my mind. So...

Support on prose and article quality. (I am not a major contributor to the article.)-- Sexy Kick  17:24, 13 April 2014 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 23:30, 18 April 2014 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.