Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Necrid/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 by User:Raul654 19:07, 14 December 2008.

Necrid

 * Nominator(s): Kung Fu Man (talk)

After hammering everything out and with everything said and done as part of a plan to get the Soul (series) character articles to a featured topic, nominating Necrid for Featured Article status! ...Yeah I know it won't be that directly easy. References were checked for reliability and endorsement by other sources, and the images should be up to snuff for the fair use guideline. So ready to fix any issues that come up with the article.Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:02, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Oppose Criterion 1a (prose). Sorry, but the prose is well below the standard required for a featured article. It is a pity the article wasn't peer-reviewed before this nomination because these prose problems could have have been resolved then.

The following are issues picked up from the lead and the first half of the first section:-
 * "Despite hving spoken lins in the game, a voice actor has not been been attributed to Necrid". Needs ephasing along the lines: "Despite Necrid having spoken lines in the game, no voice actor has been attributed".
 * "...a human warrior that searched..." Since he was human it should be "who", not "that". And it should be "searched for"
 * Punctuation: comma needed after "while there"
 * "Now drastically mutated, he wields various various forms of energy as weapons, searching for fragments..." etc. Suggest "Drastically mutated, he wields various forms of energy while searching..." etc
 * "...Nicred has received mixed reception" - should be "a mixed reception".
 * "Series producer Hiroaki Yotoriama learned Todd McFarlane was not only a fan of the Soul series, but also praised their designs". Needs rephrasing. Perhaps: "Series producer Hiroaki Yotoriama learned that Todd McFarlae was a fan of the Soul series, and had praised its design".
 * Second sentence of this paragraph - multiple issues here. "Himself" is redundant; the sentence needs splitting; it is too wordy, and the final clause needs rephrasing. I suggest a reduction to: "McFarland was interested in ceating a new Spawn video game. During subsequent discussions with Namco a deal was agreed, to release a line of toys based on SoulcaliberII"

I could extend the examples. I would recommend that you find a handy prose expert to review the text and highlight further improvements that need to be made. Brianboulton (talk) 13:59, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Fixed everything you pointed out and a few other bits. One thing though stuck out that I'm unsure about: I haven't seen the term "a mixed reception" used in comparison to just "mixed reception", so are you certain that's a necessity?
 * "Reception" is not a plural or a mass noun, so yes, the "a" is necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Other than that, I'll be more than happy to take care of any other issues you have with the article and thank you for your time.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:41, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Thank you for your prompt responses, but it would honestly be better if you got someone else to read the rest of the text, since the function of FAC is review rather than article-building. I will be happy to look again a little later, when the prose has been checked. Brianboulton (talk) 16:12, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Comments -
 * What makes the following reliable sources?
 * http://www.gamersmark.com/
 * http://www.soulcaliburuniverse.com/images/sc2/wallpaper/ (and is this a copyright violation also? We do not link to those.)
 * http://web.archive.org/web/20040801054906/http://www.soulcalibur.com/images/smilies/z_necrid.gif
 * Regarding the sources:
 * GamersMark was a source turned up by Google News in relation to the figures, cited for the collaboration statement which can be brought up by other sources if need be.
 * Soul Calibur Universe receives official sanction from Namco's own Soulcalibur website in their links section, as seen here under their links section. In addition Namco's recent "fansite" (no closed) "What's Within Your Soul?" actively promoted the distribution of artwork and wallpaper items distributed from Namco through individual websites, as I had cited on an image of Tira I uploaded.
 * Soulcalibur.com is their official website and in this case an older copy is cited to show they created a gif "smiley" as a promotional piece for their forums (I would cite the smiley template itself, but due to its nature Wayback Machine didn't store it properly).
 * To determine the reliablity of the site, we need to know what sort of fact checking they do. You can establish this by showing news articles that say the site is reliable/noteworthy/etc. or you can show a page on the site that gives their rules for submissions/etc. or you can show they are backed by a media company/university/institute, or you can show that the website gives its sources and methods, or there are some other ways that would work too. It's their reputation for reliabilty that needs to be demonstrated. Please see Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches for further detailed information. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:51, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replaced GamersMark with a GameSpot source. I'll dig through Wayback Machine for a wallpaper page to cite for the article in place of Soul Calibur Universe.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:18, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replaced the wallpaper mention with one noting the character's mention on the back of each box for game and interviews conducted with the two developers on the subject of Necrid.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:03, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Replaced gif link with screenshot and artwork citations pointing to IGN. That should take care of them all.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:11, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Magazine titles should be in italics (current ref 19 Minkley...)
 * Will fix. Fixed. Was unsure as the webpage was cited in this case.
 * Current ref 17 is a reprint of a published magazine, so you need to format it like a magazine, not a website. The actual publisher of the information was Electronic Games Monthly.
 * Same for current ref 34 (GameNOW...) where the publisher is GameNOW
 * I'm on it. Fixed.
 * Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 14:34, 8 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'll fix those links. I'm currently in Sociology at the college so I'll have to wait till I get out of class for the more refined fixes.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:21, 8 December 2008 (UTC)

Images –Juliancolton Tropical Cyclone  17:54, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * I'd like more information in the fair use rationale of Image:Necrid01.png; how is it low resolution (it seems rather large to me). The summary info can be put into the rationale.
 * I'm not seeing how Image:Souldcalibur2-necrid-screenshot.jpg and Image:Sc2-necrid.jpg are a) low resolution, and b) covered on WP:NFCC; they contain a lot of duplicate information with the infobox image, and their justification for use is not at all compelling. -- Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk ) 04:29, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Looking through the article I'm going to oppose for now. I'm concerned about the prose, images as they stand now, and the use of some primary sources for sources, ex. this version's refs 13-15. That said, there's an admirable core to the article and is very good about sparingly describing appearances, but I feel it might benefit from use of more meat. I'm going to search LexisNexis and see if I can find some more sources to add to the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 19:57, 9 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Not quite sure I follow about refs 13-15. Citing primary sources for sections regarding character appearance and background information should be acceptable along the same lines as it is for Master Chief (Halo), no?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 09:34, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Also something else I should have asked, are the images fine now or should further work be done on them?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 11:49, 10 December 2008 (UTC)
 * They are all now appropriate resolution, but you still have to demonstrate how they significantly aid reader understanding. The secondary outfit doesn't tell me much that isn't already in the prose, and the weapons can be easily summarized (not to mention the image isn't that clear in depicting said weapons, even at higher resolution). Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 17:00, 12 December 2008 (UTC)
 * Oppose - I agree with Brianboulton that the prose needs to be improved. Here are some examples from the first half of the article:
 * Despite Necrid having spoken lines in the game - This is worded poorly.
 * Since his introduction Necrid has received a mixed reception. - "His" sounds odd when referring to a fictional character.
 * Sources such as GameSpy have criticized his design for clashing with the game's aesthetic, while other publications praised its visual appeal when the character was in motion. - What sources?
 * While some reviewers have cited Necrid as one of the best characters introduced to the series, others have cited him as one of the worst. - "Some reviewers" are weasel words.
 * McFarlane at the time was interested in creating a new Spawn video game, and during discussions with Namco the subject turned to toys,[2] and a deal was formed to release a line of toys based upon Soulcalibur II. - Not sure I understand what this sentence is trying to say.
 * Necrid is depicted as a large, muscular, bald green humanoid. - "Bald green"?
 * His eyes glow a bright red - No need for "a".
 * reddish orange scaly skin - &rarr; "scaly, reddish orange skin"
 * Necrid can additionally utilize other forms of energy as weapons, such as ignis fatuus - No need for "additionally".

Oppose sorry. The prose needs a lot of work; there is redundancy, passive constructions and a generally poor style of writing. I am reluctant to give examples because there is a growing tendency at FAC simply fix the examples given and not ask another editor to copy-edit. Although questions and suggestions are in order, FAC is not the place to get below FA standard articles fixed. Graham Colm Talk 10:11, 14 December 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.