Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/PlayStation Portable/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 03:07, 30 March 2008.

PlayStation Portable
Self-nominator If you are a fan of portable gaming, multimedia devices, or just electronics in general, this is the article for you to review. Also, unlike the many hackers and homebrew developers that have made this device one of the most hacked electronic devices in history, you don't even have to know how to do computer programming! All you have to do is review the FA criteria (of course you already knew them, right? ;) ) read the article, (I mean THE Article), decide whether it meets the criteria, and post your (innumerable) issues here. Though hopefully there won't be too many issues because I have been working on this article for about a week and I'm pretty sure it meets all of the criteria for FAs. Thank you, good night, and God Bless Amer...wrong speech... Ahh, here it is.. *clears throat* Thanks for taking the time to review this article. Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  15:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)

Note: the HTTP 404 link that shows up in the external links checker is a result of that program adding a slash ("/") after the link. If the slash is removed, the link is fine. Thingg &#8853; &#8855; 15:04, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment One issue I see right off the bat is that the tense arbitrarily changes, e.g. "However the player was only version 6, three iterations behind the current desktop version 9,[101] making some websites difficult to view.[94] The browser also has limited tabbed browsing support"- in this case, it would be fine if the issue was fixed, but no mention is made of that being the case. This is prevalent throughout the article. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 21:21, 20 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I fixed the areas I saw. Thanks for the comment. Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  23:35, 21 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Oppose for now. I'll detail all my objections as I continue to review, but here's my concerns so far:
 * "Controversial advertising campaigns" seems like a trivia list, and should be integrated with a marketing section. The following "safety issues" section should be removed if that's all the content that is in it.
 * Where's the reception of the game system?
 * PS3 connectivity is often mentioned, but there's nothing about it in detail as far as I can see. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 23:47, 24 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I removed the unnecessary "safety issues" section (I had been considering removing it before, but I wanted to wait see what was said here) and added info about remote play. Hopefully, I will be able to work on the "trivia" list and add a reception section later today. Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  15:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Comment
 * Title case should be used in ref titles, as per Manual of Style (capital letters)
 * "Prior to" is overly formal. "Before" is better.
 * Some citations aren't immediately after punctuation.
 * An image caption should only end with a full-stop if it forms a complete sentence.
 * Non-breaking spaces are needed between numerical and non-numerical elements, eg. "with 2 MB onboard"
 * Some compound adjectives are missing hyphens, "first day sales record"
 * English speaking countries generally don't require linking.
 * There are some stubby sections which would be better expanded upon or merged.
 * Ref authors are inconsistently formatted.
 * External links only belong in the External links section.
 * Common words such as "white" and "black" do not need linking. Epbr123 (talk) 19:09, 25 March 2008 (UTC)
 * I believe I have addressed all of your concerns. Thanks much for the review and your comments. Thingg &#8853; &#8855;  15:51, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * All fixed, except the "Controversial advertising campaigns" section still has an external link. Epbr123 (talk) 22:18, 26 March 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments
 * http://gizmodo.com/gadgets/psp-vs-ds/8-reasons-why-the-psp-might-overtake-the-ds-327596.php What makes this site a reliable site for the information that the PSPs sales have lagged behind the DS?
 * Same for http://www.ocprojects.com/modules.php?name=Content&pa=showpage&pid=56&page=1 and the information that the PSP has been the most sucessful handheld not manufactured by Nintendo?
 * Refs 13 and 24 look to be duplicates.
 * What makes this http://www.ps2fantasy.com/news/200305/1052852413.php a reliable source?
 * http://www.psp-vault.com/Article930.psp/ dead links
 * Current ref 28 has format glitches
 * What makes http://play.tm/ a reliable source?
 * Likewise http://www.technewsworld.com/?
 * And http://www.gamingworldx.com/index.shtml?
 * Likewise http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/?
 * Current ref 45 (Surrette, Tim PSP breaks UK sales record) is lacking last access date
 * Not being up on Australian gaming sites, what makes http://kotaku.com/ a reliable site?
 * And http://www.shacknews.com/? What makes it a reliable source?
 * current ref 105 (PSP - Theme settings) is lacking publisher information and I assume that date is the access date?
 * http://www.trejan.com/ looks like a personal site to me.
 * Current ref 123 (UMD file system access) is lacking publisher information
 * Likewise current ref 124 (Hello PSP!)
 * And current ref 127 (PSPlayer MT for PSP..)
 * What makes http://www.psp-homebrew.eu/index.php a reliable source?
 * http://www.dark-alex.org/ looks like a personal site to me.
 * Is this a reliable source http://www.noobz.eu/joomla/?
 * What makes http://www.joystiq.com/about/ a reliable site?
 * Current ref 131 (Singel, Ryan "Sony Draws Ire with PSP Graffiti")... at the end it says "superscript text".
 * All other links checked out with the link checking tool.Ealdgyth - Talk 14:31, 29 March 2008 (UTC)
 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.