Wikipedia:Featured article review/Link (The Legend of Zelda series)/archive1

Review commentary

 * Messages left at User talk:Phils, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Computer and video games, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Nintendo, and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject The Legend of Zelda series. Sandy 00:48, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

This article need some improvement. In light of the recent Featuring of high quality FA fictional characters, it has the following issues;
 * Way too many and somewhat repetitious fair use images which also lack rationales and sources.
 * No information on character creation and portrayal from outside of the universe.
 * Not sure if this is a criteria, but there appears to be a ton of information about Links relationships and other in-game information that may be unnecessary.
 * Finally, there are few in-line citations and in the old format style.

I will try to help with this, but I hope this article gets saved. Judgesurreal777 00:07, 11 September 2006 (UTC)

My minor issues: My major issue:
 * Many of these images are collages, and as such very difficult to source (since we need to source every single image that was composited).
 * Many other images are unnecessary. Why do we need an image of the ending of Zelda II when prose suffices? Why do we have so many images of essentially similar Links (the pre-N64 links, with the same outfit, hair, and essential appearance)?
 * Why is there a synopsis of every single Legend of Zelda game? We have an article on the series and on each game already.
 * More SSB cruft in Nintendo articles. There's a wholly unnecessary full page on Link in the Super Smash Bros. series, including detailed gameplay abilities.
 * Ditto for Soul Calibur II.
 * An extremely lengthy cameo section; this could be prosified or even summarized (no need to list EVERY cameo).
 * 99% in-universe content, 1% out-of-universe content. It's all "Link does foo in game Bar" and no "The creators did X for Y reason."

While I don't want to see this demoted, I'm not entirely sure it's even GA status right now. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 00:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)
 * To make it clear, the minor issues are relatively easy to fix and shouldn't be a big deal, but the major one I feel is FARC-worthy. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 03:23, 12 September 2006 (UTC)

Also, there is way too much information in this article that should be left to Weapons and items from The Legend of Zelda series.  Pagra shtak  14:28, 11 September 2006 (UTC)


 * I agree a large number of images should be cut. Also, the summaries of Link's adventures in each game should be drastically reduced to some standard size and focus on the peculiarity of the incarnation in each game, not provide a synopsis of the story. The cameos section should be pretty easy to "prosify". Phil s 03:16, 12 September 2006 (UTC)
 * While they're not exactly at standard size, I had a go at taking out 'storycruft' in the adventure summaries. --Sparky Lurkdragon 06:02, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

There are one or two promising hits at Google Books and Google Scholar for anyone willing to slog through the results. And there's always this site. — BrianSmithson 11:06, 13 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Ok, 90% of the problems are gone, including all the minor ones. As to the major problems, I am going to start hunting for references and going to massively start trimming the article. If anyone wants to help, please consult current featured fictional characters such as Jabba the Hutt or Padme Amidala. Judgesurreal777 21:55, 20 September 2006 (UTC)

Whilst reading this article i was surprised to see the gold star - this simply isn't FA-worthy in its current state. The Video Games section is way too long, waffly, and full of crap. The Characteristics section is fairly pants as well. It needs cleaning up as in language, formatting, as well as more sources and more relevant information (and less non-relevant information). I'll try to help out where i can. -- jeffthe  jiff  14:18, 21 September 2006 (UTC)

Someone please help! People have undone all the work I am doing on Link (Legend of Zelda) and I don't want to break to 3 revert rule, so someone please stop them from reverting everything I did. Judgesurreal777 03:49, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, situation under control, thank you to those who helped out :) But as you can see, I have a lot of copyediting to do, anyone wanting to help would be greatly appreciated. Judgesurreal777 17:34, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Of ALL our FAs, this is the LAST one I want to see go. I will do whatever needs to be done. Leave a note on my talk page if you are having trouble with something. The more specific, the better.  Sir Crazyswordsman  20:14, 23 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm adding references to the story section. I could appreciate some help.  I say three to five per game, depending on the importance of it.  Sir Crazyswordsman  03:02, 24 September 2006 (UTC)

FARC commentary

 * Suggested FA criteria concerns are images (3), format and sufficiency of citations (1c), comprehensiveness (1b). Marskell 10:43, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The suggested concerns do not take into account any of the work done on this article, such as the lack of any current image issues. Also, on the other two points, A lot of work has been done, and it would be good to hear reviewers comment on how its going, as opposed to now moving to FARC with active work on the article. Judgesurreal777 12:18, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I say the issues raised have been addressed. If there are any further objections, please state them so those working to keep this article FA can begin work. Judgesurreal777 22:29, 27 September 2006 (UTC)
 * To elaborate, I was the one who initially wanted this article reviewed, little suspecting I would be one of the prime fixers :) The images, starting at over a dozen and many montages, are now 3 encyclopedic images with rationales and sources. The article is now comprehensive as it has a ton of concept and creation info, as there was very little before, and we have gone from 1-2 inline ciations to many many more now. Judgesurreal777 17:30, 28 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep. More images can be added, as can more citations.  Most of the issues have been adressed though.  The article is definitely comprehensive.  Sir Crazyswordsman  16:42, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * The problem was that there were too many images, many of which were unsourced or impossible to source. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Frankly there will be disagreements among editors about what constitutes enough images. There always are.  Sir Crazyswordsman  21:01, 2 October 2006 (UTC)
 * Comment. It does look tons better, so kudos to Judgesurreal. The cruft keeps creeping back in, though, so be vigilant. It's unfortunate that there's nothing else to say about the character's concept and creation. Are there other sources that might be consulted? — BrianSmithson 22:28, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I'm still ambivalent about keeping this. The cruft was annoying but not the key problem; there's just so little information here that isn't gleaned directly from the games, and a good chunk of it is of interest primarily to hardcore LOZ fans. (For example, a full quarter of the "Character creation" header is dedicated to explaining that zomg yes there is a Zelda continuity.) It feels more like an A-class than a FA-class to me, but I'm not sure if splitting that hair is worth it. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 22:49, 28 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Keep - We should fix the problems but keep it. As the Importance=high clearly states, Link is one of the staples of NES and Gameboy and should be portrayed accordingly in Wikipedia. We just need to bring it up to par. I'll help !! Renmiri 13:46, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Ok, so I added a bunch of game references to get the ingame stuff set, but I see that many people are mentioning the need for concept and creation information. What specificially do people want added? Say what it is, that way we can add it :) Judgesurreal777 16:56, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Where did the name come from? Why'd they design the sprite the way they did? Did Miyamoto know the backstory before the character was created or was it kind of random as with Mario's design? What design decisions were made and by whom in the character's reinterpretation in future games? That sort of thing. — BrianSmithson 01:43, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Great suggestions Brian! I also did some wordsmithing, trying to make the section more out of universe and adding specific design criteria Miyamoto has mentioned on interviews. Have a look folks, see if you like the changes Renmiri 02:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)
 * PS: The article is long and the Characteristics / Appearances sections look daunting. I suggest trimming it, though I have not had the chance to read it in detail Renmiri 02:50, 30 September 2006 (UTC)


 * So, how's the article looking now? More has been added, more re written. Judgesurreal777 02:10, 9 October 2006 (UTC)


 * Keep - It still could use some work, but it has been improved enough in my opinion to warrant remaining as an FA. --PresN 17:27, 12 October 2006 (UTC)