Wikipedia:Peer review/Skullgirls/archive1

Skullgirls


I've made it a personal goal to try to bring this article up to FA status. Any feedback and suggestions for improvement are greatly appreciated!

Thank you! Wani (talk) 02:40, 3 April 2023 (UTC)


 * STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template.
 * Since you are still working on nominating your first FA, I would suggest seeking a FA mentor. They can comment on this PR and guide you through the FAC process. Z1720 (talk) 14:22, 14 April 2023 (UTC)
 * This has been open for over a month and has yet to receive a response. Are you still interested in comments? If so, I suggest asking for feedback on the talk pages of Wikiprojects attached to this article and seeking the help of a mentor. If not, can this be closed? Z1720 (talk) 01:42, 8 May 2023 (UTC)
 * I already wrote a request for mentorship on the FAC talkpage and didn't get a response. I'd still like feedback, so I'll post on WP:VG's talkpage and see if I can get any interest. If that fails, then go ahead and close the PR. Wani (talk) 02:51, 8 May 2023 (UTC)

Comments by David Fuchs
in progress Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs  talk 14:03, 16 May 2023 (UTC)

Overall thoughts: Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs talk 16:59, 23 May 2023 (UTC)
 * The lead really doesn't properly cover the contents of the article; it blitzes through a ton of content and is mostly focused on post-release updates and legal woes.
 * The infobox shouldn't have all the personnel unless they're notable or significantly covered in the prose (they're also unreferenced.)
 * In general, the prose needs a lot of work, as it's an active stumbling block to understanding some elements. I recommend reading through User:Tony1/How to improve your writing for general tips and exercises to apply.
 * A good example in the lead: After Autumn Games severed ties with distributor Konami in December 2013, the latter formally requested to have the game removed from the PlayStation and Xbox storefronts. The clunky language just begs more questions (can you informally request a game removal? Did the game get removed or not?
 * The gameplay section starts off by comparing the gameplay to another game, which I've never played, and which is thus useless for explaining this game's gameplay. Likewise, a ton of jargon is used like "snapbacks", "infinite combos", "generate meter", et al. This should be minimally comprehensible for someone who isn't a serious fighting game player.
 * I'm currently rewriting the gameplay section in my sandbox, but I've run into a problem. I can't find any good secondary sources explaining very basic mechanics, like the control scheme, the definition of special attacks and supers/blockbusters, etc. The only decent one I could find was this review by ZTGD, but they're considered unreliable by WP:VG. The only way I can think to circumvent this issue is to cite the game's tutorial mode, which does cover all these topics. Is that okay for me to do? I know use of primary sources is frowned upon, so I guess I'm wondering how many times I can cite the tutorials before it's considered too much. Wani (talk) 21:15, 15 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The character rosters seems like undue weight, unless these are individually significantly covered in reception or secondary sources.
 * I've (mostly) reverted the entire section back to before the character descriptions were added. Wani (talk) 03:38, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Weird that the plot section doesn't actually cover the game's plot, which I assumed didn't existed until I saw the mention of a story mode's final boss.
 * The initial development of the game only merits a single paragraph, while stuff like exact backer rewards and kickstarter stretch goal timeframes deserves the same amount of text? This feels imbalanced and simultaneously needs trimming in some areas and expansion in others.
 * For all the discussion about the legal changes, it's never explained how the new studio actual comes to manage the IP versus Lab Zero Games.
 * Why does the soundtrack section start with the soundtrack's release and then go back in time a year to talk about who actually composed the music?
 * The release section just wallops you with a ton of release dates; I don't see how announcement dates of delayed launches or beta tests are significant enough to need exact dates for (or mentioning, for that matter.)
 * Skullgirls mobile is a completely different game, so it's weird it's covered in the release section for the Skullgirls console/PC game.
 * Reception section needs work; the section opens with the Metacritic scores and then never bothers summarizing general critic consensus beyond that; criticism is lumped together in a single section instead of being covered in the respective sections before (e.g. why are the critics lamenting the limited number of game modes not discussed in the gameplay paragraph before it?)
 * What makes Shoryuken, Fanbyte, Esports.gg, Kakuchopurei, VGR high-quality reliable sources? (Shoryuken in particular is listed as unreliable at WP:VG/S.)
 * I don't think there's solid fair use rationales for two non-free screenshots, especially since File:Skullgirls screenshot 2.png is pretty tough to actually see what's going on in the shot.
 * I've removed the second gameplay screenshot from the development section. Wani (talk) 03:17, 7 July 2023 (UTC)
 * The original uploader for screenshot 2 keeps reverting the deletion (and also accused me of violating WP:OWN), so...dunno what to do at this point. Wani (talk) 06:47, 11 July 2023 (UTC)

Did you see the above comments? Z1720 (talk) 21:24, 17 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, I have. I'll try to address the issues once I have ample free time. If you need to close this, you can. The archive will be available through the article's talk page, correct? Wani (talk) 03:33, 18 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Yes, the archive will be available when this is closed. Since it has been another month without comments, can this be closed or will you solicit more comments? Z1720 (talk) 21:16, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * You can go ahead and close. Wani (talk) 22:26, 22 July 2023 (UTC)