Wikipedia:Peer review/StarCraft: Ghost/archive1

StarCraft: Ghost

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to receive feedback on how to improve this article for perhaps a future FA. Thanks! Gary King ( talk ) 04:44, 14 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Opening salvo:
 * Using my acquired talents at ripping apart images (if only Elco could see me now,) the article has at least one too many fair use (nonfree) images for the size of the article. Also, I would beef up the FURs for the remaining images (look at The World Ends With You for some good examples). Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 04:28, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, if I had to get rid of one, I'd go for the multiplayer one, but do you really think its necessary to remove one? I purposefully chose the images so there's one for single-player, another one for multiplayer (which has massive differences from single-player) that also demonstrates vehicles and one for the cinematics that also provides a clear shot of the protagonist. You don't think its possible to justify the FUR's for them and keep all three? -- Sabre (talk) 08:21, 15 September 2008 (UTC)
 * Well, it's up to the image reviewers at FAC to make the final desision, but if I were you I'd remove the vehicles image-- how does "it features a strong vehicular aspect" significantly aiding reader's understanding of the previous with an image of said vehicles?
 * "The continued delay of Ghost caused it to be labelled as vaporware, " shouldn't it be "have caused", since it's still indefinitely postponed?
 * For the "Nova would..." et al of the gameplay, perhaps it should be stated at some point where all this "woulda coulda" information comes from, for example, trailers or game previews?
 * "has formed through deceit, military might and revolution" not sure "has" is what you want to use here. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ( talk  ) 12:53, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * All done Gary King ( talk ) 15:32, 15 September 2008 (UTC)


 * Automated peer review didn't turn up as much as I thought. Dealt with the redundancy point, the other one is part of a reference title.-- Sabre (talk) 10:19, 16 September 2008 (UTC)