Wikipedia:Peer review/Starflight/archive1

Starflight
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've been working on Starflight on and off for a year or two, and I think it's almost ready for WP:GAN. It's been expanded some, but mostly I've rewritten and sourced it extensively. I'd like to get some fresh eyes to give a looking over and help me polish it up that last little bit. Thanks. —Torchiest talkedits 13:57, 3 November 2012 (UTC)
 * I can do this one. --Noleander (talk) 05:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC)

End Noleander comments. --Noleander (talk) 05:04, 18 November 2012 (UTC)
 * Comments from Noleander
 * Wording: " ... resemble a space opera à la Star Trek. " - "a la" is too slangy; need more professional wording for encyclopedia.
 * Wording: " ... and name it for no gameplay effect whatsoever." - "whatsoever" is too slangy.
 * Citation - needed for section "Mega Drive/Genesis version"
 * Grammar: " ...Starflight has also received favorable ..." - just say "Starflight received favorable ..".  The word "also" should rarely be used in encycl articles.
 * Ref subsection? - At the bottom of the section "References" is the manual "Binary Systems (1986). Starflight: The Manual. Electronic Arts." - that looks too confusing there, part of the footnotes?  Just put it in a dedicated subsection "Manuals" or similar.  Or change "References" to "Footnotes" and put the manual in a subsection named "References"
 * Wording: "... and was very much the spiritual predecessor to ..."- "was very much" is too slangy. Just say "and was the spiritual ..".  BUT make sure "spiritual" is the word/idea used in the source; editors should not supply that kind of sentiment on their own.
 * Info on creator: It was created by Binary Systems ... why is there no article on them? Primary software developer was ...?   Did they create any other games?   ... [later note]: Okay, I see some detail later in the article.  But should Binary Systems article be created? or at least red-linked? or was the company too tiny & non-notable?
 * The "Plot" section should have more citations ... if entire section comes from the manual, at least put one footnote at the very end of the Plot section.
 * Is there some kind of footer navBox you can put at the bottom that contains links to other, similar games?  Readers may want to browse for other games of that era.
 * Wording: "Starflight is often mentioned in the same breath as ..." - "same breath" is too slangy
 * That's all I have. I think if you resolve that, and take it to GAN, you should be in good shape.   I'm sure the GAN reviewer will find a few more things, but it should be straightforward.  Good luck!
 * Thanks for the notes. On the last point, there is a page for Binary Systems, but it's a redirect to Starflight. I think the team only developed those two games.  I'm not sure there's enough out there to establish notability.  One of the guys in the group, Greg Johnson, has been pretty successful and has an article, so maybe I could mooch off his sources.  Thanks again for taking the time to leave comments. —Torchiest talkedits 13:55, 18 November 2012 (UTC)