Wikipedia:Peer review/Survivalcraft/archive1

Survivalcraft


I've listed this article for peer review before nominating this for FA. The game isn't popular as it used to be, so some sources may be outdated.

Thanks, Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 13:46, 27 June 2021 (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. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 21:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

I also suggest that you review some articles at WP:FAC if you haven't already. This will help you understand the FA criteria so that you can further improve your article. It also builds goodwill among FAC regulars who will be more likely to review your article. Editors do not need to be an expert in the topic or in Wikipedia policy to review. In fact, FAC needs reviewers who are not experts to point out technical jargon and places they don't understand the prose in an article. I hope to see you there. Z1720 (talk) 21:06, 7 July 2021 (UTC)

Urve
Some comments from a very quick readthrough:
 * What makes Pocket Gamer - eg this - a high-quality source?
 * Pocket Gamer is listed here. Check it out. If you use the search engine provided by WikiProject Video Games, you could see that the first page of the search result of Survivalcraft is mostly Pocket Gamer articles.


 * Similarly for Gamezebo?
 * Gamezebo is listed here. Check it out.


 * "with most reviews stating that the game is either better or supplementing its source of inspiration" ---> "with most reviews stating that the game is either better than or supplements its source of inspiration"


 * "One of the most popular demands was to make the game more similar to Minecraft up to its detail" - unclear
 * I've reorganized the sentence, please check it out.


 * "He wanted to make the game into a long-term game" - redundant use of 'game'


 * "Survivalcraft 2 is a prequel" - sequel


 * critical response seems to give almost WP:UNDUE weight to the praise alone. take a look at the first paragraph and then look at the reviews that were more negative - there's some balancing that needs to happen
 * I'm not sure what balancing are you talking here....could you elaborate? English is my third language, so I might not understand some words/idioms in English. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 02:40, 9 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Could you elaborate what do you mean about WP:UNDUE here? ... please? thanks --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 02:56, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * , UNDUE basically talks about balance between topics. So Urve is referring to the reception section, where there's more positive review cited than the negative, despite the Metacritic being mixed.  Gerald WL  03:36, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * Yes, I see. I've used all of the four review that Metacritic aggregated in the article. As you can see, the first two reviews in Metacritic were positive, so I put these on the more positive first paragraph. The mixed reviews was put in the second and third paragraph of the section. The last paragraph is for the Gamezebo review that judged this game entirely negative. If you have any more specific advice on balancing that would be really appreciated. --Regards, Jeromi Mikhael 03:58, 21 July 2021 (UTC)
 * I see., mind responding?  Gerald WL  04:10, 21 July 2021 (UTC)

Will return if/when have the time. Urve (talk) 04:19, 8 July 2021 (UTC)

Comments from Gerald Waldo Luis
Hey! Sorry for not GA reviewing it, but here we are. The article is relatively short (nearing 30,000bytes), so you might see significant oppositions cause apparently some people think shorties can't be FA. To try prevent that, if you have more includable information I would recommend doing so.  Gerald WL  06:29, 19 July 2021 (UTC)


 * "The game was compared to Minecraft by various reviews, with most reviews stating that the game is either better than or supplements its source of inspiration." The first half is not needed. So probably change it to "The game received polarizing reviews by video game critics, though most opined that the game is either better than or supplements its source of inspiration."


 * "Windows Phone and iPad"-- link iPad


 * "Survivalcraft is a 3D"-- "Survivalcraft is a three-dimensional (3D)"


 * "the player generating a world" extend "world" to "open world" then link.
 * "a tree to obtain timber" link timber


 * "create items and blocks." link Item (game terminology)


 * "and the character's health bar" link Health bar


 * "game modes" link game mode


 * "Challenging is the normal survival mode"-- link survival mode


 * Since it also covers the release, suggest changing to "Development and release".


 * "He bought a copy of the game in July 2011 after hearing rumours about the game" change the second "the game" to "it" to avoid repetition.


 * "After playing the game and modifying the game's source code"-- "After playing it and modifying its source code".. also link source code


 * "a rate of 4.5 frames per second" link frame rate in "rate".


 * "to the Windows Phone's app store" --> "to the Windows Phone Store"


 * "also conducted in Survivalcraft's final"-- "also conducted in its final"


 * "Survivalcraft 2 is a sequel"-- usually I would bold the game name.


 * Italicize Survival 2 in the image caption


 * For the critical response, I suggest seeing WP:RECEPTION. It's a guide used by many editors when considering FAC, and makes the section much more readable.
 * Because the ratings have been stated at the table, there's no need to state the rating in prose.


 * Recommend adding to the "Translation" section.