Wikipedia:Peer review/The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time/archive1

The Legend of Zelda: Ocarina of Time
Planning on elevating to featured article status, so I need some advice on what to add, delete or change. - A Link to the Past (talk) 23:56, 20 September 2005 (UTC)


 * This is probably the best one so far. HOWEVER: next to no screenshots.  Bad! Very bad!  Also, a brief list of significant weapons should be added (yes, I know there is a link to a comprehensive article, but the ocarina and sword are so important that they should at least get a mention on the main article).  And I'm a bit chary of the attention given to bugs and speculation.  Like the others, historical context would be appreciated, but ther than that, good work. --Maru (talk) 02:54, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Very weaselly With its innovative gameplay, it is widely considered as one of the greatest video games of all time in both game console and PC games combined and is the highest rated game by game critics of all time. Many people even consider it to be the best game ever created. This needs to be cited.  This was actually the game that I hated so much that it turned me off gaming for the rest of my life.  I haven't purchased a video or computer game since, because this one was so bad I couldn't stand it.  (don't really remember why, except that there was an obnoxious faerie that didn't do anything but block the screen)  The whole "success" section lacks references, which is lamentable (was it really that popular?  I rather assumed everyone hated it as much as I did)... as a matter of fact, the whole article lacks any references at all, which are a prerequisite for FACs. Tuf-Kat 04:24, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Are you nuts? OOT was insanely popular.  We're talking Halo level here. But I don't really know where one would find references for that. --Maru (talk) 04:31, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I guess I don't hang out with the right crowd. (I hate Halo too, but at least I know people who like it)  Surely people have written about the success of OOT, and one could always document sales figures as a start.  No doubt reviews have been published, presumably positive.  --Tuf-Kat 04:36, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I think sales figures are already in there. Or else I've started hallucinating "5 million +" figures... --Maru (talk) 04:43, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * It says that, but there's no references section, so as far as I know, it's completely made up. (I'm not saying it is, but that's the point of having references) And that's not enough to support "without question one of the most successful video games of all time" -- it doesn't even claim how it ranks in sales, much less establish that it qualifies as "without question one of the most successful".  It doesn't provide so much a single reference for "Critically the game was widely commended as a seamless transition from 2-D to 3-D".  Just for the sake of argument, I don't believe it one bit -- provide some sources so I can be proved wrong. Tuf-Kat 04:47, 21 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Computer and video games that have been considered the greatest ever has references for OOT's popularity, for starters. -- grm_wnr Esc  08:58, 21 September 2005 (UTC)