Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening

Devil May Cry 3: Dante's Awakening
I am nominating this article for a peer review to know how many things people that are avid Wiki editors think are needed to be done to raise it to Featured Article, I am asking for a review to avoid having to do all the work after it has been nominated like what has happened with Devil May Cry, I will peronally attend the points you post here and will be as efficient as I can, thanks to anyone that comments, don't forget to be bold in your comments, Peace. 凶 00:04, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Um....how was this promoted without a development section (pre-release, interviews, problems, promotion)? Also, cover art is missing a fair use rationale. You'll never make it to FA without both of these done.--Clyde (talk) 18:49, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I already added the Fair use rationable to the cover art, I will dig around and create a Development section wich I will add later this evening, thanks for your comments. - 凶  19:03, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Development section and marketing sub section in place, ready for next point.- 凶 22:29, 12 April 2007 (UTC)


 * A few notes:


 * Gameplay is completely unreferenced. Use the manual, reviews, interviews, that "Note of Naught"... anything. Just get some citations in there.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * The list of styles needs to be converted into prose. It should look like the "list" of Final Fantasy VII characters, with semicolons separating the names and descriptions.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * The placement of references needs to be standardized. See WP:REF.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * Full dates should be linked, per WP:DATE.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * Game titles and the names of magazine publications should be italicized.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * The game's positive reception is not adequately covered. I'm hearing all this stuff about how much critics disliked the difficulty, without enough discussion of critical praise. The only positive quote is from Gamepro, at the end of Reception's first paragraph.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * "At the 2005 Tokyo Game Show, it was confirmed that Capcom would be releasing a Special Edition of Devil May Cry 3." -- needs a citation.[[Image:Green tick.svg|15px]]Done


 * Finally, the article suffers from the same prose issues that Devil May Cry did. This time, I recommend getting a full copyedit before nominating, to avoid a fiasco like last time.


 * Good luck. JimmyBlackwing 19:14, 13 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Can you please be more specific about the placement of references, all of them exepct for one in the plot are located after the period on the sentence's end. - 凶 02:49, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Certainly. Some style guide, which I cannot now locate, dictates that references go like the following: ". ". Not ". " or " ." Most all featured articles follow this. It's a minor point, but I guarantee that it will be brought up in FAC. JimmyBlackwing 05:15, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Oh! thanks for clarifing that I will deal with them now. - 凶 05:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Ok all of them have the order, I do have a doubt should we list the author of those reviews whose author is identified as "Staff" such as IGN staff and so on? -- 凶 05:37, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I've never seen it done, and I've never done it myself, so I would say no. If the author's name isn't specified, I recommend just leaving out the "author" part. JimmyBlackwing 07:10, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * Cool, can you please take a look and see if all the points excluding the prose are taken care of. The remaining and more notable one is the prose wich I will work when a user especialized in that kind of thing like Boradis is available, since such users can correct some errors or typos that bypass me. - 凶 07:20, 15 April 2007 (UTC)
 * Looks like you've taken care of everything besides the prose. The article's overall content appears to be nearing completion. Once it's been copyedited, it should be ship-shape for FAC. JimmyBlackwing 20:19, 15 April 2007 (UTC)


 * It seems Boradis worked with the article's prose, how is it now? any suggestions?- 凶 22:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The prose is now much improved, to the point that I think I could support the article in FAC. However, on re-reading the article, I did note that there are several excessively short subsections. Marketing, for example, is so tiny that I would recommend considering merging its content into Development, and doing away with the subheading. Aside from that, I place a tag on an unreferenced sentence. Also note that while my standards for prose may be satisfied, Wikipedians such as User:Tony1 and User:Deckiller may not be as impressed. As such, I think copyediting should probably continue for awhile. Good work, nonetheless. JimmyBlackwing 23:29, 17 April 2007 (UTC)


 * I eliminated the sub heading, the reference was in the article already but it somehow got moved from where it was to a paragraph that was irrelevant to it. I will nominate it and ask Deckiller for some of his stellar copy editing if he is available, I think that what little is left will be attended faster in FAC, by now my intention of upgrading it to avoid as much fire as DMC has been fullfiled and the task force has at least two other articles for peer review, I don't want to fill the page with too many of these DMC pages. Thanks for taking the time to review the page and providing your help. -- 凶 00:56, 18 April 2007 (UTC)