Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/PlayStation Home

PlayStation Home
The article has gone a long way in the past few months thanks to many, many users. This is due to it being in the open beta form, and therefore more users know about it and are willing to edit the article. I request a peer review now, because future content that we add into the article will pretty much just be updates and not extreme changes like we did recently. We're aiming for it to be currently reviewed as B Class. I would like the critique to push the article to GA Class. I know it's a lot to ask for, and if the article is not yet such standard, please say so. Thanks for your time. Ffgamera (talk) 10:36, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Levi


 * Lead


 * There are inline citations in the lead, which generally aren't required because you'll repeat those same points later in the article, especially if they're contentious.
 * Still has one.
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 08:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The lead is a little short, especially for an article of this size. Two good-sized paragraphs would be appropriate.
 * What would you suggest the lead should cover? Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 10:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 10:42, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That looks pretty good. — Levi van Tine (t – c)  11:26, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Prose/Grammar/Style - The entire article needs a good copyedit; here are some examples:


 * There are lots of words that probably don't need to be italicized.
 * Still quite a few (central plaza, bowling alley, etc.).
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 08:24, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There are also lots of single-sentence paragraphs (especially in "History of the Home Beta").
 * Still a lot of tiny paragraphs (User interface, game spaces, etc.).
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 03:14, 21 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "PlayStation Home, as a feature, was first publicly mentioned in an interview with NG-Gamer This was later detailed by Kotaku and finally confirmed by NG-Gamer." - Missing some punctuation marks here.
 * Can you elaborate? Ffgamera (talk) 06:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There should be a period after NG-Gamer.
 * There are also inline citations in the middle of sentences (not after punctuation marks) which makes it more difficult to read.


 * "Sony say that they are strict on the behaviour of users in Home." - Should be "Sony says..."
 * ✅ Ffgamera (talk) 06:46, 8 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "There is currently seating, a water feature and wine bottles." - Not even sure where to start on this one.
 * Well, it's difficult to understand. What kind of seating?  What's a water feature?  How does this sentence flow with the previous one?
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 08:18, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Layout


 * The "Layout" section is pretty huge and can probably be condensed (maybe losing some of those subsections in the process). Same for "World map".  Both sections could use a better name, I'd suggest "Operation" or "Features".
 * Looks better, but still needs some trimming/rearranging.


 * There are inline citations that don't follow punctuation marks (#12 in History is an example).


 * Sources


 * The citation style is inconsistent - consider using or other  templates every time.
 * ✅ JDC808 (talk) 16:20, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The article has lots of sources, but more is not always better. Several of them (including Joystiq and Kotaku) have questionable reliability.
 * ✅, Wasn't able to find a replacement source for source #5, #8, and #10. JDC808 (talk) 16:55, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Consider removing the information that they provide, then. — Levi van Tine (t – c)  08:46, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There are lots of statements that should have inline citations, including:


 * "In time, the PSP will be getting support for Home rewards."
 * ✅ JDC808 (talk) 16:59, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "In contrast to the trailers available on the PlayStation Store, the dynamic video content in Home is presented in standard definition."
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 01:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)


 * "Home currently has seven Game Spaces from either SCE or various third parties."
 * Removed in a recent edit by JDC808. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 10:25, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "In time, more events will occur, such as exclusive game previews and developer interviews."
 * ✅ Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 01:10, 24 April 2009 (UTC)
 * For these three, I wasn't able to find a source to put an inline citation. JDC808 (talk) 17:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * As a general rule of thumb, I'd suggest not including information unless you can find it in a reliable source. — Levi van Tine (t – c)  08:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "Sony say that they are strict on the behaviour of users in Home."
 * ✅ May need some editing on where I put the inline citations. JDC808 (talk) 17:14, 25 March 2009 (UTC)


 * I fixed the citations. Are you familiar with the and tags? —  Levi van Tine (t – c)  08:49, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

All in all, this is a good start, but needs some work. The prose is mostly understandable, but could benefit from some quality time with a copyeditor. The sources need to be thoroughly screened for reliability, especially if you want to eventually take this article to GA/FA. Take a look at similar articles, like Xbox Live, Xbox Live Arcade, and PlayStation Store for tips, especially regarding layout. I do not believe that in its current state, it is GA material. — Levi van Tine (t – c)  12:41, 7 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for that! Much appreciated! Done a bit so far. One question: what class would you give the article at this very moment? Ffgamera (talk) 07:08, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Good question...honestly it'd be tough to decide between C and B. I guess my decision would be a "weak B" citing B-class criterion #3 (layout).  There's a lot of good information in the article and the inline citations are appropriate, but it's kind of a jumbled mess (and a touch bloated).  With that fixed, it would be a strong GA-class contender if it could get a serious prose polish/copyedit (to make it more accessible to non-gamers) and also a reference check.  The references should be consistent (I personally use and encourage the use of citation templates like ), and some of them aren't very strong, like Kotaku (see the WPVG's sources page). —  Levi van Tine (t – c)  11:56, 8 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Interesting. What do you mean it's a mess, besides the citations, which I'll clean up asap? Ffgamera (talk) 02:37, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * By mess, I just mean that the sections should probably be rearranged to flow better. It should start relatively slowly (with explanations of "online service", etc.) and get more detailed/technical as the article continues. For instance, the "Public Spaces" section is huge and can probably be condensed with Features and Updates after a good trim.  History of the Home Beta can be condensed with History.  Operations can be condensed with Security. —  Levi van Tine (t – c)  12:05, 10 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the Peer Review Levi, we'll try to make this article even better. JDC808 (talk) 17:18, 25 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Not sure how to approach the things that are left on the to-do list. Ffgamera - My page! | Talk to me! | Contribs 03:03, 21 April 2009 (UTC)