Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Shadow the Hedgehog (video game)

Shadow the Hedgehog (video game)
A fairly low-importance video game, but an article that I have worked hard on. It passed its GA review about a month ago, and now I am planning to take it to FAC soon. But first, I want to know what stands between it and an FA. Mainly, I want to know if the article looks confusing, and if it is copyedited/formatted properly, although any comments are appreciated. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:17, 16 March 2009 (UTC)

User:Ashnard
 * "Shadow the Hedgehog is a video game starring Shadow the Hedgehog" Is there any way to reword this? Think of throwing in the word "titular" or "eponymous".
 * It was once worded as "the eponymous character" and later "the Shadow the Hedgehog character", but I thought that implied that Shadow had not appeared in any games before this one. I just didn't think it sounded right. It's more like Shadow the Hedgehog is Shadow's eponymous game. Tezkag72 (talk) 16:46, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "It was first revealed". Given the Internet and all, something can only really be revealed once.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 16:47, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "The game is a 3D platformer, following the trend of previous Sonic games". A pedantic one, maybe, but is there not some non-platforming Sonic games that preceded this?
 * Reworded. Better? Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "The plot of the game involves Shadow, a creation of Doctor Eggman's grandfather Gerald Robotnik, attempting to learn about his past after suffering from amnesia, while completing missions that affect the storyline." We could do without the last clause&mdash;it's already stated earlier and disrupts the flow.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Shadow the Hedgehog is a platform game that has similar traits to previous 3D Sonic games, in which the player traverses a set of three-dimensional platforming levels". Reword. This shares similar traits with every platform game since this is what actually defines the genre.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "the collection of rings, and destroying enemies". Why the shift of tense here?
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "The Hero missions involve the player completing tasks for his friends, including Sonic, Tails,". Friends? I don't know about you, but I've never spoken to them. Sonic's accent grates on me too.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 02:55, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "The Normal missions are completed by simply reaching the Chaos Emerald inside" Chaos wha? Link or explain jargon, please.
 * Done. Sorry, I thought I had linked it earlier. Well, it's linked later. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Which missions are completed affects how the game progresses, what levels are played, and ultimately, which of the ten possible endings will be reached,[7][5] although the enemies attack the player no matter which side they take." Think about deleting this last clause or moving it elsewhere, as it disrupts the flow of the sentence.
 * Done...I think. I moved it before the start of the sentence, which seemed to be the best place for it, because I didn't want to say "no matter which side he takes" without explaining what "side" means. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "and there are many different paths in which to complete the game". This has basically already been stated in the paragraph.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Perhaps the greatest difference in the game". Hmmm, I'm unsure about the tone here.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "the player may opt not to use weapons". Is this not already implied by the word "may" in the previous clause?
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The whole "Chaos Emerald" sentence should be rewritten. Watch out for shifts in tense.
 * Reworded. Better? Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "It previously appeared in Sonic Adventure 2." Trivia?
 * Removed. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "but the screen is divided horizontally between players". Maybe I should go back to school, but the screenshot is split vertically.
 * Done. Sorry, I must have gotten confused. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "The multiplayer mode was criticized by GameSpot's Greg Mueller for its poor combat execution and small number of stages.[2]" Save it for "Reception".
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 21:09, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Two players exploring a stage in the multiplayer mode." If it's not a full sentence, then it shouldn't have a full stop at the end.
 * Done for both images.
 * "50 years before the game begins". Needs more clarity for the context. Use "is set" as opposed to "the game begins" as this could technically mean when the game was released.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm worried that a seemingly simplistic plot has been stretched into two paragraphs.
 * Rearranged... Still in two paragraphs, but the info isn't all over the place like it was before. Tezkag72 (talk) 21:18, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Shadow, whose character design was inspired by films such as Underworld, Constantine, and the Terminator series; was" I don't know what's happening with the semi-colon here.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "was the ideal character to use for such a game". According to whom? Same for the next sentence; even if it is sourced, it's still worded if this is the writer's view. Who said this?
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * "Upon another requirement, the Hero characters were required". Watch out for repetition.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The "Reception" as it stands really is just a sequence of quotes, scores, and statistics. It needs to be better structured and written if you're going for FA.
 * Improved. Better? Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The table should not be larger than the text for issues relating to structure and presentation. Section should be expanded to feature a more detailed and broad overview. Remember to mention all aspects, such as graphics and music.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 21:07, 23 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The GameSpy review is missing its date and author.
 * There is no date or author in the review. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Patrick Klepek, 11-16-2005. Right above the star rating in the review. —    Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   14:45, 26 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 21:10, 26 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay, generally a decent article. I'm very short on time, so I probably won't look over amendments or respond to questions. Contact me on my talk page if you need to know something quickly. Cheers. Ashnard Talk  Contribs  08:33, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref 25 is missing its author.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Watch out for MoS on ref 11.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Ref 2 is missing its author.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 17:17, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thank you very much! If you have time later, though, try to watchlist the article so you can reply to my replies, once I fix or reply to what you said. Tezkag72 (talk) 14:05, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * In an issue of Nintendo Power, they gave Shadow the Hedgehog a 8.0 and recived the Editor's Pick for Best Platformer on that year's Nintendo Power Awards. I don't know what the issues were, but if you or someone could find references to them, they could be useful for the Reception section. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:44, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I thought I heard that too. I don't have that issue, though, and a long time ago when I looked to see if it was somewhere on the Internet, but couldn't find it. Thanks anyway, though. Tezkag72 (talk) 21:54, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Hmm, I think I actually own the issues. I'll let you know if I can find them. Also, I also don't know how to reference a magizine. Do you know how? Give me a shout on my talk page. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:05, 23 March 2009 (UTC)

Levi's Comments

Prose/Layout/Style


 * Lead


 * Is that inline required in the lead?
 * What do you mean, "inline"? Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Inline citation.[1] They generally aren't required in the lead. —    Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Gameplay


 * "Another new feature in the game are vehicles such as motorcycles and alien aircraft that Shadow may drive, though as with the weapons, most of the vehicles are optional." - Awkward, might be better as "Another new feature in the game is the addition of vehicles..."
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "There is also a multiplayer mode for up to two players..." - This makes it sound as if the multiplayer mode could be played with fewer than two players. "Up to" could be removed.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Plot


 * "...a condition which lasts into..." - "Continues" might be better than "lasts" in this case.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Development


 * "...out-of-place in..." - Tone consideration, "inappropriate for" may be better.
 * Done, although I don't see how it sounded awkward. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It wasn't awkward, it was just a tone consideration. "Out-of-place" could be considered less formal. —    Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Censorship


 * For "1UP.com's", the entire word should be wikilinked.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Reception


 * In the first paragraph, every sentence after the first isn't really necessary. It's just numerical statistics, all of which can be found in the reviews infobox.  Also, because the information is from other websites, it could change at any time, if a review is added or taken away.  I also feel that the Mobygames scores aren't required because MobyGames is kind of sketchy and there are already references to Metacritic and GameRankings, which are more reliable.
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Better, but now there's a single-sentence paragraph. —   Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * "Famitsu gave it 31 out of 40 on all systems but, being a simple scores archive, did not give a review." - Technically, 31 out of 40 is a review. Maybe the last clause could be changed to "did not provide a more thorough review."
 * Done. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * There are two single-sentence paragraphs in this section. Could they be combined with other paragraphs?
 * I'm not sure. The multiplayer mode really stands on its own; no other reviews mentioned it but I think it's important. And for the last "paragraph", selling a million copies and being acclaimed twice for that really isn't the same as getting good reviews. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * It's not about the information standing on its own. I agree that they are both important points.  It's just an aesthetic consideration. —    Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)


 * The last sentence has an inline citation (#39) not following a punctuation mark.
 * I don't really see how this improves it, but done. I added a comma. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Per the MOS. —   Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Comprehensiveness


 * Plot


 * "...on the government's orders." - Which government?
 * I really don't know; it doesn't say. I put the United States government because there's a president who speaks English and speaks with an American accent, but this could be considered original research. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC) Undone because that was OR. It doesn't say. Tezkag72 (talk) 16:39, 28 March 2009 (UTC)

Sources
 * There are no inlines for the last paragraph in Gameplay.
 * One now. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Are Gaming Age and GameTrailers reliable sources?
 * I don't see why they aren't. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, just be prepared to defend them in the FAC. —   Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)

Looks good otherwise! —   Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   09:01, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the comments. Think it's ready for FAC? I want to be ready and not blow it by going too quickly. Tezkag72 (talk) 13:23, 27 March 2009 (UTC)
 * It might be. You might have to do some defense of the sources and the prose might need more tweaking.  Would you like me to do a more thorough copyedit? —    Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   08:33, 29 March 2009 (UTC)