Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/The Sims 2/Archive 1

The Sims 2
The article has recently undergone a major top-to-bottom overhaul. The article quality has improved greatly, but I'd like to see in general what would need to be done to get this to GA, A, or (dare I say it) FA quality. --Carl (talk 01:27, 22 August 2006 (UTC)
 * The short list is the lead, grammar/readability, and sources. I usually tell people to do research first, and then write the article; there is certainly a lot to be said about the importance of the game, yet there's nothing there. Nifboy 22:34, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * Okay, grammar and readibility are being worked on. Sources I understand, but could you explain a bit more about what is wrong with the lead? What's there now is about the third or forth version we've used? --Carl (talk 23:59, 31 August 2006 (UTC)
 * WP:LEAD. Remember, the point of the lead is to summarize the article, not simply introduce the topic. It tends to be a FAC concern, but it's worth spending a little time on. Nifboy 02:12, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * I've worked on the lead a bit. Is it any better, in your opinion? --Carl (talk 02:42, 1 September 2006 (UTC)
 * Ya, the lead's much better. Nifboy 02:49, 1 September 2006 (UTC)

This article is rift with WP:NOR - phrases like "it looks more realistic" and assertions about raster images and espeically the stuff about the bugs, without any citations. The bugs section also reads like a how-to guide - WP isn't supposed tob e a game guide. I'd suggest moving ModTheSims2 out of See also and writing about it in the mod community. I'd actually be more in favor of deleting that entire section - it's entirely generic and gives me no reason why to think that The Sims community is any different. It sounds just like any other mod. Hbdragon88 07:54, 9 September 2006 (UTC)


 * Sounds good to me. I've been considering that anyway. --Carl (talk 03:59, 13 September 2006 (UTC)