Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Nintendo DSi/archive5

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by

GrahamColm 10:02, 25 September 2013 (UTC) [1].[reply

]

Nintendo DSi

Nominator(s): « Ryūkotsusei » 14:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I have sufficiently addressed all the issues raised in the previous FACs and all of the reviews in-between. « Ryūkotsusei » 14:50, 18 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support as per my review in Archive 4. --JDC808 ♫ 08:52, 22 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I have one issue with a sentence in the lead, the one that states that the "Nintendo DSi XL is a larger model that launched the following year". From looking at the small infobox near the bottom of the article, I know what this means, as it launched in 2009 in Japan and in 2010 elsewhere, but the sentence is placed not too far after the year 2009 is mentioned in a previous sentence, so I thought "the following year" meant 2010 for all countries at first glance. This should be made clearer. T C N7JM 14:36, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I see what you mean. I tried conveying that without repeating the same "released in x" sentence. Hows this? « Ryūkotsusei » 16:08, 7 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

That looks better. T C N7JM 11:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support - This article has gone through a fair amount of reviewing and, aside from the one issue that has been addressed above, I found no concerns while reading through the article. T C N7JM 11:15, 8 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Image check - all OK (CC, Flickr and own work). Sources and authors provided.

File:GameStop,_Universal_CityWalk_Hollywood.JPG - OK. The permission statement is a bit confusing, but a formal CC-license is offered and OK for Commons. GermanJoe (talk) 13:54, 12 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]
The image layout needs to be improved a bit (see
-}}. Maybe spread out the images a bit more too. Also, File:GameStop, Universal CityWalk Hollywood.JPG needs to be removed. All those characters are copyright. See Commons:COM:DM. --Odie5533 (talk) 18:26, 17 August 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

Perhaps like this? For those interested, I've started a deletion discussion for File:GameStop, Universal CityWalk Hollywood.JPG. « Ryūkotsusei » 02:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I made some changes to the layout. Please feel free to tweak it if you disagree with them. Regarding the image, you should probably try posting it to a forum or something on Commons because regular commons deletion requests don't usually end up getting that much attention. Sometimes it's just the nominator and the closing admin. --Odie5533 (talk) 23:46, 18 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

It has been deleted, unfortunately without any further explanation on the rationale - but the store image wasn't that vital for the article. GermanJoe (talk) 20:51, 28 August 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Comment -- This review has been open almost two months and though I've been loath to archive it when consensus is leaning towards promotion, it may come to that as there's been no action here for a couple of weeks. I note that we're also still awaiting a source review. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:00, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to take a look at the sources today and early tomorrow. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 22:56, 14 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

~~Conditional support~~ -- this article is very informative and appears well-sourced. The images are all checked out. The sales graph is very useful, although the emdash in "2008 — 2012 Nintendo DS worldwide sales" should be replaced with an endash. In addition, FN 102 is a dead link. Other than that, I will be happy to offer my support pending Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs's citation review. Cheers --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 03:24, 15 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Support -- I am happy with the article after the source review has been conducted. --Sp33dyphil ©^hat_ontributions 23:13, 23 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Source comments

Reliability of sources look fine.
Refs 3 and 4 are to text-heavy, multiple-page sources--for the ease of verification it would be much better to split these into separate refs. For instance, while I was able to verify some details regarding the design, I could not easily find the speaker grilles section to check it. This was an issue on other larger multi-page refs as well. Making it easy for people to source content in the article is good--make it easier!
I spot checked statements attributed to the following sources: 3, 4, 5, 21, 29, 30, 37, 53, 95, 111, 130, and 142. I found a few issues:
- Prose says DSi was released in black and light blue, but source 21 gives simply "blue".[2]
- showed potential in further expanding the Nintendo DS gaming population—particularly in Europe and the United States. To further promote the product line while expanding its gaming population, Nintendo modified its market expansion approach. seems to be reading between the lines of ref 53, unless I'm missing something.[3]
- Ref 37 doesn't seem to support the assertion that the the DSi is both the "individual" and the camera meaning.[4]
I tagged the lead as needed some work due to its rather nebulous section on reception; it feels like it's crossed the line into lumping critics' opinions together into synthesis, unless we have sources that specifically mention "critics thought this".

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 13:23, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I tried tackling almost everything but,

ref 53: Not sure what page 3 was for but I slimmed it down to 5 and 6.[5] It starts during the second half of the lengthy paragraph before introducing the DSi and continues on page 6 discussing how it will expand the DS' marketshare. If that's not convincing would changing "...Nintendo modified its market expansion approach" to "...Nintendo created the DSi" would fix this?

ref 37: Found Cnet, but would techradar suffice? Cnet cites TR. « Ryūkotsusei » 22:58, 17 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Nintendo created the DSi" would be better, yes, and you should always try to cite the source as close to the original degree as possible--so if Cnet cited TR, verify it's in TR and cite that instead. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 13:52, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

(←)Done and hows the lead? Would you recommend further tweaking? Also, I've split refs 3 and 4. « Ryūkotsusei » 15:56, 18 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

How do things stand now for you, David? Incidentally, Ryūkotsusei, I notice there's an unresolved ^[who?] tag in the lead. Also in the lead, I really don't understand what's meant by "in its respective territory" -- simplest thing would be to simply drop that phrase. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 11:16, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I wasn't sure if my tweaks to the lead were sufficient so I left the tag. Really? What are your thoughts about TCN7JM's comments at top of the nomination? Maybe I'm over complicating things and stating again "launched in Japan on [date], and worldwide beginning in [month/year]" wouldn't be so bad. « Ryūkotsusei » 17:15, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I've done another quick look over on the article, and I've removed the {{who}} tag as clarification has already been provided. As there weren't significant misattributions/referencing mistakes and didn't appear to be that many on my spotcheck I think it can pass 1c. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:19, 20 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This
talk) 08:48, 25 September 2013 (UTC)[reply
]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.