Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess/archive2

Add links
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
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 not promoted 21:25, 13 May 2008.

The Legend of Zelda: Twilight Princess

previous FAC

OK, yet another Zelda FAC... a current GA, this article is well-written, referenced and illustrated, since the failed FA candidacy last year has improved very much, and unlike the recent failures, is comprehensive and detailed in all sections. igordebraga ≠ 16:04, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Co-nom

talk) 00:38, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Comments from David Fuchs (talk · contribs)
  • Ouch, that hurt... I wouldn't call any FAC a "failure"... but anyway, some opening comments:
    • "Twilight met with both commercial and critical success." - eh, could you expand that and state what reviewers liked/didn't about the game?
    • "it was delayed by Nintendo so that the EAD staff could add more content and refine the game." since it's a new paragraph, replace "it" with Twilight Princess and specify who EAD is- I can figure out its the people you were talking about in the first paragraph, but suddenly using the abbreviation is bad.

I'll have more to say later, but for now, I got real-life fish to fry. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 21:18, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry if my words were bad (specially because the second one was your work... and was very close to passing, unlike the first one). But anyway, fixed both suggestions, and I'm open to anything you say, Fuchs. igordebraga ≠ 22:06, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • No problem, my man. Anyway, some more stuff:
    • The whole first paragraph of gameplay is horrible for anyone who has never picked up a Zelda game: "Twilight Princess features a stylized, naturalistic art style (similar to, but far more advanced than that found in Ocarina of Time), rather than the cel-shaded look that The Wind Waker exhibited — although it still makes use of cel-shading effects, as it uses a very heavily modified version of The Wind Waker’s engine.[1] In a further departure from The Wind Waker, Link is once again a young man, as opposed to a child, as in the latter part of Ocarina of Time and in The Adventure of Link. The game also has a darker tone, similar to Majora's Mask.[10]" - if you're going to talk about these other games, do so in relation to what they *are*, ex. more advanced than previous game OoT" or something similar.) Really, it shouldn't start out like this at all: is it a third person shooter? Who knows, because that info isn't there.
    • Continuing with gameplay: "The singular exception to this is Midna" exception to what? "Returning from Ocarina of Time and Majora's Mask, a horse can again be ridden in Twilight Princess." bad sentence structure, et al. Really, the gameplay needs to be reorganized so it flows better and addresses key issues.
    • Abilities section; seems to belong with statements in gameplay, another reason it needs to be reorganized.
    • Plot: perhaps there should be a setting/characters component to the synopsis so people are familiarized with the game and its world?
      • The other Legend of Zelda FAs don't have these, so that's the route this article took, also.
        talk) 19:12, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
        ]
    • "British publication NGC Magazine claimed, in December 2005, that when the GameCube version is played on Wii, the player will be given the option of using the Wii's unique controller;[33] and it was not suspected that two versions of the game would be released." Lots of, commas here, make, it hard to read.
    • "Some reviews have mentioned drawbacks about the game, however. The most commonly mentioned is that the game, having been designed for the GameCube, is not up to scratch with the cutting-edge graphics of its competitors. Some aspects of the game's design have been more firmly criticized by a number of reviewers. " Doesn't sound like good prose, and is unreferenced. Don't deal with generalities, or source them.

More later, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 17:03, 21 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

  • Begun the first and second, will try my best to fix (even if I haven't played it yet, have a GameCube but could only afford Wind Waker). igordebraga ≠ 02:04, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • Reworked Gameplay (thus first, second and third potentially done). igordebraga ≠ 17:28, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments (2) from David Fuchs (talk · contribs)
It's still nebulous for someone who hasn't played the game.
  • Comments
    • "Along with new weapons, Link can get two shields, one made of wood and other of metal, and three suits, the regular green garb, a Zora Armor which allows him to breathe underwater, and the Magic Armor which gives invincibility while draining his money. Unlike previous games, magic arrows are not available..." Why would someone who has never played the game know what magic arrows are, or care?
    • "Twilight Princess retains the basic gameplay from the 3D Zelda games, with basic actions such as walking, running, attacking, defending, and automatic jumping at ledges."- can you talk about what kind of a game TP is before we launch into how it is similar?
    • "The protagonist Link also uses the control system introduced in Ocarina of Time that allows him to "lock-on" to an enemy or other target." Suddenly jumps into minutiae of gameplay, once again is not helping a novice reader understand the game.
    • "Link battles enemies, collects items, and solves puzzles to progress through a dungeon, fighting a boss at the end. " this is better, but it's entirely understated. How does the story progress? How do players advance through stages? What people and items aid Link in his quest? What new gameplay features were added? The section seems looped in on itself and not following a most-important -> detail scheme which makes it confusing to read.
    • "Link is a young adult similar to the one from latter part of Ocarina of Time, unlike the child hero from the previous game, and as opposed to the cartoon-looking cel-shaded of its predecessor, Twilight Princess features a stylized, naturalistic art style, similar to, but far more advanced than that found in Ocarina of Time." awkward sentence, break up into two. Perhaps you should explain why it doesn't follow The Wind Waker look, and how that was a radical departure from previous games? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 17:37, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • More gameplay work, and put why it doesn't follow in Development. What I missed, and anything else? igordebraga ≠ 05:06, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)
Issues resolved, Ealdgyth - Talk 14:42, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
All other links worked. Ealdgyth - Talk 22:53, 20 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]


  • Comment The pictures "sandwiching" text with the infobox is problematic and will need to be addressed. Perhaps shrink the infobox picture some, remove the imput devices and media, and that will give you more room for pictures. Ottava Rima (talk) 03:37, 22 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    • I've moved one of the images down. It should be better now.
      talk) 00:58, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
      ]

Alright. Separate those awards with a new section...I believe there is one, but I forgot the code. And keep only the MOST relevant game of the year awards...since those are awkwardly long. (Gamespot and X-Play game of year. That's it). The rest of the article seems nice. Cut down a bit on the plot if possible, and remove one of those 3 images in the gameplay section. (Or relocate it) --haha169 (talk) 22:47, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm using the Awards feature of {{
talk) 23:58, 23 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Looks like my comments have been addressed. I Support, as soon as I see the plot section cut down a bit more. --haha169 (talk) 19:51, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

This page is showing me a grand total of FIVE dead links in the article. You should try and fix that immediately. --haha169 (talk) 21:39, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All fixed
talk) 22:29, 24 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Those are the only issues I see. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:13, 26 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All resolved, though I still think that there should be a picture showing the much praised art direction. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:40, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Ahh, a picture showing the art direction, hurray! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 03:17, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Reliable sources need to be resolved, not per a WikiProject, not per a Wiki article: per
    WP:V. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:54, 28 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Comments from
talk · contribs
)

H2O) 09:07, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

All of the above are done.
talk) 01:31, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I am withholding my support until the stability issue noted by Coanda-1910 is resolved—a note on my talk page when that's done will get my support (or, if I forget, consider this a support if the oppose below is struck...thanks Sandy! :).
H2O) 09:01, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Comments from Coanda-1910 (talk · contribs)
  • Weak Oppose: There's a current discussion on the article thread about the last sentence of the opener - the one about some reviewers calling it the "greatest Zelda game ever." I have an opinion on the topic, laid out in the talk page, but that's not really what this objection is about. I simply think that the opening section of the article probably ought to be stable before it gets FA status. If consensus is reached on the topic (either way), I'll withdraw my opposition. Coanda-1910 (talk) 05:37, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    It's not really unstable as it hasn't been touched in a few days. The page just agreed with the user but a few users helped pitch in to make the statement less POV and more accurate.
    talk) 11:14, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply
    ]
Stability issues would be that major facts about the article are changing, massive vandalism or edit wars; wording issues do not equal article stability problems. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 20:29, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
If there was anything to oppose about this article, it would probably be the 3 images clogging the gameplay section. One of the first two could be removed in the future if consensus is reached, but it isn't that big of an issue. Stability definitely isn't a problem. --haha169 (talk) 21:59, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I still am not exactly thrilled about the way it reads and I did see an ongoing discussion of the wording, but I can see either side and don't have a major issue with it as is; I also agree that it's not a huge part of the article. Withdrawing objection. Coanda-1910 (talk) 01:15, 1 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. The writing is only just reasonable (much improved in this area from a while ago, but it needs to be polished, especially after the top—a quick run through by a copy-editor). Just at random (suggesting there's lots more) ...
    • "Link can get different armor"—but stubby, and "get" is ungainly here. Then "which ... which".
    • ice, fire and Light: one cap?
  • More commas wouldn't go astray (less objective, though). Especially in longish sentences.
    • "Wolf Link has also an improved sense of smell, which allows him to follow trails left by certain characters in the game (or obtaining scents of other things to guide him, such as medicine or fish), and is also the only way players are able to see wandering spirits and hunt for the Poes—which can neither be seen (except for the lanterns they carry) nor attacked without the ability"—If "also" really is necessary (often it's not), it's in the wrong position. "to obtain", surely, to match the previous grammar; then a totally redundant "also". Weed them out. This sentence is a long snake.
  • "The game's score was composed by"—Which word is redundant? And "the game's title screen".
  • "Kondo originally stated that he "would really like to push for" the music being performed by an orchestra, as he considers live instruments much more deep and expressive than the ones used in digital music." Ungrammatical; why not "for an acoustic orchestral performance" (and I think you need to distinguish it from a synthesised orchestral sound.
  • "The game falls chronologically over a century after Ocarina of Time"—No, use "more than" or we think it's over = during the course of. Boring to have to disambiguate in reverse.

Now these are taken throughout at random. It's within reach, but not promotable yet. Please let me know when someone fresh has worked on it. Tony (talk) 16:52, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Issues resolved, Black Kite 17:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose due to use of fair-use imagesIssues now addressed.
  • WP:NFCC#8
    .



Fair enough. Removed.
talk) 19:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Black Kite 17:19, 3 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The items above have been addressed.
talk) 19:02, 4 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

Criterion 3: I was the reviewer who asked Black Kite to take a look at the copyright implications, so that I (and perhaps others) have an opportunity of learning how this critical aspect of WP's mission should be reviewed. Thank you, Black Kite. Tony (talk) 13:09, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Laser brain (talk · contribs)
I've fixed the above issues; I'll do another run through the article to check it again.
talk) 17:51, 5 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Could you take a second look at the article? I think we resolved these issues now.
talk) 18:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Gary, I think further work is needed, although I have tremendous respect for the work you have done thus far. I think this would benefit from an "uninvolved" copyedit which is means you grab an editor who hasn't seen the text. I recommended getting a non-video game person because this still reads too much like a game guide in places. I've had the experience of looking at my own article until I'm goo-goo and I know it's hard to disengage and ask for an external copyedit.. but it needs it. --Laser brain (talk) 18:44, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I've asked around already; I'm awaiting responses. All the copyedits I know are up to their necks in copyediting requests, and I can't blame them for passing this one up. Why does everyone have to discriminate against video game articles so much :p
talk) 18:51, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I managed to somehow get
talk) 19:02, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I have asked
talk) 00:56, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I sincerely hate to say it but much more work still needed. I think you desperately need a fresh pair of eyes on this. I don't have to go far into the Gameplay section before the writing is more Nintendo Power than Wikipedia. Attention needed to grammar, and sentences like "There are also three suits: the standard green garb, a Zora Armor which allows Link to breathe underwater, and a Magic Armor which provides invincibility while draining his money." --Laser brain (talk) 05:19, 9 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
I have made another significant change to the Gameplay section. Let me know if it has improved.
talk) 22:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Comments from
talk · contribs
)
Fixed all - but the passive, that will take more time... igordebraga ≠ 03:08, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Could you take a second look at the article? I think we resolved these issues now.
talk) 18:40, 8 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
I'm still an oppose here per Laser brain. The writing does not sparkle and the article seems to assume readers are familiar with the series/game, which is a big no-no. Some examples I've found while skimming the article:
I've made another major copyedit of the Gameplay section, so please let me know if it has improved.
talk) 22:31, 12 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
Still far too easy to spot errors. Few examples:
  • Japanese characters—Laser brain is perfectly justified in raising the issue of just why the bizarre practice of stamping out non-Roman characters is slavishly repeated in this article (there's even a romanised equivalent of the Japanese-language title, which doesn't help either). The fact that it has been occurring unchecked in other video-game articles provides more reason to question the practice, since the openings of so many of our vid articles are damaged by what is meaningless clutter to all but a tiny, privileged minority of English-speakers. The place for Japanese characters is in the Japanese WP, like ... HERE.

See my objection to this regrettable practice at the WikiProject:

Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines#Japanese characters are totally inappropriate. I suggest that the nominator make the first strike against the clutter by removing it (and probably the romanised Japanese-language equivalent, too); that would enable the text to engage our readers at the very start, rather than distract them and interrupt their concentration. Tony (talk) 16:06, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]

I always enjoy being part of a revolution. Where do I sign up? Oh, right... removed!
talk) 16:12, 6 May 2008 (UTC)[reply
]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/The_Legend_of_Zelda:_Twilight_Princess/archive2&oldid=1088821562"