Wikipedia:Featured article review/Chrono Cross/archive1

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

The article was delisted by Nikkimaria via FACBot (talk) 4:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC) [1].

Chrono Cross

Notified: Frietjes, Sergecross73, PresN, Zeality, WikiProject Video games, WikiProject Square Enix, diff for talk page notification (2022-07-05)

Review section

Issues about the article originally raised in talk page were reliability of sources and possibly excessive quotes. Since being listed in

Of the two remaining concerns on that page, it looks like the Nsider factoid is gone regardless (likely removed at some point over the last two years), and the Square Ultimania/Missing Piece information appears admissible under the WikiProject video games review standards: "Interviews from any source are typically allowed as a "self-published source about self". As long as the interview's authenticity can be reasonably ascertained, we allow the developer's own words as a primary source when the claims are (1) not exceptional, and (2) about the team or individual making the claim. Greater claims require a secondary source with a reputation for editorial quality. Whenever possible, prefer the editorial distance of a reliable, secondary source over a primary source interview." Square Enix doesn't appear to be called out on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. I don't think there are really any controversial claims being made in either publication; the only thing of that flavor I've ever encountered is Toriyama's old editor claiming that an entirely different version of Chrono Trigger was made and scrapped based on his judgment call, which was nonetheless published by Famitsu, so it's still standing. ZeaLitY [ Talk - Activity ] 15:55, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did a quick spot check for the sources in the article and didn't see any red flags. All of the sources not covered by the

WP:AGF cited to support things that are obvious (conducted by Arnie Roth, who produced the concert series, and that CC is on the tracklist). The (remaining?) NSider source is an interview, also PRIMARY. The Square Enix sources are all interviews or citing the game itself. Are there any sources you can find in particular that are unreliable to you? Axem Titanium (talk) 20:17, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply

]

I just brought this article to review only because I saw it listed in FARGIVEN, so I figured issues were presumably unresolved. I guess the sourcing issue is resolved now?

Meanwhile, I now have concerns about consistency of English translations of the music tracks between this article and Music of Chrono Cross. Also, I wonder whether any of three music samples are necessary. Maybe I could be wrong about concerning them. George Ho (talk) 20:47, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Which translations are you concerned about? As far as the music samples go, I don't know that we need three of them but these seem to be well supported as far as these things go. All three are discussed in the prose and illustrate key issues in the music development. Of the three, I would probably lose Scars of Time first since it's only discussed in one sentence and we could theoretically move another one to the Music of Chrono Cross article if it comes to that. Axem Titanium (talk) 21:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Hmm... I should've said English titles of instrumental tracks, like ones seen in the Music (or Soundtrack) section and the "music of" article.

As suggested, I have just now PRODded the "Scars of Time" sample. And moving another sample, you mean "The Dream That Time Dreams" or "Unstolen Jewels"? George Ho (talk) 22:15, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I also moved a sample of ending theme to another article per one of your suggestions. George Ho (talk) 07:44, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Found out that "The Dream That Time Dreams" ("Chrono Cross" article) = "時のみる夢" = "Dreams of the Ages" ("Music of..." article). George Ho (talk) 07:51, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not familiar enough with the CC soundtrack to say which one is correct. I don't know that a mistake in the translation of music track titles rises to the level of FAR though. Perhaps User:PresN could weigh in about the titles? Axem Titanium (talk) 15:24, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The official English translation is "Dreams of the Ages"; "The Dream That Time Dreams" is the unofficial translation. --PresN 19:25, 17 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Is the unofficial English title commonly used by multiple reliable sources? Are there other commonly used English titles of the same piece besides the two? George Ho (talk) 06:02, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

It should be "Dreams of the Ages". Done. --PresN 23:59, 18 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

If the official English title is gonna be used, then the same should apply to other pieces, like one whose unofficial title is "Voyage~Another World". George Ho (talk) 02:58, 19 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Updated the unofficial track names I saw. --PresN 02:53, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Do you or anyone else have any other objections with the article? Axem Titanium (talk) 15:47, 24 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Generally there's a lot of overquoting that would be better handled by paraphrase for a FA-quality article, if this went through FAC today. czar 13:40, 2 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Could we get an update on status here? Nikkimaria (talk) 04:51, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  No major edits were made to address over-quoting. Hopefully, the inconsistency with use of English titles of tracks is resolved. Seems that sourcing issue may have been resolved, but that's my guess. George Ho (talk) 16:57, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

  I'd like to see some of the less important quotes paraphrased, but I wouldn't stand in the way of closing this. The article looks to be FA quality. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:03, 24 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Close without FARC. Article seems in fine shape to me. SnowFire (talk) 17:19, 23 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• What is FPS? It is never defined and is listed two different ways (unable to cross the threshold of 30 FPS and increasing the game's framerate to 60fps). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:42, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Missing publisher; please check citations throughout, samples: "Chrono Cross Demo". Archived from the original on February 1, 2009. Retrieved August 10, 2009. and Chrono Cross Review Archived August 21, 2008, at the Wayback Machine
• MOS:ALLCAPS
  : "Naoki Yoshida Part 2". WE DISCUSS VANA'DIEL #10. FINAL FANTASY XI – WE ARE VANA'DIEL
• Please use the trans-title= parameter to give title translations and lang= プレイステーション – クロノ・クロス. Weekly Famitsu. No.915 Pt.2. p. 13. June 30, 2006
• Missing dates on citations, sample: Gann, Patrick. "Chrono Cross 10th Anniversary Arrange Album Update". Archived from the original on December 27, 2008. Retrieved December 27, 2008.
• Inconsistent author format: is it first name last name, or last name, first name-- both are present.
• Xbox, Pure is not an author: Xbox, Pure (February 9, 2022). "Chrono Cross: The Radical Dreamers Edition Arrives On Xbox This April". Pure Xbox. Archived from the original on February 9, 2022. Retrieved February 9, 2022.
• Extreme overquoting, [2]
• Why are Release and Reception combined? There are paragraph issues in that section. And please see
  WP:RECEPTION
  .
• The first paragraph of Legacy is ... unrelated to Legacy, it's about a subsequent release.

At this point, the article is still off the FA mark, and I wouldn't want to spend time looking at the prose until the citations are cleaned up and David Fuchs has looked at the sourcing and comprehensiveness. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 00:42, 18 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

At first blush, I'd agree with SandyGeorgia. The citations need a lot of cleanup (missing fields, inconsistent publisher/website usage, stuff that's redirecting or needs archiving), but that's relatively tangential to the larger issues.

• Gameplay section needs a look over to make sure the sources are there to support it. I don't think the GameSpot review adequately cites "Chrono Cross features standard role-playing video game gameplay with some differences." for example (it says this about the battle system, not the entire gameplay experience). It also doesn't go into the same detail about the overworld view and 3D map.
• Not sure File:Navigatingelnido.png really has a strong enough fair use rationale, and File:Chronocrossbattlescreenshot.png needs work too.
• The details in the characters section could probably do with citations beyond the game text, given the specifics; the synopsis section is also pretty hefty (the plot alone is 1100 words) and could likely get examined for trims.
• The reception section definitely needs rewriting and expansion to meet modern standards; it shouldn't just be a single paragraph of critic scores.
• Sandy has a point about the Legacy section, it feels a bit disorganized.
• The N-Sider source is mentioned above, but what about Chrono Compendiums, Automation Media, Rpgsite.net, etc. makes them high-quality RS? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 18:28, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Move to FARC, thanks David Fuchs! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 21:47, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

FARC section

Issues raised in the review section include sourcing, style, and organization. Nikkimaria (talk) 02:59, 21 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

• Delist, issues unaddressed. Hog Farm _Talk 00:50, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist, issues remain. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:05, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist while I think the article could be fixed up quite easily, I do not see any progress being made and concerns about excessive quotes remain. I also note some sentences at the end of paragraphs that need citations. Z1720 (talk) 00:59, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Delist Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs ^talk 22:03, 8 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]
• Closing note: This removal candidate has been delisted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please leave the {{featured article review}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Nikkimaria (talk) 04:52, 11 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

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