Wikipedia:Featured article review/Pokémon Channel/archive1
Pokémon Channel
Pokémon Channel (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)
| Toolbox |
|---|
- Notified: Example user, Example WikiProject, [diff for talk page notification]
Review section
Nominating the article for review as the article has a few conspicuous issues that this process may assist with:
- Firstly, in terms of research, the article features overuse of quote citations from the game to evidence plot and gameplay mechanics. Secondary coverage should be preferred, other than WP:EXCESSIVE- over half the article's citations are for quotes as trivial as 'The End' just to evidence that the game ends! Without these, the article is not particularly broadly cited - not that this is any barrier to FA status.
- Secondly, in terms of comprehensiveness, the article has no actual development information that may shine a light on who made the game, how they made it and what they thought of it. The section relies on pre-release promotional articles that are purely early impressions of the game. This leads to unclear statements - that the game is a "spiritual successor" to Hey You Pikachu! and that it was developed for the purpose of promoting the e-reader - are likely the case but this is assumed from how an IGN preview describes it rather than the developer. Investigation into WP:NONENGsources and the potential for Japanese development interviews could significantly improve this section.
- Thirdly, this may be a matter of personal opinion about comprehensiveness, but for a game titled Pokemon Channel with gameplay oriented around the channels, the gameplay section is well-written but does not go into much detail about what each channel is and what it features. I understand the channels are a bit superficial, but a list or more detailed description rather than a sentence that says Other channels include X, Y, and Z may be more helpful for readers to know exactly what content is offered in the game's channels. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 09:56, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- Hi Vrxces. Unless I missed something, you have not yet brought these concerns up at Talk:Pokémon Channel. Per the instructions at the top of the page, talk page discussion is the first requisite step in this process. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 13:33, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, I'm not familiar with the FAR process. I'll do that. Happy to take this down if the FAR is inappropriate at this time. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- No worries on my end either, and I hope you stick around FAR! I know sometimes the coordinators will just put the discussion on hold while talk page discussion occurs, so you should leave this up and let them handle it. Firefangledfeathers (talk / contribs) 22:05, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
- No worries, I'm not familiar with the FAR process. I'll do that. Happy to take this down if the FAR is inappropriate at this time. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 21:42, 12 February 2024 (UTC)
Hold recommend that this FAR is place on hold while the notice period (step 1 above) is conducted. Z1720 (talk) 18:18, 17 February 2024 (UTC)
On hold. Nikkimaria (talk) 05:06, 18 February 2024 (UTC)
- Step 1 is now complete (with no response) so hold is off. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ, could you please notify relevant editors and WikiProjects? Nikkimaria (talk) 03:08, 9 March 2024 (UTC)
Move to FARC no edits to address concerns. Z1720 (talk) 18:57, 5 April 2024 (UTC)
FARC section
- Issues raised in the review section include comprehensiveness and sourcing. Nikkimaria (talk) 14:10, 6 April 2024 (UTC)
- The quote-citations of the game are pretty strange, but since the material would be fine even without citations per FAC criteria issue (although I'm not averse to just removing the citations). Comprehensiveness, on the other hand, is definitely a valid concern, but does anyone have a few examples of good sources that aren't currently being cited? The reason there's no development section may just be that the sources don't talk about it. Extraordinary Writ (talk) 03:40, 20 April 2024 (UTC)]