Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Plants vs. Zombies (video game)/archive1

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
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 Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 26 May 2021 [1].

Plants vs. Zombies (video game) edit

Nominator(s): Lazman321 (talk) 13:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Plants vs. Zombies is a video game developed and published by PopCap Games. When it was first released, it became the fastest-selling game developed by PopCap Games. I have worked on this article since November 2020. It passed a GA nomination on February 18, 2021. Now a peer review and a copyedit has been done on the Plants vs. Zombies article and now it is ready for Featured Article Candidacy. Lazman321 (talk) 13:01, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Wikipedia:Peer review/Plants vs. Zombies (video game)/archive1. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 15:30, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wehwalt edit

I'm very familiar with the game. My comments:

  • "If a zombie makes it to the house on any lane, the level is over." Would it be more accurate to say the game is over, or that the player has failed the level?
  • Done
  • Zombie is linked on a second or later use in the lead.
  • Done
  • "The player can only pick a limited number of plants through seed packets at the beginning of each level,[7]" Perhaps you mean "... limited number of types of plants ..."?
  • Done
  • It might be better to describe the stages as the Zombies advancing across the front yard by day, then night, the pooled backyard by day, then night, then the roof. The Lawnmowers are not used on the pool lanes, nor on the roof, though there are analogues, by the way.
  • Comment: It is already made clear that stages 2 and 4 are night levels, stages 3 and 4 are pool levels, and stage 5 is a roof level. Also, the gameplay section did originally did mention the different types of lawnmowers. I removed them following a peer review in order to make the gameplay section more consise.
  • Something more could be said about the role of Crazy Dave, that in addition to running the shop he offers (somewhat eccentric) help and advice, and "chooses" the preselected seed packets when playing Adventure Mode after beating Zomboss.
  • Comment: Like above, they were originally mentions of this but were removed for more conciseness following a peer review.
  • It might be mentioned that as one advances in Adventure Mode, there is access to more types of seed packets.
  • Done
  • You are not consistent on whether the "M" in "Adventure Mode" is capped.
  • Comment: There is only one instance of the "mode" in Adventure mode is capitalized and that is the heading in the gameplay section.
That's what I mean. Does it need to be capped?--Wehwalt (talk) 10:31, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I guess it doesn't. Done
  • There is a clarification needed tag that should be resolved.
  • Done
  • Perhaps something could be said about that the zombies' intent is to eat the brains of the house occupants, and if they get past the defenses, they do so.
  • Done
More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:05, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wehwalt: I have addressed all your current problems. Lazman321 (talk) 23:07, 7 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On May 20, 2009, Plants vs. Zombies was reportedly the fastest-selling video game created by PopCap Games.[103][104]" This seems awkwardly phrased. Perhaps the game "was declared the fastest-selling" or similar.
  • Done
  • Some of the strings of citations are not in numerical order, which is OK if what you are doing is always putting the most important citation (the one the cited material most relies on) first. Is that what is going on?
  • Done
  • Can anything be said about marketing of objects based on the game, toys etc?
  • Not Done Information about that is only possible if reliable sources report on it, which they haven't.
That's it.--Wehwalt (talk) 10:28, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Wehwalt: Done with your requests. Lazman321 (talk) 15:40, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Support.--Wehwalt (talk) 21:17, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from HumanxAntro edit

I'm ready to look at this again after the peer review. I will say that I disagree with the use of present perfect tense in the third paragraph, as all of the citations are reviews from 2009, upon the game's release. 👨x🐱 (talk) 21:58, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments:

  • A possible comprehensiveness issue. I see no representation from scholarly and academic literature; this is especially concerning given that this game has been analyzed for its contribution to the tower defense genre, and the fact that, according to the Edge source in Ref 17, "during the making of this game tower defence kind of exploded in popularity" only adds to this problem. The only thing the Legacy section discusses is its DLCs, sequels and cultural references, but nothing about its impact on the design of games in the industry.
  • Comment: I am looking through the sources and none of them seems to help say how this video game impacted design on video games or the genre of the tower defense genre. While its design was definitely unique, especially in terms of its tutorial, it wasn't ever stated to be influential or having an impact. A lot of the sources just say that Plants vs. Zombies was a popular tower defense game. They often just use the game as examples of something with occasional but trivial analysis. Saying in the article that Plants vs. Zombies has been the subject of many scholarly sources is original research unless a reliable source directly says so, which none have. Maybe if you can find some sources that directly state significant information about Plants vs. Zombies's legacy, maybe that will help.
  • Working: You know what. I've found some sources that I could probably integrate into the legacy section and Plants vs. Zombies impact on tower defense and overall the industry. Lazman321 (talk) 04:02, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some cites have work names linked in every instance, while others not all the time and at random moments. This is inconsistent and not in line with the manual of style. You either have to link all source names the first time they're cited, or link them in every citation.
  • Done though I can't do anything about Metacritic at the moment.
  • Whoever programmed cite MC needs to understand Metacritic is not a work. Until he realizes that and changes the template accordingly, you're going to have to manually cite the Metacritic sources with a cite web template, and the name of Metacritic in the publisher= field. 👨x🐱 (talk) 20:47, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: That was not was I talking about. Metacritic is a website, which by definition is a work, not a publisher as per WP:CS1. I was talking about its link being on every single citation. I can edit the template to remove that. Lazman321 (talk) 22:00, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

👨x🐱 (talk) 22:49, 8 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I have addressed your current requests. Lazman321 (talk) 03:49, 9 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More comments
  • " tower defense and strategy video game" Redundant. Tower defense is a subgenre of strategy.
  • Done
  • 1b issues. The article does state Weedlings was a working title, but never gives the reason for why its change, which was to differentiate itself in the saturated market of gardening games, which is in the Edge interview. In the same instance where he discusses this, he also gives a reason for why he ultimately went zombies as the antagonist, which I also see nowhere in the the Development section: "In fact, the game was called Weedlings, but many gardening games were coming out at that time and that just didn’t sit well with me. I tend to try to make games that are a little bit original. That’s when I came up with zombies, which are perfect because they move slowly so you have a lot of time to react to them."
  • Done
  • "Showing her how to customize their card decks inspired him to design Plants vs. Zombies with seed packet"
    • (1) I don't see how the experience of teaching her how to play Magic plays into this conception. I think the customability of the Magic is what influence the seed packets, not the girlfriend's learning of Magic. Presenting it like this without specifying Magic is a custom game is both misleading and too vague.
    • (2) Who is "their"? Were there multiple people whose cards were owned by while the couple played Magic?
  • Done
  • "finding common tower defense gameplay elements to be awkward, such as mazing and juggling," I know "mazing and juggling" is linked, but I still think how this sentence interprets the Edge interview is too vague. I find Fan's words in the Edge interview to be far clearer, that the "awkward" thing was that enemies would never go after towers obviously attacking them: "Originally the game was laid out the same way, but I realised there was something unintuitive about it. I always wondered why these guys never think to attack these towers that are shooting at them, so I was looking for a way to have the towers be directly threatened by the antagonist."
  • Done
  • "The Jackson-inspired zombie" Not in citation given. It is only from the subjective viewpoint of the sources currently in the article that it looks like Jackson in Thriller. "Jackson-inspired" implies the creator intentionally was influenced by Thriller to make the dance, which is not covered in the MTV Multiplayer source that cites this phrase. Sure, Jackson's actual estate perceived it as a rip-off, but that's not evidence the game's creator intended it that way.
  • Done
  • I don't see any reason to have the first two sentences of the Legacy section in that section and not in a section about the game's sales. The events discussed in those sentences happened close to the game's release, not a decade later, and the citations used for these sentences were published upon release as well.
  • Done

👨x🐱 (talk) 19:40, 10 April 2021 (UTC) Done with more of your commments. Lazman321 (talk) 22:01, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Even more comments
  • "The team discovered" Wait, this game was done as a team? I initially thought Fan made the game by himself with his girlfriend. [Looks at infobox] Oh, there definitely was a team to this. Any info on how this team came together? Did PopCap sign the man to make another game with staff? A team is randomly introduced here, and this sudden first mention of it may confuse readers.
  • Done
  • Link "real-time strategy" in "Design" section.
  • Done
  • I would really give Ref 27 another read, because I'm finding major details about the making of this game in it that I don't see in the wikipedia article. For example, Fan designed all of the concepts based on the knowledge of casual players: "Fan knew he wanted to use stationary "towers," and players immediately understand why rooted plants are unable to move. Zombies, on the other hand, are known for moving slowly, making them a perfect fit for the game's single-screen fields." Another example, specifically about how the characters were designed: "In Plants vs. Zombies, Fan made sure that each character visually represented its function. The standard "Peashooter" plant, for instance, has a giant mouth for spitting projectiles, and its name further suggests what it's capable of."
  • Done

👨x🐱 (talk) 02:54, 11 April 2021 (UTC) @HumanxAnthro: Addressed your current requests. Lazman321 (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

4/11/21
  • I echo yet again for the nominator to give Ref 27 more reads, because only those two examples have been added. Trust me when I say there is more than 2 cites worth of material in that source. Given missing info I have found in other citations in this article, I'd recommend the nominator read the other references to look for any other missing details himself. 👨x🐱 (talk) 13:48, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Please excuse the lack of comments over ten days. I have been juggling other reviews and articles on Wikipedia and sometimes delays like this happen. My apologies.. 👨x🐱 (talk) 00:32, 21 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

4/22/21 Now that this has a re-write and expansion, here's some more comments. I'll have more to make after this.
  • The lead is well-written but feels short a little on summary of development.
  • Done
  • "who want to eat the player's brains" (1) This might get nitpicky, but the cited source only describes the game as the player defending themselves from zombies, without specifying the zombies want to eat brains. (2) The eating-brains is probably fluff. It is common knowledge that zombies try to eat humans' brains, and in the slim chance a reader doesn't know that, they have the zombie article currently linked to read that.
  • Done
  • "five or six horizontal rows and nine columns," This is cited both to PopCap and GamesRaders+ cites (or Refs 7 and 8). PopCap source does give numbers for the amount of rows, but not for the amount of columns. I also saw no specification of the number of columns in the GamesRadar+ source. Did I miss it, or is it covered in another source?
  • Done
  • "The player places different types of plants and fungi on individual squares of the grid" The only citation for this sentence is the GamesRadar review. The source talks about there being a variety of plants and seeds as the game progresses, but never specifically discusses a grid or the player specifically placing a planet on the square of a grid. It also doesn't talk about fungi also being usable to defend against Zombies.
  • Done
  • Per MOS:CITEPUNCT, you must place references after punctuation marks. There are references in the middle of the sentences, something I noticed in the Gameplay section. Check for others.
  • Not Done: That is not what the guideline says. It says that if the reference is located next to a punctuation mark, it should be after the punctuation mark. Citations are allowed to be put mid-sentence as long as it is next to the cited material. Lazman321 (talk) 02:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Multiple reference numbers are not in increasing numerical order. "[7][5][11]" "[7][6][9]" "[7][6]" This is what I noticed just reading the gameplay section. Check for others.
  • Done
  • The Critical response section is navigable and well-written, but a couple of spots use full quotes that could be paraphrased or be partial quotes in some sports, and an issue, which I brought up in the peer review, of not using past tense for 2009-published reviews in the third paragraph remains.
  • Done

👨x🐱 (talk) 18:26, 22 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Lazman321: Done with your requests. Lazman321 (talk) 02:49, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
More comments (4/23/21)
  • "generally stylized as a lawn" Why not just say it's a lawn? Why say it's stylized as one? The GamesRadar source citing this statement certainly doesn't put it that way. It just says it's a lawn
  • Done
  • "Each plant has a different style of defense, such as shooting" Why only one attack method listed? I get we're trying to make this a little of a WP:GAMEGUIDE, but if there are multiple types of attacks, why only bring up one? Can't you bring up any other examples that reliable reviews provide, cause I've spotchecked a few of the currently-used review sources and I know they talk about them?
  • Done
  • "by using certain plants that generate sun, like Sunflowers." Again, why only one example listed? The VideoGamer brings up the sun-shrooms, which "produce sun during the night."
  • Done
  • "Different types of zombies have their own special behaviors and their own weaknesses to different plants." Same issue. I know we're not a WP:GAMEGUIDE, but I think we're leaving readers in the dust by not giving them examples, especially when they the types of Zombies, especially the dancing and football ones, are enthusiastically covered in reviews. Again, only use the ones brought up in reliable sources so it's not GAMEGUIDE-ish.
  • Done

👨x🐱 (talk) 23:57, 23 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HumanxAnthro: Done with this set of requests. Lazman321 (talk) 16:37, 24 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@HumanxAnthro: Any more to come here? Gog the Mild (talk) 16:28, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly, I've haven't re-looked at the rest of the article, but other commenters are and are giving it a thumbs up, so I'll let them handle the rest, given that I want to work on other varied topics. The incorrect tense in the third paragraph is still not addressed, however. 👨x🐱 (talk) 17:05, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I have fixed the incorrect tense in the third paragraph. It was addressed, I simply forgot one of the words. Lazman321 (talk) 13:42, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Image review from Nikkimaria edit

  • Don't use fixed px size
  • Done
  • Missing alt text
  • Done
  • File:Plants_vs_Zombies_Gameplay.png needs a more detailed FUR. Nikkimaria (talk) 20:59, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's been expanded, but not appropriately. It looks like it's been largely copied from the lead image? They serve different purposes within the article so should have different rationales. Nikkimaria (talk) 01:02, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: The templates being used are different. I'm mostly using the default text on the rationales. Is that wrong? Lazman321 (talk) 03:49, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Yes. It reads as if the default text is for a lead image; that's not the use of the image here. What are you trying to convey with this image? What benefit does it provide to readers to have it here? Why is it needed in addition to the lead image, which is also non-free? These are the sorts of questions that the rationale should answer. Nikkimaria (talk) 12:50, 11 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is used for readers to have a better understanding of the gameplay itself and can also be used to tell people that they made it to the right article if it was what they were looking for. This is what is mentioned in the rationale and I believe it is sufficient. Plus, I can't even change the descriptions. Lazman321 (talk) 18:11, 13 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The explanation currently in the FUR is insufficient, because it doesn't tell us what benefit this image provides in addition to the lead image, which is also non-free. If there is no added benefit we won't be able to use it. You do have the ability to edit the FUR here. Nikkimaria (talk) 00:49, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okay, I replaced the rationale with a non-free media rationale in order to actually edit the descriptions. I have clarified the purpose of use in the rationale. Lazman321 (talk) 17:04, 14 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Nikkimaria: Done with your requests. Lazman321 (talk) 22:54, 10 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Spy-cicle edit

I am not sure I have time for a full review but I have a few comments:

  • Per WP:VGBOX the game was released for multiple platforms with a similar cover, art without any platform-related logotypes should be used where possible either from an official source or by editing the cover picture in order to create a platform-neutral picture. The current cover art has various PC logos, etc, found a platform neutral one free from of them here [2].
  • Done
  • In the lead and body "Plants vs. Zombies received critical acclaim" 8 versions on Metacritic 2 (iOS) recieved "universal acclaim", DSiware " mixed or average" and rest "generally favorable", not sure how that results in overall critical acclaim.
  • Comment: Is generally positive a better summary? Lazman321 (talk) 03:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • I believe so yes, should be reflected in the lead as well
  • Surely Stephen Notley should be mentioned at least once in development section since Notley was the writer, or the fact he only wrote the almanac section.
  • Done
  • Are there any free images avaliable of development staff or any other relevant images (appears to be this at commons [3] though not sure how copyright works in regards to that).
  • Working: I have asked Dean Takahashi through Twitter to license a picture of George Fan he took during a 2018 interview about Octogeddon under Commons. Lazman321 (talk) 03:51, 17 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Done: @Spy-cicle: Takahashi agreed to send OTRS an email saying that he will license the image under Commons license. He chose CC-BY-SA 4.0 International and now the image is in the article. By the way, in regards to the cosplay images, the problem is not copyright. The problem is this article does not have a cultural impact section as there is little-to-no information about its cultural impact. The closest would be the cultural references section, but adding a picture of cos players would add nothing to the section or this article. Lazman321 (talk) 05:53, 18 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ah I see nice one on getting that free image. I understand what you mean about the relevance of cosplayers if there is no cultural impact section.
  • The Fan image should have an alt text, and should be on the right side per MOS:IMAGELOCATION.
  • Possible to mention the link to the series article in some way (i.e. it spawned a series including third-person shooters, etc or something)
  • Done
  • The way it was placed seems a little MOS:EGGy, may need to reword a little bit.
  • The release section only mentions a PlayStation Network (should also be linked) port as if it is digital only on ps3 there appears to be a disc version also.
  • Not Done: There needs to be reliable sources that mention the physical copies of the PS3 version, not store directories. If you can find some, I will definitely add them. Done for linking.
  • There seems to be some strange inconsistent linking in the reference sometimes websites like IGN other times they are not.
  • For example in ref #37 IGN is linked, whilst in refs #40, #44, #45, etc it is not. The website parameters (IGN is just one example) should either be consistently linked or consistently not linked in references (iirc MOS does not mandate which one but may be worth double checking).  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 13:29, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: I've always been told that you only link the first instance of a work in a citation. But, I guess it is allowed to link every instance of a website in a citation. Done. Lazman321 (talk) 15:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • First reference to readme appears to be dead (url-status should be changed)
  • Done
  • Done
  • The usage of USD $ need MOS:NBSP and the M needs to spelt out on first usage per MOS:CURRENCY or spelt out both times since they are in different sections.
  • Done
  • The nbsps do not appear to be placed correctly (example $11{{nbsp}}billion, see MOS:NBSP).
Hope this helps.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 22:19, 15 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
@Spy-cicle: I have addressed your requests.
@Spy-cicle: I have addressed your second set of requests. Lazman321 (talk) 15:26, 26 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I'll circle back to this once I have some more time on my hands, but it is certainly looking better.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 01:27, 30 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hi Spy-cicle, any more to come on this? Don't feel obligated, but if there is I don't want to close the nomination when you are in mid-review. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:31, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
    Yeah I have a few more comments that should hopefully come over the next few days (if I don't get it done by Friday then don't worry).  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 15:29, 10 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Further comments edit
  • "The Nintendo DS port was commended for its four new mini-games and its versus mode from the Xbox 360 version, but was considered inferior in its animation and graphics." Yet only one cite to one IGN review is cited.
  • Done: Moved back the IGN DS citation to the other DS citations. Lazman321 (talk) 02:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 7 a primary source is acceptable but I think we should really mostly be using secondary sources. I am not saying it cannot be used at all but considering the number of times it is cited that stuff should cited to mostly be cited to secondary sources (from MOS:VG As with most Wikipedia content, gameplay details must be appropriately verifiable to reliable sources. While secondary sources like reviews are preferred, primary sources like game manuals and game guides are acceptable,)
  • Done: I removed citations to the readme where secondary sources could reasonably already confirm the information. Lazman321 (talk) 02:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 2 Could you link to the specific where Fan confirms this rather than the whole post (same goes for the archive if possible)
  • Done
  • Ref 4 does not list the author (Earnest Cavalli)
  • Done
  • Ref 8 Date is does not match what it says on wiki, on their website it says May 13, 2009
  • Done
  • Ref 12 No author (Alice Laing)
  • Done
  • For older reviews (like in 2009) are often over a number of different pages like the case for GameSpy and GamePro. For those two for instance are cited 5 and 4 times respectively and I doubt in all 9 cases that you are only referencing the first page. Could you ensure you are citing the correct pages for reviews where there are multiple.
  • Done
  • That was just looking from scanning over the first the first handful of references which makes me slightly worried.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 00:33, 14 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • @Spy-cicle: I have done your requests along with adding names of authors to sources that previously didn't have them. Lazman321 (talk) 02:30, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are currently some ref errors (36 and 38 for PC Gamer interview and edge)
  • I made a few adjustments here and there
  • Is it clear when development started, do sources mention when (I guess sometime after the release Insaniquarium but if there are no sources that say that then do not worry about) I know it says total time was 3.5 years?
  • Comment: No source I looked at ever stated when exactly Plants vs. Zombies started. Lazman321 (talk) 02:32, 16 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It appears the PlayStation ports were published by Sony Online Entertainment not PopCap [4][5][6].
  • Done
  • There is also does not appear to be any said summary of what critics thought of said playstation 3 / psvita ports unlike some of the other consoles there certainly seem to be enough reviews covering it. [7][8]
  • Done for PS-Vita. Not Done for PS3 as for that one, the only reliable source I have access to that I know of is the IGN review. As far as I know, there isn't a significant difference between the Xbox 360 version and the PS3 version.
  • Reading over it The gameplay, development, legacy sections are solid but release and reception needs a little work but I'll address that more directly later.
  • Hope this helps.  Spy-cicle💥  Talk? 20:00, 15 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support by Cas Liber edit

Nice work - made some tweaks. Seems alright on comprehensiveness and prose Cas Liber (talk · contribs) 09:01, 29 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support and comments by Qwertyxp2000 edit

Independent thinking here, but I would like to say that the content coverage of the article as a whole feels complete. It covers a well-balanced amount of both the in-universe and out-of-universe content in both quality and quantity, including the ratio between them. The word variety and sentence structuring appears to be clear and concise; neither too excessive nor too vague. Sources appear to be reliable and primarily secondary upon first glance, and source formatting feels well-structured upon a brief look at the reference list. Balance in Critical Reviews section appears to be done exceptionally well for tower defense games. The entire article provides a good example of how a tower defense game game should be formatted. The legacy section is also structured very clearly, and I can easily understand the content of those sections just by reading the entire sections within several minutes of deep reading. The leading section is a bit long for my liking, but the leading section sure sums up the entirety of the article sufficiently, keeping the most important points written there including the basic information about the game itself, the design and development, and the critical reviews and legacies.

If I have some criticism, I would probably work a bit more on the Legacy section and its subsections by introducing a bit more about each stage of the legacies, like perhaps add a leading section in Legacy about the general legacy of the Plants vs Zombie original game, obviously backed up with reliable secondary sources that is. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 05:57, 4 May 2021 (UTC) Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 23:50, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Otherwise, I would like to say this is a good candidate for Featured Article. Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 05:59, 4 May 2021 (UTC) Qwertyxp2000 (talk | contribs) 23:50, 4 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass edit

Will get to soon. Might claim for 5 points in the WikiCup. Hog Farm Talk 17:33, 7 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • Non source-related comment - You use both Stephen Notly and Stephen Notely. Which is correct
  • Done: The correct spelling is "Stephen Notley". Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • No action needed - while the Reddit thing looks a little dodgy, the verification checks out, so I'd say it's about equivalent to using the subject's social media and is cited very minimally, so its probably fine
  • Who is James Gwertzman? That Slide Share source linked to him looks WP:SPS. Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: He is a primary source. At the time of the creation of the slideshow, James Gwertzman was the vice president of the Asia/Pacific division of PopCap Games located in Shanghai, China. [9][10] Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the body, it's the Suburban Almanac. The two times you cite it, it's Suburben Almanac. Which spelling is correct?
  • Done: The correct spelling is "Suburban Almanac". Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Padgadget appears to be a blog, what makes it high-quality RS?
  • Done: I have removed the blog but kept the other citations as they are considered RS. Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:VGRS says that Kotaku is reliable post-2010. There is a single 2010 cite to Kotaku that might ought to be replaced to be on the safe side.
  • Done: Considering USA Today is reliable in it of itself, I just removed the Kotaku citation. Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I think that's it for formatting/reliability. Will conduct spot checks for text-source integrity and copyright soon. Hog Farm Talk 03:21, 8 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done with this set of requests. Lazman321 (talk) 01:12, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Spot checks at User:Hog Farm/spot checks/PlantsZombies. No issues detected with copyright or text-source integrity. Hog Farm Talk 04:14, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Passing on source review - no issues with copyright or text-source integrity; satisfied with source reliability and text-source integrity. Sourcing seems to be a thorough and representative survey, as well. Hog Farm Talk 04:19, 9 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Support from TRM edit

  • Link "ported".
  • Done
  • " Magic the Gathering" is "Magic: The Gathering".
  • Done
  • "and Swiss Family Robinson" this is odd, so probably best to note that it was the movie, not some game.
  • Done
  • "game took three and half years to make. Rich Werner was the game's main artist, Tod Semple programmed the game, and Laura Shigihara composed the game's...." game game game game...
  • In fact "game" appears 13 times in the lead alone, excluding "gamer" and "gameplay" etc. It's jarringly repetitive.
  • Done: I've gone through the article to remove many instances of "game" and "the game". Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "to casual and hardcore.." to both
  • Done
  • "fastest-selling video game developed by PopCap Games" without context this is meaningless, what did they launch before this that was popular?
  • "A few years after" not encyclopedic.
  • "followed by a series of follow-ups" followed by follow-ups? Repetitive.
  • "ups; including" not a semi-colon, maybe a comma.
  • The engine is mentioned in the infobox but nowhere else.
  • Done
  • If strategy is mentioned in the infobox, shouldn't that also be in the lead as the genre?
  • Not Done: Tower defense is a sub-genre of strategy, making the inclusion of "strategy" in the lead repetitive. Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "game[3][4] in which" move awkward refs to end of sentence.
  • Done
  • "types of plants on" singular, types of plant.
  • Done
  • Zombie doesn't need disambiguation.
  • Done
  • own special behaviors" particular.
  • Comment: I listed examples of their "own special behaviors".
  • I get what "Cactus" is but "Blover"?
  • Comment: I'm just going to remove its mention. Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "can only pick a " only not required.
  • Done
  • "called "sun".The" space.
  • Done
  • "Sunshrooms.[7][6][8] Each" order.
  • Done
  • "type of plant recharges between each placement of the plant" -> "of plant ... of the plant" repetitive and awkward reading.
  • Done
  • "a lane, the lane's Lawnmower will kill all the zombies in that lane " lane three times in one sentence...
  • "drop money when" do you mean "drop sun"
  • Not Done Nope, money. Zombies don't drop sun when killed. Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Saving for now, I need to re-boot. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:25, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "iddyDinkies.[11][7]" order.
  • Done
  • "Zen Garden.[6][7] The Zen Garden" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "and has the player water and maintain " allows the player.
  • Done
  • "player money" sun?
  • "has some mini-game challenge" why "some"? why not "a"?
  • Done
  • "without a mini-game-type gimmick" why not just "without a mini-game"?
  • Comment: That wording just sounds awkward. I'm just going to remove it. Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • How many levels are there?
  • Comment: The article says "There are five stages in the Adventure mode, each comprising ten levels." What do you mean? Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "lanes.[11][9] On" order.
  • Done
  • "On the pool, plants are placed on top of Lily Pads which" -> "Plants are placed on top of Lily Pads in the pool" and why are Lily Pads capitalised?
  • Comment: Because in this context, Lily Pads is a proper noun. Lazman321 (talk) 04:40, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Zombot's feet and vans" feet and vans? like vehicles?
  • "The player subdues these" The player can subdue...
  • Done
  • "After beating the " completing.
  • Done
  • "other side of each lane.[11][6] Survival"" end of each lane, and order.
  • Done

That takes me to Development. More to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 13:43, 17 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "make a tower defense game" overlinked.
  • Done
  • "DS. In the initial" merge for better flow.
  • Done
  • "the fact that enemies in tower defense games would never attack the towers was unintuitive" I don't quite follow that, don't enemies attack towers?
  • Comment: No, they simply walk towards the end goal while they are attacked by the towers. Keep in mind that I am going off of what the sources say. Lazman321 (talk) 04:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "which a family defends against" defends what?
  • "by the game Tapper" some context for this would be good, it's somewhat a classic and dates back almost three decades before this game was developed.
  • Done
  • "video games were being released at the time" can you list any examples?
  • Not Done: I would if George Fan himself did in the interview. Lazman321 (talk) 04:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the enemies changed" were changed.
  • Done
  • "But Romero did..." avoid starting sentences with "But..."
  • Done
  • "errors.[28][26] " order.
  • Done
  • "at PopCap Games, PopCap helped" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "based in ... was based in Seattle" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "the plants and zombies descriptions" -> "the plant and zombie descriptions"
  • Done
  • I suspect "the Suburban Almanac" should really be "the Suburban Almanac"
  • Comment: I don't think so, as the Suburban Alamanac is fictional and as a result, may not be a major work. However, since it is based on actual almanacs, there may be a chance you are correct. I can't decide at the moment. Lazman321 (talk) 04:22, 20 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "internal forum. .. internal forum" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "years to make overall" does "overall" add anything?
  • "would later be" why not just "were later"?
  • Done
  • "polishing and fine-tuning" I would suggest that "polishing" is not encyclopedic in tone here.
  • Done
  • Hardcore gaming just redirects to gamer.
  • Done: Changed
  • Couldn't you just say "hardcore and casual gaming"?
  • Done
  • "attract casual gamers. It had" overlinked.
  • Done
  • "It had the player learning by doing actions"" really awkward phrasing.
  • Done
  • Of course, this kind of tutorial is commonplace nowadays, is there any source that this was a novel approach back then?
  • Comment: Not really. Why would that be needed anyway? Lazman321 (talk) 19:13, 22 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "fun on level paired up with it" I don't follow this.
  • "strategy often had difficulty learning the strategy" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "lowered from 100 to 50 sun," without context this makes no sense. Perhaps just "halved" would be better unless you want to discuss the whole "sun" value/price/acquisition rate in more detail?
  • Done
  • "Early in the development of Plants vs. Zombies was spent brainstorming" this doesn't parse for me, maybe "Early in the development of Plants vs. Zombies, time was spent brainstorming.." perhaps?
  • Done
  • "a big mouth to shoot projectiles out of its mouth " repetitive poor prose.
  • Done: Rewrote to be more concise.
  • "shoot projectiles out ... it shoots projectiles" likewise...
  • Done
  • "plant crushes enemies" zombies?
  • Done
  • "placed next to plants" no need for italics.
  • Done
  • "51 types of zombies" zombie.
  • Done
  • "designing the fight against him at the end of the game" so is he a Boss (video games)? Link that.
  • Done
  • "on their father, as their father" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "these songs were reactionary songs" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "playing through it" it through.
  • Done
  • "song was inspired by the song" repetitive.
  • Done

That takes me to "Promotion and release". More to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:08, 19 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "eventually released" when?
  • "The edition was" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "the port's release" link port here too.
  • "a tweaked interface" not encyclopedic tone, perhaps "modified".
  • Done
  • "and added back in the Survival mode and the Mini-Games mode" -> "and restored the Survival and Mini-Games modes"
  • Done
  • Link iOS.
  • Done
  • "games, etc" I don't like "etc" in an encyclopedic article. What else was the "etc"?
  • Done: Replaced with "and additional achievements" Lazman321 (talk) 15:08, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • It's "Amazon Appstore" and we have an article.
  • Done
  • Done: Android Market already redirects to Google Play. As per WP:NOTBROKEN, I linked it to Android Market. Lazman321 (talk) 15:08, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On June 23, 2011, the game was ported to" no, I assume it was released on that platform that date, not ported on that date. Same applies to subsequent sentences here.
  • Done
  • Link Xbox Live.
  • Done
  • "as a singular copy and as a " -> "both on its own and as part of .."
  • Done
  • "versus mode, a co-op mode, and a new mini-game mode"" modes were previously capitalised.
  • "2011[83] with" comma after year.
  • Done
  • "being its publisher" as its publisher.
  • Done
  • Link PlayStation Vita.
  • Done

That's down to Reception. More to come. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 10:51, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

  • "game created by PopCap Games.[112] It quickly became PopCap Games's best" overlinked and repetitive, maybe: "game created by PopCap Games, quickly becoming their best"
  • Done
  • "James Gwertzman" who?
  • Done: The vice president of the Asia/Pacific division of PopCap Games. Lazman321 (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "from hardcore gamers" this was (IIRC) linked before but to a different target?
  • Done: I removed the link. Previously, I changed the redirect itself for consistency.
  • "Live, reports that" reported.
  • Done
  • Done
  • "number one in amount of sales and amount of money grossed" no need for "amount of".
  • Done
  • "received positive reviews" I would dare say "very"
  • Done
  • "all versions received generally..." this sentence has versions three times, repetitive.
  • Done: Replaced the two others with "According to Metacritic, the only version that didn't receive "generally positive reviews" or "universal acclaim" is the DSiware version, which received "mixed or average reviews".[103]" Lazman321 (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "premise; He clarified" no need for cap after semi-colon.
  • Done
  • "Rock, Paper, Shotgun " according to our article there are no commas.
  • Done
  • "at some moments" sounds Germanic, perhaps "sometimes"?
  • Done
  • "of new units" first time you've used the term "unit" so needs reword or explanation.
  • Done

Gotta rush now, more soon. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 15:49, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man: Done with this now. Also, I apologize for not doing some of the release section stuff earlier. Lazman321 (talk) 16:44, 23 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Some noted the game's humor" you've already explicitly noted a quote which says "the game's sense of humor will really have you grinning" so that's obvious, no?
  • " new exclusive mini" sounds a bit adverty, do you mean it's a mini-game only available on the iPad?
  • Done: Removed "new". Yes, it is only available on the iPad. Lazman321 (talk) 16:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "mode.[107][83][121] " order.
  • Done
  • "The Nintendo DS port"" overlinked.
  • Done
  • "Awards earned" strictly its Awards and nominations
  • Done
  • "laid off as part of the systematic lay-offs in" repetitive.
  • Done
  • "named Plants vs. Zombies 2 was" overlinked.
  • Done
  • "third third-person shooter," likewise.
  • Comment: I'm not sure what you want me to do? Lazman321 (talk) 16:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • "is currently in" as of?

Thats it, just the refs to go. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:55, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man:: Done with this set, ready for the refs. Lazman321 (talk) 16:31, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 12 - Popcap -> PopCap
  • Done
  • Ref 30 - Slideshare -> SlideShare
  • Done
  • Ref 41 - space after "?
  • Ref 43 - is NG his surname? Should it be Ng?
  • Done: Yes, Ng is his surname. It is apparently a common surname from China.
  • Ref 48, 52 etc - not archived, any reason?
  • Done
  • Ref 79 - IGN not linked.
  • Done
  • Ref 117 - for me NYT is a subscription only access.
  • Done
  • Ref 122 - Nick, not Nicj.
  • Done

And that ... is that. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 18:02, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@The Rambling Man:: Done with all your requests. Lazman321 (talk) 20:33, 25 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]
Good work. Article is in excellent condition, reads well, is comprehensive, sourced well and meets all the bits of MOS that I know of. Happy to support. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 07:09, 26 May 2021 (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/Plants_vs._Zombies_(video_game)/archive1&oldid=1025221238"