Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Terra Nova: Strike Force Centauri/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Terra Nova: Strike Force Centauri edit

Toolbox
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Looking to take this to FAC. I brought it to GAN a few months ago, and have since copyedited the article and heavily expanded its Development section. I haven't nominated an article at FAC in two years, so I'd greatly appreciate any commentary on the sources, prose and image rationales, which may not be up to today's standards. However, if you notice problems with anything else, feel free to point those out as well. Thanks. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:35, 29 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • {{doing}} Yell at me if I don't have something by tomorrow night EST :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 00:46, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Okey dokey, some starter comments:
    • "Terra Nova has been cited as one of the first three-dimensional (3D) games with squad-oriented gameplay;" - you should probably clarify "3D" as "3D graphics". Same thing in the gameplay section.
    • In the gameplay section you use lots of grouped terms like "the latter", "the first" and "the last" where just explaining which specific nouns you're referring to would probably be simpler.
    • A little more disambig for some bluelinks would be nice, for example, saying "As with (Looking Glass' previous game) System Shock", "(novels) Starship Troopers and The Forever War", "(Game designer) Paul Nuerath..., etc.
    • "did not break even" --> Might be too informal for an encyclopedia article? --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 15:21, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Thanks for the comments; I'll get to them ASAP. As for the last point, I had considered that it might be too informal. However, I could think of no superior way of phrasing it, and the article break-even made it seem like it'd work. Do you have any ideas about what to do with it? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:37, 1 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Took steps to address the first and third issues. I'll deal with the second one today, most likely. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 20:09, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Some scattered comments:

  • Redirect checker is telling me that you have a few- PC Gamer UK/US don't have their own articles; single-player in the infobox; computer game in the lead, Solar System is capitalized, and bipedal is redirecting to bipedalism.
  • The Computer Shopper link in the references is to a disambiguation page (though the one in the article text isn't).
  • The external link checker is throwing a 404 for this, which isn't true, but combined with the half-broken nature of the page is a reminder that you might want to go through and find webarchive/webcite links for everything, as links from 1996 tend to vanish without warning. --PresN 19:49, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • I wrote a script that would automatically archive everything, only to realize that you already have it all archived. So, ignore that last one there. --PresN 17:42, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Went through and got these myself. --PresN 19:42, 25 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sorry that I didn't get to them sooner! I've been busy with off-Wikipedia stuff. Thanks for your help. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 15:34, 26 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Leaving comments and suggestions as I read through the article. Note that I never played the game, but if you are the primary editor of the article, there should be no problems with factual accuracy.

  • "the player is often assisted by artificial intelligence-controlled teammates"
    • The AI bit sounds a bit weird there, possibly rephrase
      • "Computer-controlled", maybe? I'm not sure that's better. I originally settled on "artificial intelligence-controlled" after several attempts to find a good description. It isn't great, admittedly, but I don't know how I could improve it. Any suggestions? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Can't think of anything better myself. "AI-controlled" would be optimal, but would have to be introduced first. With "assisted by teammates controlled by artificial intelligence", the subordinate clause looks suboptimally placed. Maybe someone else has an idea. Prime Blue (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah. If anyone can come up with a good solution, I'll implement it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "many noted the game's steep system requirements"
    • "many criticized the game's steep system requirements" (to make it more apparent)
      • Actually, the requirements weren't often brought up in a negative context. It was mostly neutral. They were mentioned in almost every review, though, so I thought it was important to include them. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Based this on "noted the game's poor performance on lower-end computers". Would address this more directly, but just a suggestion. Prime Blue (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Ultima Underworld: The Stygian Abyss", "MechWarrior 2: 31st Century Combat"
    • Agree with David on the disambiguation, this will most likely come up if the article is nominated
      • I tried to deal with David's a few days ago, but I missed these. Fixed. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Accidentally introduced a repetitive mistake with "first game". Replace "First conceived by" with something else ("Initially conceived by", "Originally conceived by"). Prime Blue (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Whoops; changed to "initially". JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Forgot that: I think it would be good if the non-lead sections had disambiguations for these as well. Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "can process 3D outdoor environments and a simulation of physics"
    • "can process 3D outdoor environments and simulate physics"
  • "enables procedural animation and other effects"
    • "enables effects such as procedural animation" (to avoid suspense until the effects are named further down)
  • "from a character's eye view"
    • Common phrase? Maybe something like "takes place in a three-dimensional (3D) graphical environment seen from the perspective of a playable character"
  • "three-dimensional (3D)"
    • abbreviation is introduced twice in the article
      • It's always been my practice to introduce abbreviations in both the lead and in the body. In the days of ye olde MOS, I think this may have been standard. Maybe I'm a little out-of-date. Any idea? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think it's great that you re-use wikilinks immediately after the lead, I can imagine many people skipping the first section. I guess the bigger problem I have with the double introduction is that it's such a common expression, basically everybody should know it (will definitely bring 2D/3D up at MOS to be added to the WP:ABBR list). Prime Blue (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Yeah, that'd be great. I've always written it as plain-old "3D", but, over the last year or so, a lot of people have started asking for it to be clarified. David's comment above is an example. I don't have a problem with it either way, but I think it'd be a good addition to ABBR. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The player character wears"
    • Word "character" used in the previous sentence, "player" in the next sentence; maybe use "protagonist"
      • Fixed. Since that sentence was used to introduce the term "player character" into the article, removing it kind of threw off the rest of its uses. I changed them all to "protagonist" for good measure. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "features jumpjets, lock-on targeting, infrared and zoomed vision, and regenerating shields"
    • Don't know what jumpjets and regenerating shields are
      • Clarified regenerating shields. As for jumpjets, it's Looking Glass's term; not mine. I'd have just written "jetpacks" for clarity, but I think that'd be original research. Any suggestions? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • If they can't be replaced, I'd explain their purpose. Something like "features jumpjets for..." and "rechargeable energy shields to...". Prime Blue (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "among other things"
  • "up to three artificial intelligence-controlled squadmates"
    • For AI bit see above
      • As with the other one, I'll rephrase this if something better comes along. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "from holding a position, to taking cover, to rushing enemies"
    • Should be "and rushing enemies"?
      • That whole construction was pretty clunky, so I rewrote it all. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "half of a squad may be used to distract enemies while the other attacks an objective"
    • should be "one half of a squad" if used in conjunction with "the other"?
  • The word "squadmate" is used often in this paragraph, any synonyms?
    • I think it might harm the Gameplay section's clarity if I changed that phrase too regularly. Perhaps I could swap it out with "teammate" on occasion? Or perhaps "squad member"? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the right depicts weapons, suit status, drones and ASFs"
    • Don't know what drones and ASFs are (if important, mention in prose)
      • Drones are somewhat important to the gameplay, but Terra Nova is one of the most ridiculously over-complex games I've ever played; an in-depth description of its gameplay would be a cruft disaster. Removed them. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "that describes such things as objectives, squad size and enemies"
  • "Each may be equipped with such things as"
    • Another word for "things" might be good here
  • "Auxiliary Suit Function"
  • "increased jumpjet power"
    • For jumpjet see above
      • I think that the newly-clarified first use of "jumpjet" solves this issue as well. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC) [reply]
  • "assessed it as "Aliens-esque""
    • add disambiguation such as ", referencing the 1986 action film"
  • "In charge of the squad is commander Arlen MacPherson"
    • This is a bit unclear, I thought Nikola ap Io was in charge, maybe use "overall charge" or something
      • Nikola has a squad captain-ish role, but MacPherson tells them all what to do. My knowledge of military terminology isn't great. Reworked the sentence to include your fix. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Project Leader Dan Schmidt later described these scenes as "cheesier than most" of those in other games, and said that "I wince a lot looking back on [them]"."
    • Should be "Project leader Dan Schmidt"; sentence might fit the development section (end of third paragraph) better as the cheesiness of the cutscenes is not really a part of the setting
      • That's true. Fixed.
  • "A reconnaissance mission by Nikola identifies them at a heavily defended pirate base"
    • "them" can refer to the pirates and the grenades
      • I think it's actually both, but it's not that clear. Specified "grenades". JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "a minor previous information leak was in fact the work of a Hegemony spy"
    • Should be explained more if it is an important plot point
      • The information leak isn't important in the slightest, but I thought it made MacPherson sound crazy if I just said, "Now knowing the pirates are funded by the Hegemony, MacPherson suspects that a Hegemony spy has infiltrated Strike Force Centauri". I had a lot of trouble with this one. Any suggestions? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC) [reply]
        • Maybe playing down its importance might help, I think it's the "minor" that doesn't sound right here (somehow makes me curious). Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Nikola's dropship is ambushed and shot down"
    • Don't know what a dropship is
      • That's me falling into gamecruft-speak without noticing it. There were a few uses of this term in the article at one point, but I thought I'd gotten rid of them all. Fixed. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "At his funeral, Ashford accuses Nikola of being the traitor."
    • Might be a minor qualm, but how do they know that there is a traitor if Pentheus only told Nikola?
      • I think the squad might have guessed something along those lines before that point, but it's not really put in concrete terms until the whole Pentheus thing. I tried to keep the plot section as small as possible; it doesn't mention a few of the more minor plot threads, and several less-important characters got the axe. There's actually a huge cast (20-some characters, including 8-9 squadmates), but only the ones with central roles in the main story arc got mentioned. Like with the gameplay section, I summarized stuff as briefly as possible to avoid cruft. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "It soon becomes clear that MacPherson is being poisoned"
    • Continuously?
      • Yeah, I think so. That's how they make it sound, in any case. I think someone says, "Someone is poisoning Mac", or somesuch. I always thought it was a bit odd that they never tried to stop him from being regularly poisoned. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Company co-founder Paul Neurath"
    • Mentioning the developer here again would be good
  • "It was originally titled Freefall, due to the way soldiers in the game enter combat by dropping from aircraft"
    • "The game was originally titled Freefall, due to the way the soldiers enter combat by dropping from aircraft"
      • Hey, that's a good idea. Hadn't thought of using a "the" to avoid making it sound like a real-life concept. Fixed. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "led the game's development"
  • "Then-Tribe members"
    • "Then-Tribe band members" or "Then-members of the band Tribe"
      • Restructured the whole thing and implemented your second suggestion. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Disambiguation needed for some game titles in the development section
      • Fixed, hopefully. This is a bad habit of mine, so there might still be something hiding from me. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "didn't have any it would look second-rate"
    • Journalists and their missing commas...
  • "So now we have this game that's already late, and half of our resources are being poured into doing the full motion video"
    • Development uses many direct quotes such as that one, the less significant of which could be rephrased to normal prose
      • Another bad habit of mine. However, I tried my best to cut down on the amount of quotes before I nominated it for PR. The issue really needs a clean pair of eyes. Do you have any specific suggestions? It'll make fixing the problem much easier. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Of the 30 direct quotes in the main development section, I think the ones that could be reworked are "got the team underway", "staying out of your way", "fixed end date", "still inherited that vision and never thought to change it", "was very difficult", "became the lead programmer just because there was a void to fill and I bubbled up to it", "So now we have this game that's already late, and half of our resources are being poured into doing the full motion video", "probably a business mistake", "ended up just costing us more and delaying the game even more than it already was", "had to ship or the company was going to go under or we were going to cancel it", "made the game way more fun", "the team finally came together near the end of the project". Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • That's a pretty beefy list. I'll get to work on it over the next few days. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 23:22, 12 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The game's lateness"
    • Word "game" used in the previous sentence, would replace "lateness" with "delays"
  • "needed to achieve break-even"
  • "that the game's already-lengthy"
    • Word "game" used in the previous sentence
  • "much more arcadey"
  • "fully 3D outdoor environments"
    • Adverbs with "2D"/"3D" sound a bit weird
      • Made it "three-dimensional" and re-introduced everyone's favorite abbreviation in parentheses. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "moves characters' models"
    • "moves the characters' models" or "moves character models"
  • "designer Richard Wyckoff later compared them to those of "a marble""
    • Possibly put this at the end of the sentence, or in another
      • I'm not sure what you mean. The Wyckoff comment relates to the "basic physics" used to propel characters, and they aren't mentioned again after that sentence. It seems like it would be non-sequitur if placed elsewhere. Maybe I'm misunderstanding your suggestion, though. Could you clarify? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Just seemed a bit intrusive to me there. Possibly "Designer Richard Wyckoff later compared the physics to those of a marble". In any case, the "them" should be replaced to identify it as the physics. Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "and did not break even"
  • "Despite this, it was acclaimed by critics"
    • Replace "it" with something to distinguish the game from the disaster
      • It's pretty funny when you take it to mean "the disaster"; hadn't noticed that. Fixed. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "more fun than a barrelful of"
    • Could not find "barrelful" in dictionaries, a [sic] might be in order here
  • "and described performance issues"
  • "He finished"
  • "Schmidt later said that he had"
  • "While Dan Schmidt said before the game's release"
    • "While Schmidt said before the game's release"
    • More reception: There's a GameRankings entry for the game, and the awards in the review box can be mentioned in prose
      • I don't think that a GameRankings entry based on 3 reviews is particularly critical to the article. However, if you think more coverage of the game's reception is necessary, I have access to a few more print reviews that I could include. They'd probably add up to another paragraph or so. Oh, and could you clarify what you mean about the awards? I'm not that clear on how they're supposed to be used; the last time I discussed it with someone was, I believe, in 2009. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • Didn't pay attention to the number of reviews – yup, that's not really helpful. I think the reception section is good to go (didn't read the awards properly either, those are not really significant enough to mention in prose). Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just realized that "Multi-Function Displays" is in quotation marks, while other game-specific terms ("Random Scenario Builder") are not. Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also, non-judgmental single words ("simulation", "a marble") are not put between quotation marks. Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • "in a hamster ball" is very similar to this and sounds strange if quoted solely. Depending on what Schmidt said, I'd either extend the quote to "putting each character in a hamster ball" (or whichever his quote was), or remove the quotation marks altogether. Prime Blue (talk) 16:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Image review:

  • File:TerraNovaLandscape.gif should use {{Non-free use rationale}}
    • Done. As usual, my image rationale leaves a lot to be desired, however. Any advice on how to improve it would be appreciated. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • if 640x400 is the native resolution of the game, possibly resize the image to something smaller but still sufficient to read
    • As the image summary describes, the game's resolution is 320x400 in an 8:5 aspect ratio. I don't know what would happen if I messed with the image's dimensions, and I have no idea how to go about halving its size without distorting the content. As above, any advice would be appreciated. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just a suggestion as someone will probably complain about it at an FAN. Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "it depicts highly detailed tactical information"

Shpadoinkle. Prime Blue (talk) 21:53, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Partial source review:

  • For manuals, there's {{Cite manual}}; I'm not sure if it's a deal-breaker, but I would welcome the manual source to be split into individual sections with page numbers (even if it's annoying to change this now, it's just more thorough as far as sourcing goes)
    • I really, really hate citing specific pages. I tried that once while working on another article, and the soul-destroying tedium of it nearly drove me insane. If you think it'll make a difference at FAC, I'll do it; but if not, I'd like to avoid it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC) [reply]
  • If ref. 2 is a press release, there's {{Cite press release}}; is there a URL?

Prime Blue (talk) 19:28, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thanks for the reviews! After Mr. Fuchs finishes, I should be set. I'll take care of these issues ASAP. I'm a bit on the busy side, so it could be a week before I deal with all of this. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:12, 3 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Added a few comments. I'll get to the rest before too long. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:24, 4 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Responded again. I'll get to the rest of your review soon; I have to rush off right now. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:56, 5 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
        • More comments/fixes. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:27, 6 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
          • Finished responding to your tweak list. Will get to the image/source review tomorrow. PresN: I'll deal with your comments soon. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:01, 7 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
            • Finished responding to Prime Blue's review! I'll handle PresN's comments tomorrow. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 09:28, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
              • Note that I checked the fixes individually, I'll probably read the whole article again tomorrow to see if everything still fits together. Good work! :-) Prime Blue (talk) 20:09, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
                • Thanks. I'll try to finish up your final comments today and tomorrow. You've been a huge help. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:48, 9 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "the game follows a faction of humans who have colonized the Alpha Centauri star system in order to escape from a totalitarian Earth government" → "who colonize" instead of "have colonized"?
    • It happens before the start of the game, so I thought that putting it in present tense might confuse people. If you really think it's better, I'll change it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Terra Nova has been cited as one of the first squad-oriented games " → it's kind of odd it doesn't explain what squad-oriented games could possibly mean until after this part of the sentence.
    • This is a side-effect of clarifying that the game uses "three-dimensional graphics", as you requested before. It's odd, I admit, but I can't think of a way to put the graphics part first without breaking several rules of grammar. Any ideas? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...and several compared it to the 1995 video game Mechwarrior..." → Compared it favorably? Unfavorably? Without context this prolly doesn't belong in the lead.
    • Bizarrely, almost every single reviewer compared the two games neutrally. I thought it was important to include it in the lead, though since it was so common. If you think it should be removed, I'll find something else to replace it with. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 21:26, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:19, 11 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Reread the article. used green for remaining qualms and suggestions. Again, good work with the fixes. I don't regularly check the FA nominations, so it would be nice of you to give me a heads-up so I can support it as one of its peer reviewers. Prime Blue (talk) 16:39, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sure thing. Sorry I've been so slow on these. The RE2 review is my top Wikipedia priority, but I'll really try to get back to this. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:42, 23 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Terra_Nova:_Strike_Force_Centauri/archive1&oldid=1143112693"