Talk:Planescape: Torment/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

I quick fail this article, because I believe that the plot section does not contain crucial information for the understanding of the game, for example no information is given about the party members or other important characters although dialog and interaction with NPCs is an integral part of the game. It is also unforgivable that no mention is made of the question "What can change the nature of a man?" which is the hook of the whole story. It is not even clear that (roughly) the first half of the game takes place in Sigil and the second half in various planes. The article is therefore not broad in its coverage (3) since it's missing essential information. Please compare the Plot/Setting/Characters section with various Final Fantasy articles to get an idea how it should be expanded. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 12:36, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

There is a separate article, List of characters in Planescape: Torment, which describes the different characters... to much description here would probably lead to too large a plot summary. For the "What can change the nature of man?", there needs to be a good reliable source to be able to relate that to the game in the article, otherwise it would be original research (it actually had been in the article before, but was removed as unsourced OR). The Sigil-planes problem is an easy fix which I can do now, and I'll try to add in a little more about characters. Would you consider re-reviewing the article in a day or two to look for any other problems which can be fixed? None of this seems to hard to do. Thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 15:08, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I have just added in information about the alternative party members as well as information about Sigil and other planes. Most of the information about characters is in the spinout article. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Besides, criterion 3 is no a reason for quick-failing an article (see Wikipedia:Reviewing good articles#First things to look for)... I think that a hold would have been more appropriate to allow for improvements like what I've been working on. -Drilnoth (talk) 15:35, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I also disagree with a quick fail on this article, and that putting it on hold would allow it to be fixed. However, if the fail is maintained, we can fix and renom in a few days. As was being discussed on the article's talk page just before the nom was filed, the article was previously more comprehensive regarding the plot, but was cut down last year as it was seen as being overly detailed; we can bring back some elements that were previously in the article and it can then be reassessed with comprehensiveness in mind.

That said, would you be averse to assessing the remainder of the article so we can get a clearer picture of any other issues that may be present? BOZ (talk) 15:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I think that most of what had been removed was actually split into List of characters in Planescape: Torment. Additionally, if the fail is maintained, we could probably use WP:GAR rather than WP:GAN. -Drilnoth (talk) 16:11, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I have written long and detailed instructions for improving the quality of previous GA nominations like Leopard and Furry Fandom, but I believe that the plot section of this article is so far from being comprehensive that the nomination was definitely premature. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 16:34, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Okay; in that case would you mind giving it a re-review in a few days once I've added more (I haven't played the game, so I have to look online)? -Drilnoth (talk) 17:20, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

I will certainly have another look at it when the section about setting, story and characters is significantly expanded.

You haven’t played the game? I’m always surprised when somebody works hard on an article who has no particular interest in. As someone with quasi semi-religious feelings towards the game, the extremely short plot section has really bothered me when I read the article for the first time some months ago. It does not offer a comprehensive overview of the development of the story, the main characters or the main themes. Planescape: Torment is one of the few games where the setting/story/characters section is particularly important because the literary aspect of the game is unique in the history of Western computer games.

That an own article for the characters exists is not an excuse to exclude any kind of information about them in the main article.

Most often, you don’t need sources for plot points since the fictional work itself can be used as source. The “What can change the nature of a man” theme is important since it’s for example the central point of the central conservation with Ravel and it’s the last sentence spoken in the ending sequence. It is also mentioned in the very interesting interview with Chris Avellone. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 17:50, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

You found a source? Great! I'll add it into the article a little later. Anyway, I have an interest in the article because it was a fairly well-written and popular Dungeons & Dragons article, and I'm really trying to improve coverage in that area. Give me a few days to work on the page and get a better plot overview and then I'll ping your talk page if you'd like to let you know I'm ready. For the time being, could you maybe switch this review to be "on hold" rather than "quick-failed"? As I said above, not being comprehensive isn't a quick-fail criteria and I think that this problem shouldn't be hard enough to fix that a whole additional review is needed, rather than just following up in the same one. Thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 17:59, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll probably have time later today and tomorrow to really start work. -Drilnoth (talk) 18:07, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

OK, the plot needs expanding; not only do I understand it, but I fully support that viewpoint. In fact, I have had to argue more than once with people who wanted to remove most or all plot description from articles, stating that such content will prevent an article from getting to GA or higher (and this article was apparently one such case [1]) - man, I should show them this review. :) But yes, my point is, I couldn't possibly be in more agreement that the plot section should be expanded for the game to be fully understood by a reader, and we will get that fixed ASAP. Some people working on the article have played the game, and that knowledge should help make it better.

Aside from the plot though, are there any other reasons that you would not pass the article? What else needs work? If we get the plot up to standard is that enough, or what could we do with the remainder to get it to GA standard? BOZ (talk) 20:24, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry to burst your bubble, but sometimes smaller is better when dealing with issues concerning plot summaries. Often it is more of a chore to trim down the plot summary than to expand it. Personally, I think the current size is fine, going by WP:PLOT. However, if you're going to expand it, you have to find actual game text citations or it's not going to fly.--_{ZXCVBNM (TALK)} 21:47, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Eh, nothing is burst (as proper level of plot coverage is a subjective matter of personal opinion), and in the case of a GA review all participants should defer to the reviewer as to how much is too much or not enough. I only want to see the text be comprehensive of the subject without getting into extraneous detail that would mean nothing to someone unfamiliar with the subject. BOZ (talk) 23:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

About the citations: There are a lot of video game GAs that don't really cite the plot summary all that much, since the game itself is the source. Are you saying that we need to have primary sources in the plot summary so that it is cited, even though it should be apparent just from playing the game? -Drilnoth (talk) 22:05, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Plot pieces may need a source if: a) They are easily overlooked. (If you want to mention it, this might be true for the "correct" answer "Belief." to the above-mentioned question in the final confrontation which is only accessible for players with a character with a high Wisdom.) b) It is not really clear what's going on and every summary can only be an interpretation (but notice that the featured article Mulholland Drive (film) (!!!) has NO source in the plot section). c) Somebody questions them and asks for a source. -- I will give make an in-depth review during the next days. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 00:40, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Ah, gotcha. I hope to finish working on the plot tomorrow. -Drilnoth (talk) 00:43, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

Much appreciated - even if we wind up being unable to get it to GA, an in-depth review will allow us to improve the article, making it much more likely to succeed on a re-nom. Thanks for your patience and willingness to work with us; much appreciated! :) BOZ (talk) 01:17, 2 March 2009 (UTC)

How does it look now? -Drilnoth (talk) 16:30, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Hold that; I'm going to expand the story more later today using this as a guide. -Drilnoth (talk) 19:12, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

I've expanded the plot; could you give it another look? Let me know if there are still problems. Thanks! -Drilnoth (talk) 22:33, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Review

Lead

• Unlike Baldur's Gate, Planescape: Torment places emphasis on conversation and storyline instead of combat. – I don’t think that’s a good example since Baldur’s Gate is also a game with a lot of dialog, at least Baldur’s Gate is not an action rpg like Diablo. I think it would be safe to say something like “places more emphasis on conversation and storyline instead of combat than almost any other role-playing game.” because that is what’s so special about Planescape: Torment. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Changed: no longer compares PT to other games, but simply states it has a strong emphasis on dialog over combat. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Not necessary for GA: It would be good to mention that an isometric perspective is used. I think the perspective used in a game is quite important. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

This is mentioned twice. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Gameplay

• Why are there 4 (!) sources for such a trivial information as PS:T uses the isometric Infinity Engine? 1, at most 2, source(s) should be sufficient. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 00:35, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I think I've fixed all three of those. -Drilnoth (talk) 02:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Ha ha, I added those because someone actually put a notice next to that sentence. It seemed like the appropriate response to such an absurd request. I should have added more :) — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 17:49, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Setting

Quite a few notes for such a short chapter:

• a setting which involves the interactions between the planes and the strange things found within them. – There HAS to be a better way to describe the Planescape setting. A reader who does not know anything about the setting does not know what a plane is. Therefore he does not know how planes could interact with each other and what these strange things are. Flying cars? --Novil Ariandis (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• takes place in the city of Sigil, an "impossible place that lives in the heart of the D&D universe". – I would rather mention the portals from Sigil to the other planes and the rule of the Lady of Pain instead of the quoted esoteric blabber. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• The city is divided among fifteen warring factions. – I don’t think you can say it this way. It’s not like each faction controls one of fifteen sections of the town. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• How's it look now? -Drilnoth (talk) 20:12, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Better. The explanation for the Planescape setting is still not particularly great, but it's okay for GA. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Sadly, even the Planescape article itself is somewhat confusing in its description. A lot of D&D-related articles are in the same state; they're written by people who (pretend to?) understand the universe, and so their descriptions take a lot of things for granted. To anyone who isn't familiar with the universe (or in this case, multiverse), it's a hard chore to figure out what's what. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 20:53, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

We're working on it. :) -Drilnoth (talk) 20:57, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• "The city also contains fifteen factions [...] each striving for further control of the city" — was this power struggle even brought up in the game? I know it is an important part of the Planescape setting, culminating in the Faction War, but I can't recall that it was ever mentioned in the game. I think the closest the game comes might be a member of one faction rejecting the beliefs of another faction (e.g. a Godsman calling the Dustmen fools, or something). Even this I can't say happens for sure. — Twas Now ( talk • contribs • e-mail ) 02:02, 5 March 2009 (UTC)

Development

• His music was pulled from the game after a new producer decided to take the game's music in a different direction. – Really? Guido Henkel was the producer of PS:T until its Beta phase. Was the soundtrack changed that late in the development of the game? This has to be checked. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 19:41, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• It is not made clear enough that Mark Morgan composed the soundtrack of the game, not just the unofficial CD. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 19:44, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• I think I fixed both of these now, too. -Drilnoth (talk) 20:16, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• It's okay now. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:29, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Characters

• I am not sure if it belongs into the characters or the story chapter, but I think it is essential to add that previous incarnations of The Nameless One have left hints, like the tattoos on his body if he should lose his memory again. And that The Transcendent One tries to destroy all references to his own existence. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)
  • I added in some information about the hints, but the prose might be really bad... it's hard to write about somone leaving clues for themselves when the new one doesn't know about it. -Drilnoth (talk) 21:00, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Similarly it should be mentioned that each time The Nameless One dies another person dies on his behalf and that the shadows of the dead persons hunt him down. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Morte [...] and has been responsible for some of his deaths. – I believe that this is misleading without further clarification. Morte is not a traitor but a very loyal fellow of The Nameless One most of the time. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Annah-of-the-Shadows, a young tiefling [...] until much later. – That’s not really useful information. We want to know about her character or her most important actions. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• The reading of the last paragraph does not flow well. You can see that it was once a list. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• Instead of The Nameless One can free Ignus from this otherwise never-ending punishment. which is quite clear since Ignus couldn’t become a party member otherwise, I would rather mention that Ignus betrays The Nameless One before the end and fights against him. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• found in a random location inside the Modron Maze – No reader who has not played the game will understand this. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

• The information on Vhailor, a rather minor party member, should be shortened. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 20:55, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

I think I fixed all of these. -Drilnoth (talk) 21:08, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

References

• There are several references without information about title, publisher of the website (author is a plus) and date of retrieval. That’s really easy to fix and the references section looks much more professional if all basic information is given. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 21:03, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Working on this; might take a little while. -Drilnoth (talk) 21:10, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

How's it look now? -Drilnoth (talk) 21:17, 4 March 2009 (UTC)

Final remarks

I believe that the article meets the good article criteria in its current state. Besides the above mentioned flaws, some issues which I have not yet mentioned, have been fixed during the last days.

Some things that could be improved in the future:

• “These vignettes help the player understand the world of Planescape.” – Merriam-Webster says that a vignette is “a short descriptive literary sketch”. I am not sure if this is the right word, at least it’s very hard to understand for non-native speakers.

• “For instance, the main character in the game lacks a proper name entirely.” – This does not qualify as differing greatly from the game.

• “In the book, the main character just chooses a name.” – Why not give the name?

• The various possibilities to end the game without battling him should be mentioned in greater detail: The true name, correct answer “Belief.”, killing oneself with the weapon by COAXMETAL. I remember those three, maybe there are more.

• I think it is essential to mention the importance of “Belief.” as theme in the game, for example The Transcendent One can be defeated by giving the “correct” answer “... whatever a man believes can change the nature of a man”.

• Other themes of the game, for example the importance of names and the nature of reality should be discussed (with sources) in a separate “Themes” chapter.

• You have to give reasons why the modules In The Footsteps of Dante and The Nature of a Man are important.

• It would be cool to have a reliable source which links the movie Memento to Planescape: Torment. Its main hero suffers from memory loss and has tattoos written on his body to remember him of his previous actions. A correctly done “Legacy” chapter would be good, which actually discusses the influence of Planescape: Torment on other media or people.

• Lots of content has been added during the last days and the prose could certainly be improved here and there. For example, there are too many semicolons.

--Novil Ariandis (talk) 23:07, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for you review, your second chance, your patience, and your help. :) BOZ (talk) 23:09, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Sorry for the errors with Annah and the cleric class. That's the problem when you have to edit so fast to not interfere with the edits of other authors currently working on the article. --Novil Ariandis (talk) 23:17, 6 March 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your thorough review! –Drilnoth (T • C) 13:23, 7 March 2009 (UTC)