Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Drowned God: Conspiracy of the Ages/archive1

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 GrahamColm 15:37, 19 December 2012 [1].

Drowned God: Conspiracy of the Ages edit

Featured article candidates/Drowned God: Conspiracy of the Ages/archive1

Nominator(s): —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Drowned God is a rather odd bird of a video game. The background story of its conception and development is probably more interesting than the gameplay, in that it's based on a forged document written by the game's creator, Harry Horse. He tried to pass it off as a manuscript from the 19th century, but was caught because of his distinctive style of illustration being recognized. After promising never to sell the work, he ended up repurposing it to tell his epic tale of "40,000 years of conspiracy". I've trawled the web numerous times and squeezed every bit of information I could find into this article. I think it's complete, interesting, and well-written. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 17:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

The article does not describe why it was titled as such, for example. Therefore I feel it is not comprehensive. Regards.--Tomcat (7) 23:05, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I believe the basis of the title comes from the Osiris myth, since some versions say that Osiris was drowned, and a spoken word voiceover describing his murder occurs during the end credits of the game, but I could not find a source explaining that. I believe an attempt to explain it would be considered original research, since I don't see a clear way to draw the connection from the game. I have a scholarly source ("Mummeries of Resurrection: The Cycle of Osiris in Finnegans Wake" by Mark L. Troy) with the phrase "In effect, Osiris had died twice: he was the drowned god, and also the rent god", which refers to page 32 of Joyce's Finnegans Wake, but nothing to connect the ideas for me. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:43, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I also found some interesting information about The Shabaka Stone, which describes Osiris' death by drowning, but again, there's no reliable source explicitly stating that's the reason for the title. It could hardly be anything else though. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 23:51, 15 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Addressed comments from Crisco 1492 moved to talk page

Support on prose and images, looks like a short but solid article. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 04:32, 21 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Moved resolved comments by Hellknowz to talk page

Support per review and resolved concerns. Ditto above, short but solid. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 09:23, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks! In the interests of disclosure I should mention that Hellknowz is a member of WP:VG but has never worked on this article before reviewing it here. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:53, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

~~Oppose~~ Comment (GermanJoe) - the article could still use more copy-editing and has a few issues with structure and clarity. Lead is no complete summary yet and some quotes are problematic. List of points after the first two readthroughs:

Moved lengthy list to talkpage - all points Done GermanJoe (talk) 11:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I suggest to let another interested editor check the prose. A lot of the mentioned points may be minor, but their amount indicates, that more work is needed. Primary specific issues are #1 structure, #6 lead and #24-26 quotation usage. GermanJoe (talk) 10:22, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comprehensive comments. I've addressed a large number of them, but will have to take a look at some of the more in-depth items later. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:35, 26 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
I've addressed the remaining issues, I believe, mainly replacing quoted bits with fuller quotations, doing a good amount of rewriting, swapping section order, and adding more info to the lead. Let me know if I've missed anything. Thanks. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 14:14, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for the improvements, moved all finished points to talk. ~~Not sure if it's even notable, but what happened with Burroughs' narrating part after his death? Was it cancelled or someone else did it?~~ I'll do another read and some spotchecks of sources later. GermanJoe (talk) 11:32, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Stroke already adressed point. Should have checked the other reviews. GermanJoe (talk) 11:35, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - stroke my oppose, though i still feel the article would benefit from another prose check. Some sentences are slightly repetitive or could flow a little better. Some more comments:

Image - fair-use seems OK, given the article's focus on the game puzzles.
- Didn't need to go out of your way for the images, I checked them already (hence why I said "support on prose and images") — Crisco 1492 (talk) 13:16, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - I didn't see that part of your support statement, nothing implied on my side. GermanJoe (talk) 13:58, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Oh, I didn't take that as a slight. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 15:14, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Sources - checked #1, #2, #4, #16, #21 - OK, content is cited or accurately quoted. (#3 see below)
A minor point to source #3, the source does not cover the infobox data "Windows 95 [and above]". A lot of games are upward compatible to a degree, but you need a source (WP:OR). #3 covers only "Windows 95". How far above anyway, is that including Windows 8? GermanJoe (talk) 13:10, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Hm, that's a good point. That bit is from before I edited the article, and I've basically left it alone. I can say that I've been able to play it on my Windows 7 machine with DOSbox, but I don't think there are any reliable sources discussing that. I've removed the "and above" part. As for the prose, I've asked another editor to take a look at the article, which he'll hopefully be able to do in the next couple days. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:28, 28 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I'm doing a copyedit of the article, and I hope to be done with a first pass by the end of the day today. I'll try and do checks on other FA criteria as well. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Not sure "The game's plot hinges on the idea" is correct. Plots can't hinge, and even in eloquent English, that idea is the center of the plot, it hardly "hinges". — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 16:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - It might be a bit too informal a word choice for Wikipedia, but the game's setup (if not the game's straight narrative) is contingent on that element being true, hence "hinge"--it's certainly not a literal door hinge we're talking about. Either way I don't think the whole "central idea of the game" element and the plot introduction is working right now; it might be better to try integrating that into the plot proper, although that might also exacerbate the issues with density. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:10, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - I rewrote it to say, "The game's plot centers around the idea...", which gets back somewhat to the original phrasing, but preserves the clarity and active voice. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:49, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Add alt text to all images properly per MOS:IMAGES
Unlink "science fiction" per WP:OVERLINK in this case
"and the human race's development and" not keen on too many "and" there
"audio, and puzzles" don't think you need the comma there
Per MOS:PUNCT, references need to be placed after punctuation
"The Albert Einstein and Isaac Newton dialogue puzzle was highly praised by multiple reviewers[2][8]" missing a period after "reviewers"
"e.g." would write out fully rather than use slang in an article
"Scottish Arts Council" ' apostrutche at end?
"In its first two weeks" grammar fail, perhaps try "Within its first two weeks"
Link "Windows 95" per WP:REPEATLINK
"Horse killed himself a decade after the game's release, however, and no sequel was ever released" grammar there is most likely wrong, try "A horse killed himself a decade after the game's release, however, and no sequel was released" without "ever" as that doesn't represent a neutral point of view

TBr and ley 16:17, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the notes. I fixed most of the above items, but I disagree about a few points you raised. I think linking the genre in the lead is not a case of overlinking, as it's central to what the game is, not a tangential subject. The doubled "and"s are grammatically okay, since they're functioning at two different layers of the sentence structure. The comma after "audio" is the serial comma, which is a controversial but essentially stylistic choice; I prefer to keep it. I don't think an apostrophe-S is needed after "Council", and it's not used in the source. Not sure what's wrong with the two weeks phrase. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:46, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No worries, but I do still believe that linking "science fiction" by itself is WP:OVERLINK, there are usually some subtopic links, such as "science fiction on television", but in this case "video games", that you could use instead as a link. Also, the two weeks phrase seems to sound more engaging with "Within" there instead. TBr and ley 06:08, 30 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

"Horse's initiation into the concept of an alternate history came in the early 1980s, when he first encountered professor Ian Halpke, who explained to him that information from the Kabbalah and ancient Jewish texts held a "cipher" explaining the secret". - what's the secret, exactly? And the text leads us to believe Horse had no knowledge of alternate histories before until this chap, is this true? --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 20:09, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I added a little more to that spot and a lot more to the first paragraph of the story section, explaining the background more clearly. As far as I know, yes, Horse wasn't knowledgeable on the subject before meeting and conversing with Halpke. In the GameSpot interview source I'm using, Horse says, "I was awakened to the possibility of an alternative genesis of the world by Professor Ian Halpke way back in the early 80s." —Torchiest ^talk_edits 21:19, 2 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Further comments

"The plot of the game" would change to "The game's plot" for more engaging prose
"The player must attempt" watch out for neutral point of view, the player "must" do that? Well, not really, if he/she wants to complete the game, then yes. Thus, could you please state something like that?
I don't believe you need to reference in the infobox if it is already referenced in the article's prose
Why has "human history" been linked in plot section, but not the lede? If anything, I would say to link in the lede, and not link in plot section, because of WP:REPEATLINK, only important links should be repeated again
Don't use words like "recently", as per WP:RELTIME
"multiple reviewers" you are referring to "critics"?
"That same year he" add a comma after "year"
The featured article criteria is against the use of one or two-line paragraphs, would suggest merging, shuffling, and such; in reception section
There's a whitespace after "AllGame" in ref. 16, needs addressing

TBr and ley 20:25, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the additional comments. I addressed everything above except for a few items. I removed some of the references from the infobox, but a few other the things in the infobox aren't in prose, so I left their references. I think "recently" is okay where I use it, because it's referring to in-game time rather than real life. Hence, it will always be recently in the game, no matter when it is played. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 20:54, 3 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

I've changed the line in release to "It initially was one of the top ten best-selling video games in United States", since I wasn't sure the original wording was actually giving an indication of what top ten meant; not sure if it needs best-selling, or if the issue I still have with it is it doesn't give a time period--does the source give something more concrete (best selling in October or November, etc?)
Okay, so you've got the Einstein and Newton puzzle referenced in an image and justified by a review. So what the hell does it actually entail? :) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 14:39, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- I rewrote that part to say "It was one of the top ten best-selling video games in United States during the first month after its release," as the source says "it went straight into the top 10. Five weeks later it was dead". As for the puzzle, it is a jumbled conversation between Einstein and Newton. You have to rearrange the order of their back and forth statements until it forms a coherent conversation. It's one of the earliest puzzles in the game, and is actually explained in the game's manual along with its solution. Can I add some of that with a reference to the manual? I don't know where my copy of the manual is so I couldn't include a page number. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 14:56, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  - Describe it as much as you can verify; I'd feel better with an actual page number but I don't think it's essential at this point (unfortunately replacementdocs doesn't have the game.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:01, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - I found the page number. Should this description going in the gameplay section, or reception where reviewers mention it? —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:05, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
    - Okay, I moved the image down to the gameplay section and added in a description of the puzzle with a reference to the game manual. How does it look? —Torchiest ^talk_edits 16:18, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
      - Looks good. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:27, 6 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
~~Leaning support have spotchecks been done? If not I'll take a look at referencing tonight.~~ Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:27, 10 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Support, my spot-checks were fine and if German's check was similarly fine I think we've covered all FA criteria. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:07, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks for that! Noting that David is also a member of WP:VG but had never edited this article before the FAC. —Torchiest ^talk_edits 19:19, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support - (did some minor CEs, but nothing essential). ~~Two remaining minor points, facts slightly out of article scope~~.

re David, i checked #1, #2, #3 , #4, #16, #21 (not sure if that's enough, but all seemed ok)
"Horse had previously written several children's books and received the Scottish Arts Council Writer of the Year award for his 1983 book, The Ogopogo – My Journey with the Loch Ness Monster." ==> Relevance for this article - why is this award important for the game?
"Williams also employed sculptor Greg Boulton,[who had previously worked on the Peter Gabriel video "Sledgehammer"]" - again, can you clarify, why this information is relevant for the game article? Did the video qualify him somehow for the team? Avoid "secondary" facts, when they have no direct relevance for the article topic. GermanJoe (talk) 09:59, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]
- On both those points, the reason for inclusion is mostly the same: the information provides a little more context. On the first one, I think it's a pretty interesting fact that Horse won an award for a children's book the same year he wrote a forged manuscript about aliens and ancient conspiracies, and it gives some background on what an odd fellow he was. The second one keeps "Boulton" from just being a name; in fact, that information was added per the request of another reviewer here who asked if there was anything else the team members had worked on other than Drowned God. So I think the inclusion of both improves the article. Thanks for your support! —Torchiest ^talk_edits 13:36, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thanks for the clarification - it's no deal breaker. GermanJoe (talk) 14:44, 11 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

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

Note: This is a WikiCup nomination. The following nominators are WikiCup participants: Torchiest. To the nominator: if you do not intend to submit this article at the WikiCup, feel free to remove this notice. UcuchaBot (talk) 00:02, 1 January 2013 (UTC)[reply]