Wikipedia:Peer review/F-Zero (video game)/archive1

F-Zero edit

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Hello. I've listed this article for peer review because me and FullMetal Falcon are trying to fix the article to get to Featured Article status. So please give us your thought. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

At a glance, I think a lot more contemporary reviews will be needed if you're going for FA. This sentence in the reception section is messed up: "F-Zero has been credited with to be the game that set a standard for the racing genre". bridies (talk) 14:25, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

O.K, fixed the sentence. GamerPro64 (talk) 19:41, 12 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work so far. I noticed that their is an overlap of content in "Development" and "Reception". Have you considered moving "Eurogamer's Tom Bramwell commented "this abundance of Mode 7 was unheard of" for the SNES.[22]" into the "Reception" paragraph discussing reception of the breakthrough? Cptnono (talk) 01:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I noticed that "jumps" is not used in the article. I assume this is something mentioned in the sources since I recall people going nuts over them (original research). Cptnono (talk) 01:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Reinvigoration, setting the standard for, creating the genre is mentioned several times.

I do not think they are redundant to each other, or do you mean something else? « ₣M₣ » 01:47, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Maybe it is a case of the "fuzzy line" below. There just seems to be so many. They really are not redundant so if you are comfortable with it then keep it in.Cptnono (talk) 08:03, 14 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- ~~The second "racing genre" in the third paragraph (lead) could be simply "genre".~~

Done. GamerPro64 (talk) 01:40, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- The quotes in reception could be broken down into plain inline cited prose unless you feel that they are needed to support the assertion. I can't say for sure if this would be best since there is a fuzzy line of between reducing bloat and dumbing down.Cptnono (talk) 01:14, 13 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]