Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Super Mario Bros. 3/archive2

< Wikipedia:Peer review

Super Mario Bros. 3 edit

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'm planning on taking it to FA, and for that, I need feedback. I've been getting awesome help from Tezero, Cas Liber and another great editor, but Tezero adviced me to take it here so that I get more opinions from people. I had another game peer reviewed a couple of weeks ago, Sleeping Dogs, which is also aiming for FA. Super Mario 3 is currently a A class article, which has been also GA reviewed and passed. Any feedback is appreciated! Also, since in 2006 the article was FA nominated, but never got to be one, I'll make it my absolute goal to make this a FA, but just like I said, I can't do this alone.

Thanks, URDNEXT (talk) 22:45, 28 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

  • It was released worldwide, beginning in Japan on October 23, 1988, followed by North America on February 12, 1990, and in Europe on August 29, 1991. - Is this too much detail for the lead, especially when you have the information in the infobox already?
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 02:52, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reference after "In addition to the running and jumping moves found in past games, the player can fly and float with the aid of special items, slide down slopes, and execute new types of jumps." is unnecessary per WP:LEAD
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 02:48, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead feels heavy on release information but light on reviews and production details.
  • Princess Peach sends Mario and Luigi to go and stop the Koopalings, - you refer to her as Toadstool above. I think she was still officially Toadstool at this time, so that should be fixed.
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 01:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't mention in the plot section that the Koopalings are Bowser's children
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 01:50, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • This is the only place power-ups can be given to small characters, as in levels this simply makes them bigger. - I've played the game, and this is unclear even to me
  Done I removed the sentence from the article, since it does not have a good citation. URDNEXT (talk) 02:55, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Through this mode, players can also access several minigames, including a remake of the original Mario Bros. arcade game, in which one player has the opportunity to steal the cards of another but may lose their turn if they lose the minigame. - I never knew this... awesome.
  • Be back after work with more. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 01:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • that the game's code uses to access in real time, and are combined to form complete images on the screen in real time - Repetition of "in real time"
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You don't seem to actually say when the game was released in the article text, at least not before discussing the game's reception. That needs to be referenced.
  • I'd be explicit: which are contemporary reviews, which are reviews in hindsight
  Done I have revamped the entire reception section,  — Crisco 1492. URDNEXT (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You haven't mentioned the hidden items in the gameplay section, yet they are all over the reviews. Kinda comes out of nowhere.
  • The final two paragraphs of "Reception" (i.e. not including the Sales section) really would work better in legacy, I think
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Nintendo Power's Top 30 - top 30 what? Games of the year? Games of all time? Sales?
  Done It was best games ever. URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The section #Sales would possibly work better in a section specifically on the release of the game and its marketing.
  • In 2008, Guinness World Records listed the game as the best-selling video game to be sold separately from a system, and reported worldwide sales of over 18 million copies. - does this include the ports?
  Done Yes, it includes ports. URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • all New Super Mario Bros. games except New Super Mario Bros. - I have the nagging feeling you're missing italics
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Your discussion of the original Super Mario All-Stars port is very light
  • It was also re-released for the Nintendo 3DS, and Wii U on April 17, 2014, as a reward that Club Nintendo users could purchase with their coins for the Wii Virtual Console on June 3, 2013. - not really sure what you're saying here
  Done URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • You've got a lot of fair-use images. I'd nix two (the men working in their office, as it doesn't pass WP:NFCC#8 regarding contextual significance, and maybe one of the screenshots.Crisco 1492 (talk) 05:40, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
The development photo is historically important since there are virtually no photos from the game's development, and the other two photos I'm just gonna change their captions. Is that ok,  — Crisco 1492? URDNEXT (talk) 13:41, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • In a book which doesn't have the NFCC to worry about, you might be correct. On Wikipedia, if that doesn't illustrate anything and the lack of an image is not "detrimental to readers' understanding", it's got to go. — Crisco 1492 (talk) 00:20, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from CR4ZE
  • Gameplay and Plot look a little light on citations. If you're wanting to take this all the way, you should probably get hold of the print sources being used and check them yourself. Try to find more. There's a citation needed for the fourth paragraph of Gameplay.
  Done I have added the citations you asked for. CR4ZE URDNEXT (talk) 20:43, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead does need work. I'd suggest moving the gameplay stuff into the first paragraph, and expanding the second paragraph to have more on the development.
  Done How does it look now, CR4ZE (t? URDNEXT (talk) 14:35, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm not seeing enough reviews in Reception that were published at the game's release. This would really be necessary if you wanted an FA, because the coverage needs to be as comprehensive as possible. No contemporaneous reviews feels like an omission.
  Done I have revamped the entire reception section. URDNEXT (talk) 20:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Images need alt text.
  • Fix up that choppy paragraph in Reception. Perhaps there's more in the way of criticism to develop upon.

Make sure major contributors have been contacted directly before you nominate. CR4ZE (t • c) 04:00, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

You don't get it, CR4ZE (t the other contributors lasted til last year. The page was abandoned when I took over it. I'm the only contributors asides from Tezero and two other great editors who came on board after I put it on Peer Reviw. URDNEXT (talk) 12:57, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • Contemporaneous sourcing is a lot thinner than it should be. In terms of reviews, where are Nintendo Power, GamePro and Electronic Gaming Monthly? I see a NP preview in the Reception section, but that isn't going to cut it. Every early issue of NP is available here, so the review will be in there somewhere. Ditto for GamePro. The EGM review is in #9 (April 1990), which I don't know where to find—but you're going to need it anyway. I see an EGM preview in the reference library that you aren't using. Plus, there'll be preview coverage from GamePro and possibly more from EGM at Retromags. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:30, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I searched for "Super Mario Bros 3" on Highbeam and these links turned up. Some of them might be dead ends; others might be good. You'll have to get someone with a Highbeam account (or similar) to access them for you: [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], [6], [7], [8], [9], [10], [11]. Make sure to contact people with NewsBank, LexisNexis and Questia accounts for SMB3 news articles from the period as well. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 22:44, 29 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks so much, JimmyBlackwing! URDNEXT (talk) 00:01, 30 June 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, Tangled is ready for review. I'm taking reference from FAs about games to see how this article can be improved. Comments coming.Forbidden User (talk) 11:45, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Forbidden User! I'll be reviewing Tangled in a bit. URDNEXT (talk) 16:15, 9 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Forbidden User edit

  • The brothers travel through Dark Land, enter his castle, and defeat Bowser in a battle. The game ends with Toadstool being freed from the castle. Any reference to that?
  Done Added link to review that mentions the ending. Forbidden User URDNEXT (talk) 12:59, 26 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'd suggest that if information from multiple paragraphs are from the same source, cite it at least once, like the end of a paragraph:Other suits include the "Frog Suit", which increases the character's underwater speed and agility and improves jumping height on land, and the "Hammer Suit", which gives Mario the appearance of the Hammer Bro. enemy and allows him to throw hammers at enemies and resist fire attacks. If the reference in the next paragraph includes the info, then I suggest citing once more at the end.Forbidden User (talk) 11:42, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
  • During 1988, a shortage of ROM chips, along with Nintendo of America's preparation of a version of Super Mario Bros. 2 for Western gamers, prevented Nintendo from performing various North American game releases according to their original schedules. It looks llike a running-on sentence. Try rewriting/wait for GOCE to take care of the prose.Forbidden User (talk) 14:28, 15 July 2014 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Super_Mario_Bros._3/archive2&oldid=1138565849"