Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Movie Battles

Movie Battles edit

This article has improved ALOT since its last review, he how-to stuff has been deleted and it has been made more encyclopedic. Keep in mind that its not perfect yet because its hard to write a perfect article about a small mod, but it can always get better... So, thats why i opened this review. My goal is to get the article to at least a B rating so, lets hope i succeed. Yzmo ^talk 21:15, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Una Laguna edit

A good start, and I'd say this is probably a low-ish Start-Class article, so getting to a B isn't impossible. The difficulty with working on a game mod article is that there are very few others which can be considered for use as an example article. Here are some ideas to improve the article:

Too much of this article is unsourced: see WP:CITE, WP:V and WP:RS. Anything which isn't considered common knowledge should be sourced. This includes your comparisons to other games.
As a subscriber to PC Gamer UK for four years, I can tell you that MBII was featured in September 2005 (issue 152), page 111. That's a better reference to give than a scan of the article, and print refs always look nice. Done
Sections 2-6 should be merged into one "Gameplay" section. Per WP:NOT#GUIDE, it should only contain information which would be useful to readers who've never played the game and don't intend to. Done
The "History" section should be expanded. Currently there isn't any information on how regularly it's updated, when the last version was released, how popular it is... anything along these lines which is notable and encyclopedic should be included here. Done Although i just wrote what i knew... i need to find refs about it
To match the Copyrighted Computer Game tag, you'll need a fair use rationale for the current screenshot and any others. Done
More screenshots showing different aspects of the game would be useful.
Anything else interesting about the mod which wouldn't be covered by any other section? If so add it in.
The quality of the prose isn't particularly high. Go through and proof-read it after you've made all the other changes. Examples of what you should look out for:

Names of games such as "Star Wars Jedi Knight II: Jedi Outcast" and "Star Wars Jedi Knight: Jedi Academy" should be written in italics. Done
The Movie Battles mod was started by Richard Hart aka RenegadeOfPhunk in 2003, the first versions of the mod were developed for... A new sentence should start after "in 2003". Done
"Team-based" is written with a hyphen, and I believe the same applies for "last-man-standing". See the MOS for use of hyphens. Done
...similar to other FPS like Battlefield 2 should have "FPS" pluralised to "FPSes" (or, just write "first-person shooters" and link to the relevant article). Done
The use of bold in the "Classes" section does not seem necessary. Done
When using terms such as "NPC" and "FPS", be sure to link to the associated article so that readers unfamiliar with video game terminology know what you're talking about. Done

If you have any further questions don't hesitate to ask. When I have a free moment I try to work on the Dark Forces/Jedi Knight articles myself (and actually have the mod installed on my computer), so MBII isn't that far out of my field of interest/expertise (if you can call it that).

Hope this helps, Una Laguna^Talk 11:49, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, this helps alot :D I know the problem with the sources.. but it aint easy to find em.. Anyway, ive done some stuff now, and do more tomorrow.. again ty for the review ;) Yzmo ^talk 20:25, 8 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It would be helpful for me if you updated your progress using the {{done}} template - have a look at how it's been used in other peer reviews. This gives me an idea of what issues you've addressed and I'll be able to add new relevant comments more promptly. Una Laguna^Talk 14:20, 9 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, Right... Thx for pointing it outYzmo ^talk 21:10, 13 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Good work so far... I'd say the two main problems with this article are length and references. Getting more references would help on the length front. Instead of writing what you know and finding sources later, try looking for sources first and write what they say. I understand that this'll be difficult with a mod of this sort. Una Laguna^Talk 06:13, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Right, are forum posts OK as sources??Yzmo ^talk 15:56, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generally no, but it depends how you interpret Reliable sources are authors or publications regarded as trustworthy or authoritative in relation to the subject at hand. If it's a forum post made by one of the people on the Movie Battles team as an official announcement/piece of news and there's no alternative source, then it may scrape through the policy. However, I'm really not sure. Una Laguna^Talk 20:20, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Just got back to this ;) i see what i can dig up ;) Yzmo ^talk 22:00, 21 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

OK, i have now added some more references as well as made all web references cite-web Yzmo ^talk 11:48, 29 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You've done a great job, but there's still a couple of points which need addressing. Currently it's still pretty short. The history section could probably be expanded: why not mention the media recognition from PC Gamer and Sky News (refs already in article). There's also a version of Movies Battles being made for the source engine (link) which you could mention. There might also be some information you can get from looking through the news section of the official website. Done

Also, Image:Movie Battles Arena.jpg is quite big (1024x768) which may violate Fair Use. I usually scale my screenshots down from 1024x768 to 800x600, which is still fine, so you may want to do the same. Done Una Laguna^Talk 18:57, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the quick answer, i'll look through that tomorrow.. ;) Yzmo ^talk 20:50, 4 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Done :D Yzmo ^talk 14:21, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Congratulations! I now believe this article is B-Class. I also did some cleanup myself, but most of the credit belongs to you. I'd say it's now better than many other B-Class articles I've seen. Quality over quantity, eh? Una Laguna^Talk 16:51, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Alot For all the help xD, Know what, i'll actually try to put it on an GA review.. It will propably fail b/c its too short, but trying doesnt hurt ;) Yzmo ^talk 16:55, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely a B-class article, no doubts about that. Putting it up for GA isn't such a bad idea. The only issues the reviewer might have would be to do with criteria 1 and 2 at WP:GA?. 1 is simple to fix, just have a look at WP:MOS and pick out the tiny errors (e.g. reference should come after the full stop, not before). 2 depends on the reviewer. I've got two articles to GA. One time there were several unsourced sections, but it still passed. The other time the reviewer was much more picky, finding fault with two references. But in terms of length, I think the article's about as good as it's going to get. The great thing about getting an article to GA is that you're given time to improve on any faults the reviewer finds with the article. I'd be very happy to continue to help improve the article during its GA candidacy. Una Laguna^Talk 20:52, 5 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thats much appreciated, although, as you said, it's hard to improve the article/make it longer since there just isnt enough sourced material.. Yzmo ^talk 13:06, 6 October 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GREETINGS