Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 not promoted by SandyGeorgia 21:17, 28 February 2009 [1].

Guitar Hero III: Legends of Rock[edit]

Nominator(s): MASEM, Gary King (talk)

Being the first single video game to surpass (pinky in mouth) one billion dollars in sales, we've gotten an extensive PR to identify some faults and perform a copyedit of the text of the Guitar Hero III article to bring it to the level of FA quality. MASEM 14:28, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sources: Should all be the standard acceptable video game sources.
  • Images: There is the game cover, one screenshot, and one free image.

Gary King (talk) 00:36, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • without hardly checking at all....I'm impressed. Most of the game articles I've seen are so 'in universe' as to be incomprehensable for non-game folks like me. The reading comprehension link gives age level of 16 to 18 readability, which might be a bit high. Though most readers I imagine are going to be older folks like me who don't know jack about the game and want to at least know what the 'kids' are talking about these days....--Rocksanddirt (talk) 18:44, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Note There are still citation needed and unreliable source tags in the "Gameplay" section. Dabomb87 (talk) 22:51, 10 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I was the one who added those marks to note a few issues. I have since resolved them. Gary King (talk) 00:20, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:51, 11 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Support - with one nitpick, Co-op should be Co-Op, correct? Ceranthor 02:02, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Fixed. --MASEM 02:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Struck. Ceranthor 02:59, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments Why are the Technical issues and Soundtrack sections under "Development"? Also, there's remarkably little on the development of the game...the second paragraph is just a jumble of press release statements. The third is just a description of the demo. BuddingJournalist 02:08, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • Good point, theses should be their toplevel sections (and tech issues down after reception). As for the minimal dev section, the bulk of the history is in previous GH game articles; this one was merely a transfer from one developer to another (which is explained) in addition to a few more larger groups. --MASEM 02:38, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • Right, but surely there's more to software development than transferring rights, no? Why was Neversoft picked? It can't be only because Neversoft developers played it in their offices...there must be some business reasons. What was the development process? "revealed that all versions of the game would feature wireless controllers as well as online multiplayer and downloadable content." <-- Parroting press releases might be superficially informative, but I think an FA can do better. Why did they choose to invest in wireless controllers, and what was the development process like? What were the challenges involved in developing online multiplayer?
  • Finger hovering over the Oppose/AfD button Ye gods, is the entire "Gameplay" section WP:COPYVIO? And the article is still here? say it ain't so! Better yet, prove it ain't so. Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 10:13, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • As one of the primary authors of this including that section, I am pretty sure that there's no copyvio going on here. What gives you the impression that there is one? --MASEM 11:53, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the "Gameplay" section, the first paragraph (a rather large) has if I'm not mistaken only one cite, and that's to "Neversoft, ed (2007). Guitar Hero III instruction manual.". Now, that is a large chunk of text to take from one source. It is given in logical order, contains (apparently) technical terms, etc. I think it would require some real elbow grease to reproduce a section that large with copying... I searched for some phrases from that section on the Internet, and many of them are reproduced word-for-word in several websites. It's quite possibe that they copied their text from Wikipedia, but it's also possible that they copied the Instruction manual. That's two pieces of suggestive (but certainly not definitive) evidence. If you would be so kind as to scan the relevant pages of the Instructor's manual, or at least two or three of them, and email them to me, I could verify that my concerns are misplaced. If it's available on the In ternet then I can look at that... I am probably wrong, but it's worth checking. Thanks! Ling.Nut (talk—WP:3IAR) 04:28, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I know the bulk of that language is stuff I wrote myself for the game (save for further copyediting). Now, I will agree that one ref for it all seems odd, that I can fix (from sourcing the reviews), though I also note the seealso in that section, the gameplay is essentially the same). I just spot-checked the manual just to make sure likelihood of any copyvio direct from the manual, but its written in a much more informal tone (and second person) for this. The terms are consistent but that's necessary to be correct of course. --MASEM 04:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've gone through and added refs to this first paragraph (as well as id'ing the manual pages when info is gleened (but not copied) from them. --MASEM 05:03, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Super support --TONO459 (talk) 17:17, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose 1a. I picked a random section to read, Career mode, and was not impressed. My read-through suggests that a copyedit is needed for the article.
    • First, what is this Guitar Hero III instruction manual? And why aren't page numbers given? Is it the same as the little instruction booklet that's available for download at replacementdocs.com? If so, I'm not seeing much of the material in the article that is purportedly cited to the instruction manual.
    • "The player completes songs in each tier that depend on the difficulty level" Confusing. What depends on the difficulty?
    • So many needless instances of "then". Maybe this type of wording is passable in a school book report, but FAs should aim higher.
    • So many opportunities to tighten wording. At random: "the player is required to compete" -> "the player must compete", "After a botched performance in Japan, caused by Lou, they attempt to break free of their contract with Lou, who then reveals himself to be the Devil and the contract as ownership of their souls." , "the drummer has the idea of making a video to make a name for the band"
    • "The band begins as a neighborhood sensation," Eh?
    • "then performs at an island jail (despite Lou's encouragement for them to "sell out")" ???
    • "The band is dragged down to Lou's Inferno, " which is?
    • "back the band's souls, and the title of Rock Legend" Numerous instances of incorrect comma use. I usually correct little errors such as these; however, there are quite a few, and often the sentence ought to be reworded anyway.
    • "which is arranged similarly to the single player Career mode, with one player on lead guitar and the other on bass or rhythm guitar." Huh?
    • "differences between the core members put the band on a three-month hiatus" What are the "core" members? Odd use of "put" here.
    • "where they find their way out by playing a live show." Unsure what "find their way out" means here. BuddingJournalist 18:56, 22 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I revisited and unfortunately my oppose stands. Article does not meet 1a in my opinion. At random:
      • "The band starts as a neighborhood sensation, and after signing a recording contract with a shady music producer named Lou, gain worldwide fame," Subject-verb inconsistency
      • "The band returns to the mortal world as Rock Legends." Capitalized because? Explain if it has implications in the game.
      • "After their first performance, the drummer has the idea of making a video to make a name for the band." Tighten prose. ("has the idea of" -> "decides to" (or something similar and more direct); "to make a name for" is colloquial). What kind of video? Music video?
      • "After a three-month hiatus after resolving differences between the band members" Huh?
      • "In 2006, Activision purchased [[RedOctane] for $100 million,[30] believing the acquisiton to provide Activsion with "an early leadership position in music-based gaming"." Typos, but more importantly, the second half of the sentence is ungrammatical.
      • Repetition of "_someone_ noted that" construct in second paragraph of Development is tiring. I also spotted at least two instances where the required "that" is missing (noted [that], announced [that]).
      • Development describes decisions, but sometimes neglects to give reasons for these decisions, which is part of what makes for a compelling and comprehensive read. "that it took much work" Why? The article says that the game is "deceptively simple", but goes no further. What caused problems? Why did they opt to focus on perfecting the guitar rather than expanding instruments? BuddingJournalist 16:53, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
        • I'll work on the rest of the text and try to fix up the "_someone_ noted that"; on the last point about development, unfortunately, this information is just not available; I've done a very recent scour of news.google to find any more collaborating sources for dev information and they are just not there; I don't know if its because the media didn't ask such questions, or if by this point the development aspect for GH was an issue, but I can't add stuff that isn't explained further. (This is compared to what happened with the next game, Guitar Hero World Tour where more instruments were added and thus there were a lot more questions asked by the media, instead of just a game that offered more of the same. --MASEM (t) 16:59, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
          • Gah, hold on, I just realized and kicking myself for missing it. We've got three dev diaries (see the ELs) that I can work from. I don't know if these will answer those questions above, but that will flush this section out a bit more from your original considers (up this page a bit). --MASEM (t) 17:11, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
            • Some new paragraphs have been added to expand on note tracking, venue creation, and character creation per these diaries. --MASEM (t) 18:08, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • (undent) Aha! The new paragraphs give me much more confidence that the article meets 1b and the Production section is a much more fulfilling read (in the future, these type of large content additions should be made before FAC). Unfortunately, I'm still an oppose with respect to 1a. The new additions, while informative, read quite rough. There are odd tense changes and sentence structures, typos, unexplained jargon, simplistic language, etc. Re-read the additions; I think you'll discover quite a bit to do. Then of course, there's the rest of the article, which on my brief skim just now, still contains quite a bit of work, prose-wise. BuddingJournalist 17:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, 1a. Not happy with random samplings of the text. The Technical Issues section is especially mediocre. It probably needs a few hours with a fresh, effective copyeditor. Examples:
    • The Reception and Technical Issues rely heavily on long quotes instead of giving us actual prose, which I believe Ling was commenting on above in his special way. The quotes aren't even especially illuminating; the quotes in the Tech Issues heading sound like 14-year-old gamers bitching instead of decent journalism. If we can write better, let's spare the readers the quotes. Some of the items make no sense either out of context. Why does the bluetooth thing matter? Or the powering down after disuse? You've provided criticism without any context or explanation.
    • "However, GameSpot offers a patch for the PC version ..." So, who will be coming by to change this when the patch is no longer offered? That sentence also has a which/that error.
    • "Activision offers a free replacement remastered game disk ..." Ditto comment above. Also, isn't it "disc"?
    • "The company later expanded this offer to include those living in the United Kingdom and Europe." This makes little sense considering you've not mentioned previously that the offer was only to.. who? We don't know. Japan?
    • "On February 22, 2008, they further extended the replacement program ..." Spot the redundant word.
--Laser brain (talk) 03:08, 23 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment to both BuddingJournalist and Laser Brain, I have gone through and done a significant reorganization of the article to address the language concerns and excessive use of quotes. I would appreciate if you could recheck this if you could. --MASEM (t) 00:49, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    Will revisit later tonight. Thanks for taking the time to work on the issues! --Laser brain (talk) 00:58, 25 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Guitar_Hero_III:_Legends_of_Rock/archive1&oldid=1138461995"