Talk:Cat Bird

Cat Bird has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: July 19, 2024. (Reviewed version).

Video games: Indie Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the indie task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Purple Francis (7 participants)
Gilman Louie (2 participants)
Yoshimitsu (3 participants)
Dr. Wily (8 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (3 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Preston Arsement (6 participants; relisted)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by LunaEclipse talk 14:57, 24 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that despite the titular character of the game Cat Bird being a hybrid of a cat and a bird, critics believed the character looked more like a bat? Source: TouchArcade Game of the Week: ‘Cat Bird’ Cat Bird review - Do we need another mobile pixel platformer?
- Reviewed: [[]]
- Comment: My 3rd DYK nomination.

Created by Captain Galaxy (talk).

Number of QPQs required: 0. Nominator has less than 5 past nominations.

Post-promotion hook changes will be logged on the talk page; consider watching the nomination until the hook appears on the Main Page.

Captain Galaxy 01:58, 3 April 2024 (UTC).[reply]

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: None required.

Overall: Really good work, especially seeing as this did not start in draft - it really is only 4 days old yet has better quality than most articles that are 4 years old. Needs quite a lot of clean-up and polishing but no there is barrier to DYK. For my own enjoyment, I am doing a rudimentary c/e if you then send it for a proper c/e consider putting it through GA. — MaxnaCarta ( 💬 • 📝 ) 09:42, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments on the article. I am probably going to take a break from editing soon but when I come back I will take your advice on getting the article to GA. Captain Galaxy 16:18, 3 April 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

Passed. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 15:23, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cat Bird/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Captain Galaxy (talk · contribs) 01:25, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 18:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Funny enough, I was just thinking of bringing this article to GA, as I myself am a mobile game enthusiast. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 18:05, 16 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Passing... TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 15:22, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	After a thorough copyedit conducted by myself, the grammar should be in tip-top shape. No typos spotted.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead section summarizes article adequately. Article is correct per MOS:LAYOUT. Article is not bombarded with words on the WTW list. Fiction is out-of-universe. List incorporation policy does not apply.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Reference section exists; no bare URLs spotted.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	Several sources considered reliable by WP:VG/S are used in the article, including Destructoid (staff-written), Pocket Gamer, AppAdvice, Game Rant (non-controversial subject), TechRadar, Gamezebo, and TouchArcade.
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecking proves there is no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	According to Earwig, the top result is at a 7.4% similarity, making this article unlikely to have any copyright violations.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The article has information on the game's gameplay, development, release, and reception - material that is adequate for a video game.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article does not go off topic; it does not give undue weight to a certain viewpoint.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is neutral; it features both praises and criticisms of the game and does not try to promote the game itself.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Both the app icon and the gameplay snapshot are tagged with their copyright status. Both have valid non-free use rationales.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The app icon serves as the identifying cover art of the game, and the gameplay screenshot showcases how the game is played and what it looks like. Both have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Alright, off to bed.

Quickfail?

Y No cleanup banners or citation needed tags.
Y First review; no previous mistakes to note.
Y No copyright violations, per Earwig.
Y Article is stable.
Y No significant issues to note.

Lead

Note: I will correct minor grammar mistakes myself as to not waste time.
The game encourages replayability by counting the player's deaths instead of giving the player lives. - To me, this sounds like OR, especially because the sources used to cite it do not directly mention how the gameplay encourages replayability.

Done I believe this was probably added by me due to the wording of the 148Apps source: "After you've beaten the game, you can go back and try levels without dying, but for now, why not enjoy the journey?". With that being said, I've opted to remove any mention of the word replayability.

The game was downloaded over five million times. - If information can be found, when was this achieved?

As far as I'm aware, the Sensor Tower source is the only reliable source to mention the game's download stats. Additionally, the first time this source was archived was by me this year so I can't check the way back machine to check.

Gameplay

multiple planets - I'm assuming three? (the next sentence mentioning the "additional fourth planet" implies that it is)

Done Fixed.

Follow-up: How many levels for each planet? I'm assuming ten.

Done interestingly enough, the source I had citing this straight up didn't have an accurate amount so I removed it and cited the game instead.

which the player can unlock at any time - How?

Done Changed the wording here to say it's available to the player at any time, instead of implying the player need to have the means to unlock it

Two levels on the planet require crowns to unlock - Where do you get crowns from?

Done There is a description on where the crowns in the previous sentence.

The game also features a leaderboard. - I don't see how this is relevant to mention.

Done Removed.

Development and release

the founder of indie mobile game developer Raiyumi Inc - Not sure why this needs a citation from a primary source.

Done Wasn't entirely sure what it was you wanted me to do here, so I just removed the citation

recharge their jump - Not sure how that works???

There's nothing much I can really change here because Raiyumi doesn't elaborate either. Direct quote:

"At first I had jump mechanics where the character would have to ‘recharge’ his jump, but it was quite difficult to come up with fun level ideas. So I switched it up to a hover mechanic and it was much easier to manage design-wise."

Would not recommend quoting the word "easier"

Done Removed quotation marks

it took four months to develop - Should be mentioned in the first paragraph, specifically someplace in the first to third sentence.

Done Move to sentence after details on composer.

Two of these levels require collecting crowns to unlock, which, when beating those levels, would unlock skins for the player character.
- One: Two out of what?
- Two: Do you get crowns, then unlock levels, then unlock the skins after beating them? It took me a while to wrap my head around this.

Done Reworded this section to (hopefully) be clearer.

Reception

The one-sentence summary for sales could be moved to somewhere in the second paragraph of the development and release section.

Whilst not saying it directly, WP:MOSVG typically puts Sales information under Reception and like with a Release section with Development, Sales can be bunched up with Reception when there isn't much information regarding the topic. I'm not opposed to removing the Sales subsection and just adding the sales information to the reception section though.

Actually, I'm not too sure if that source is reliable. What is Sensor Tower, anyway?

Sensor Tower is a marketing and analytics firm, there doesn't seem to be a discussion on it but many video game/tech articles use them to cite profit related information. Other reliable sources also have cited them in the past such as The Guardian, Bloomberg, PocketGamer.biz and TechCrunch just to name a few.

he felt Cat Bird was fully realised - ???

Done Reworded the section

Split music section from art section?

Done

the worst each level had to offer - Not sure what the "bad parts" are???

Done Reworded it to be more descriptive on what the "worst" is

Come to think of it, the lead could use a one-sentence summary of Cat Bird's original concept.

Done

Spotchecking

References are of this revision.
I'll check four.
#2 N - Don't see anything mentioning the pixelated art style nor the game's genre

I think this source was meant to cite the fact the game is set in space. Do you just want me to remove it? Captain Galaxy 12:20, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Don't remove it. The first reference already verifies other information. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 15:19, 19 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

#10 Y Y
#15 Y
#19 Y
#12 Y - "Gimme double and a bonus one..."

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.