Talk:Ether One/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Will be happy to offer a review. However, I strongly recommend you take a look at czar's comments on the talk page, as I'm concerned about over-quoting and unbalanced paragraphs in this article. JAGUAR 21:19, 13 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Initial comments

The lead is far too short to comply per WP:LEADLENGTH. Both paragraphs need to be expanded in order to summarise
There's nothing on development in the lead.
"video game company" sounds redundant
"In Ether One, the player is cast as a "Restorer" whose job" - missing comma between "restorer" and "whose"
I think that the gameplay section is a bit short and is too reliant on unnecessary quotes. Why is ""an individual with the ability to project himself into the mind of someone suffering from mental illness in the hopes of restoring their memories"" in quotes?
The development section's first paragraph is also lacking in comprehensiveness. There is so much more content to use from the first source I pulled out, for example
Story sub-section in the development is unnecessary. It should most likely be merged into the main development section, and paraphrased because it's pretty quote-heavy
""Our main goal was to tell a story that we could invest ourselves in," said Pete Bottomley, co-founder of White Paper Games and game designer." - unencyclopaedic
The biggest concern here is the reliance on over-quoting in the reception section. The Depiction of dementia sub-section for instance is comprised of a huge quote. This definitely needs to be copyedited and paraphrased in order to meet the GA criteria. I'd recommend taking a look at other VG GAs and observe how they portray reviews
Have all the concerns from the previous GAN been addressed?
One link is dead

Close - not listed

I'm sorry to do this, but this doesn't meet the GA criteria at this time and I think it should be renominated once all of the issues (mainly quote-farming) have been addressed, both in this GAN and the previous one. I couldn't put this on hold because I feel like it's too much work to do, and it might be better if you take a look at other video game GAs and see how they're written. This article is also lacking a bit in comprehension, as I pulled a couple of sources from this article and found that it had a lot of information on development. If all of the issues are addressed, then I'll be happy to review this again. Don't worry, I'm sure you'll get it next time! JAGUAR 11:18, 14 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]