Talk:Hodj 'n' Podj

Hodj 'n' Podj 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: August 25, 2017. (Reviewed version).

Video games 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.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Gilman Louie (1 participant)
Yoshimitsu (1 participant)
Dr. Wily (2 participants)
First Internet Backgammon Server (2 participants)
Emote (2 participants)
Stardew Valley Guidebook (2 participants)
Train simulator (disambiguation) (8 participants)
Preston Arsement (4 participants)
Jackpot World (3 participants; relisted)
Melee (game terminology) (6 participants; relisted)
Godzilla: Monster of Monsters (7 participants; relisted)
Godzilla 2: War of the Monsters (7 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hodj 'n' Podj/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Rapunzel-bellflower (talk · contribs) 20:36, 23 August 2017 (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.	Yes, very nicely done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Mostly very nice. I'm not a fan of "abnormal" as used in "They found that an abnormal number of female players, families and non-gamers reacted positively toward the game" in the development section.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	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).	They all look good, except for ref 3, which is missing the name of the magazine, if I'm not mistaken.
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	In the development section, the wording of "In 1994, after spending several years as a contractor for Legend Entertainment, Meretzky founded Boffo Games with his friends Leo DaCosta and Michael Dornbrook" is too similar to Gamasutra's "In 1994, at the height of the so-called "media explosion" created by the proliferation of CD-ROM drives and improved graphic and sound capabilities in home PCs, Meretzky founded Boffo Games with Leo DaCosta and Mike Dornbrook,"
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars, etc.
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.	I noticed that screenshot has been tagged as needing to be reduced. Isn't there a bot that does that?
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Overall, this is a very interesting, very nicely done article. I'm putting it on hold to have the issues raised above addressed. Thank you, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 21:00, 23 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review! I've taken steps to address all of your concerns, including the use of "abnormal" (changed to "unexpected"). Let me know how it looks. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:09, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hi! No problem! I'm always happy to see articles about retro games. It looks much better now, thank you. I'm still concerned about the similar wording--I think I should have been a little more specific. The fragment of the current revision I am most concerned with is this (" Meretzky co-founded Boffo Games with his friends Michael Dornbrook and Leo DaCosta"), which to my eyes, is still too close to the order of "Meretzky founded Boffo Games with Leo DaCosta and Mike Dornbrook". I think you've taken some good steps to start making the sentence your own, but this is still too similar to me. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 16:19, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's tricky, since there are only so many ways to phrase that coherently in a single sentence. I've taken the nuclear option and removed DaCosta's and Dornbrook's names entirely, since they were never mentioned in the rest of the article anyway. How does that look? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 20:05, 24 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

It's definitely tricky. I actually think it's one of the hardest parts of editing, tbh. I suppose you could also go something along the lines of "Meretzky and two friends [name names or don't] established Boffo Games in 1994". Or something like that. No pressure. The names aren't the problem. It's that both versions are too similar in structure and choice of verb. I know this seems incredibly nitpicky. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 00:22, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I considered that structure myself, but it creates another problem: the grammar suggests that Meretzky and his friends contracted for Legend Entertainment, which the source doesn't say. Otherwise, it would be perfect! Anyway, I took another stab at it—hopefully that solves the problem. Let me know how it looks. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 02:40, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ah! XD Oh, well. It looks much better now. Thank you for all your hard work. I'll pass this now. Keep up the wonderful work! Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 16:03, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you! I really appreciate the review. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 20:33, 25 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source