Talk:Hundreds (video game)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Hundreds (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: URDNEXT (talk · contribs) 16:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

I will review your article. I am not too great at this yet, so go easy on me if I screw up. URDNEXT (talk) 16:52, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Looking forward to it czar ♔ 22:45, 10 June 2014 (UTC)

No problem. Just don't expect it in a week. I wanna make sure it's done right. URDNEXT (talk) 00:42, 11 June 2014 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• What killed Pics Relevance for me was the game creators' one. That has no purpose in the article at all. It would be more fitting to a magazine, but not an encyclopedia. The rest of the pics are perfect.
• I suggest you look for copy-editing to clean-up some things.
• Hundreds is puzzle game developed and published by Semi Secret Software:[1] Adam Saltsman of Canabalt, Greg Wohlwend of Puzzlejuice, composer Scott Morgan (also known as Loscil[6]), and developer Eric Johnson.[7] This is repeating the same line as the lead section. Try erasing the first sentence all the way to the people on the dev team, then make it cleaner. I don't need to know that Hundreds is a puzzle game again.
• That version added circles as players progressed—gameplay that evolved into the iOS release.[9] This line is messy. Try working on it, it's kinda confusing.
• the game's minimalism... Always start a sentence with a capitalized letter.
• What is brute forced? Try to explain what it is in the article.
• He wanted the game to be purchased by a Flash game site like Kongregate or Newgrounds, but when it went unsold,[4] Wohlwend open sourced it, partly to spur "non-coders" to try what he did.[8] At the time, Semi Secret Software was between projects.[4] WAY too confusing. This is one of the reasons I suggest you using copy-editing. Also, what projects? Try to specify it.
• Having no iOS device to test the port, Wohlwend purchased an iPad.
• Last paragraph in development would have have been better on the beginning.
• On reception, try mentioning the score of the game on Metacritic in the prose.
• and The Guardian found... You forgot to credit the author in the prose.
• Nissa Campbell for TouchArcade How about Nissa Campbell from TouchArcade?
• He added, then he said. What about using said first, then added in the reception.
• Try dedicating an entire paragraph to the criticisms instead of just a couple of sentences.
• References are perfect, all authors credited, dates valid and working links. Good job!
• released for iPhone and iPad on January 7, 2013. Wouldn't iOS be a more fitting word instead of iPhone and iPad?
• It was released for Android later that year. The use of the word it becomes kind of repetitive, specially when the next line also starts with It. What about incorporating the sentence in the iOS one? It could be much better like: "and released for iOS on January 7, 2013 and on Android later that year. There, much better! Also, android has a release date in the article. Make sure its in the lead, right up there with iOS.
• The idea came from... What idea? I suggest you change it to: "The idea for the game came from..."

Overall, the article is really solid, it doesn't have any instability, its clear, focused and the citations are valid. But the page suffers from a couple of issues, which are all just small things that could be solved in a day. I'm putting this on hold for a standart of 7 days, since I don't know when you are gonna fix the issues.

I asked 4 friends to review the article and give it a score. They are 4 people who never heard about the game. They said its a really good article and praised the use of the gameplay image. The scores were 9, 8.5, 9.5 and 10. They were all well informed by the page and a friend of mine even started playing it after reading. URDNEXT (talk) 16:27, 19 June 2014 (UTC)

@URDNEXT, sorry, I thought I had replied here—perhaps I never saved the page? Anyway, would it be all right to keep this open until the end of the month? I'll have more time to do this next weekend and there's some more time sensitive stuff I'd like to do now czar ♔ 16:08, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

♔ Sure, do you know how to keep it open? I don't. :P URDNEXT (talk) 16:12, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Yep, you just don't do anything. The review only ends when the reviewer changes the talk page to say it's over—there aren't any other real restrictions. Appreciate your flexibility. Also I don't remember exactly what I previously meant to write, but please do thank your friends for me. Hope that one who bought it is into it czar ♔ 16:14, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I don't get it, what friend? URDNEXT (talk) 16:16, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

I asked 4 friends to review the article and give it a score

czar ♔ 16:26, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

Oh, I get it. Sorry if I looked stupid, I thought you were talking about Cr4ze. URDNEXT (talk) 16:29, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

And yes, he's into it. URDNEXT (talk) 16:31, 22 June 2014 (UTC)

@URDNEXT, thanks again for the review—I appreciate the feedback. I think I've addressed everything you've mentioned above—want to take a look? Some replies: (1) It's natural to have images of the creators of a game if available, especially in indie games built by only one or two people. (2) The lede is designed to be a summary of the prose, which is why it should be repeated in the prose—the idea is to write and source it in the body and then to summarize it (without references necessary) in the lede. (In this way, I don't need to put a reference next to "puzzle game" in the lede or infobox. (3) It's traditional to leave release, marketing/promotion, and music for the end of the development section. (4) I prefer not to mention the MC/GR numerical score because I think it adds nothing to the prose apropos of nothing—it's available in the box for those who want it. (5) I left the criticisms as they were since there weren't enough to stand alone as its own paragraph without looking imbalanced in the section. (6) iPhone and iPad are there to indicate that it is a universal app (otherwise it wouldn't be in the article once. (7) No need for every precise release date in the lede—it's meant to be an overview. czar ♔ 22:05, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Contratulations, the article passed the criteria! By the way, czar ♔ Are you available for teaching me some editing tips any time in the future? URDNEXT (talk) 23:38, 29 June 2014 (UTC)

Depends what you have in mind, of course, but sure—wherever I could be helpful. I'll have more time in July if you'd like me to write up something in specific. Otherwise, I tend to answer most questions posed to me that don't require too much investment, and most editing around here is by trial and error anyway. Thanks again for the review! czar ♔ 23:45, 29 June 2014 (UTC)