Talk:Localization of Square Enix video games/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Tezero (talk · contribs) 18:26, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

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

Is Final Fantasy World a reliable source? Hardcore Gaming 101 also isn't universally accepted here, although I'll trust you with that one as it is situationally.
Intro's too short. Given the article's size, it should be twice that length.
"Square Enix has been noted for the high quality of its translations" - Too lazy to check, but does IGN praise the translations or note that a large number of critics have done so? If it's the former, cast this statement as Fenlon's opinion.
Also, is there any further information on how well the translations have been received? A "reception" or "feedback" section would be nice, if practical.
The first source, TeamXbox, is used nowhere else in the article. I don't think it even needs to be where it is, honestly.
The first paragraph of Approach is very lengthy and tough. I'd split it into two at "Challenges for the localization teams".
"glossary, style, naming schemes, fonts, etc." - Is "etc." formal enough for Wikipedia?
What does "QA" stand for again? I can't remember myself, and it'd be nice to spell it longhand first with "QA" in parentheses so the abbreviation can be used safely later.
"the Western countries" - Is "the" necessary? Your call; it depends on whether Square Enix has a defined set of Western countries they typically release to.
"DragonQuest was discontinued in 1987" - You mean the name "DragonQuest", right? Clarify that.
The second sentence of "Releases" is quite long and bulky.

Putting on hold. Tezero (talk) 18:26, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Done my best with all the points

Removed FF World, but kept in Hardcore 101 as it's the only site where cited information is contained. And just so it's clear, apart from the ones I added myself from online research, I drew all the references from Good and Featured articles that didn't have any obvious discussions about their verifiability, like the FF Dream ones, and references for Last Remnant, Secret of Mana, and others. Also, I got rid of the first TeamXbox reference, although I put it there in the first place because the statement had a citation request in front of it.
Lead was a problem, but I think I've expanded it enough.
Fixed the paragraphs, wordage and grammar, I hope. And dealt with QA.
I can't create a descent reception or feedback section. I tried to more than once, but I couldn't get broad enough coverage for both companies and all the games mentioned in the thing. I would have been restricted to a few Final Fantasy titles and a couple of others, which didn't seem at all like a proper view for an article with this scope. Reviewers don't seem to have been much concerned with the localizations at the time the reviews were being written, and haven't been bringing them up as far as I have found.

I think that's addressed all your points. Anything else? --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:32, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A few Final Fantasy titles and a couple of others would still be better than nothing; you just have to work with what's available. Nonetheless, if you can't find any way to work it in, don't. The article's likely notable besides that. I'll just pass this, as I see no remaining issues. Tezero (talk) 20:17, 1 May 2014 (UTC)[reply]