Talk:Lumines: Puzzle Fusion/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Namcokid47 (talk · contribs) 15:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

One of my absolute favorite puzzle games, alongside Mr. Driller, Tetris and Columns. I'll get to this soon, likely when I finish redoing R-Type Delta. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 15:59, 12 December 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, this article is definitely gonna need a lot of work. Doesn't seem to have been copyedited (or copyedited well, at least), so I'd definitely advise seeking somebody to do it. Just glancing at the lead I can already see some glaring issues.

"Lumines: Puzzle Fusion is a 2004 puzzle video game that is based on sound and light patterns that were created by game designer Tetsuya Mizuguchi and his company Q Entertainment." This entire sentence reads awkwardly. It can easily be shortened to something like "Lumines: Puzzle Fusion is a 2004 puzzle video game developed by Q Entertainment for the PlayStation Portable". You should also follow that with something similar to "It was published by Bandai in Japan and internationally by Ubisoft."
Why is the platform for the game listed in the second paragraph? That seems like pretty important info for the first paragraph.
"The game's objective" is redundant, considering the article is talking about the game.
"and said it has an addictive factor." What does this mean, exactly?
We don't need to list all the platforms for its sequels. Just saying "it was followed by series of sequels and ports for other consoles".
"HD remastered version" can just be "HD remaster"

Overall, this makes me pretty concerned about the rest of the article. I haven't looked at it yet but I'm not very sure about it if the lead alone is very problematic. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 01:09, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: Unfortunately a lot of the copy edit wasnt that well off. Theres some questionable sentences or rewording. copyediting isnt my forté.

But other than just some sentence structure, I hope you find that this is something that can be worked into a GA quickly.

I'm willing to copy edit the article myself. I will have to do it day after tomorrow. Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 06:00, 1 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: i wouldn't call Lumines his debut work. as he's been making games for Sega prior. The original sentence was supposed to highlight that it was the first game he made (For Q Entertainment) as he was one of the founders of the company.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 17:43, 2 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Blue Pumpkin Pie Right now I'll turn towards the Reception, as I feel that's where the biggest issues with this page lie.

I don't understand the lack of a proper review box template. Right now it's just a bunch of Metacritic and GameRankings score (the GameRankings scores can also probably just be removed, since we don't really need two aggregator websites for one title).
Another issue with the reception itself is that it's pretty poorly-written. It's just a generic, boring laundry list of "[x] said [y]", "GameSpot said this and IGN said that". That's not how reception is supposed to be written, it should be weaved together into sentences that flow well. A good example is (not to toot my own horn, obviously) Ace Combat 2, as it connects reviewer's comments into sentences and does it well.
Ref 49 should include Destructoid, as it's not listed
"Lumines Remastered was received positive reviews" needs to be fixed, not grammatically correct
The bit about the exploit being discovered is too long, should probably be shortened to something along the lines of "an exploit discovered in 2007 that allowed for custom firmware to be installed boosted sales of the game by over 6,000%".
Lots of the comments don't have the titles of specific games italicized, specifically Lumines and Tetris.

Overall, this makes me very wishy-washy on the article itself. This is the largest section of the entire page, and it requires a lot of work to fix. I'm not gonna fail this quite yet, but I'd urge you to have somebody other than you copyedit this page. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 17:10, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47:I did make an official request a copyedit, and this is the result we got.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 17:32, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just looked through the edit history and noticed. Looks like the person didn't do a very good job it (no offense on their behalf), so I'd probably try requesting it again. I'd do it myself but I don't feel I'm up for the task... Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 20:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Namcokid47, per a request from the nominator on my talk page, I tried a copyedit of my own based on the suggestions on this page and my own observations. Then I saw the sheer scale of this article, and with my own work on Vanillaware and life outside Wikipedia at the moment I can't dedicate the time needed to straighten this article out. I've tried, but really can't dedicate the necessary time. Personally, I think it needs a total rewrite more than a copyedit, which can't be done within the confines of a GA review. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:18, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

After reading over the gameplay and development sections, I'd also agree with ProtoDrake on having this article be completely rewritten. @Blue Pumpkin Pie:, if it's okay with you, I'm suggesting that this review be closed so that you're able to redo this article and make it up to snuff for the GA criteria. Once that's taken care of, I'll gladly give it another review. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 21:21, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. If it needs more attention than a few days, you can close it out.21:51, 23 January 2020 (UTC)

I do feel pretty bad about closing this, as I know this review has taken such a long time and you've put a great deal into working on this, but I feel this is the best way to handle this. Once you feel this article meets the criteria and you've fixed the things I've brought up, nominate it again and I'll take a look at it. For now though, I'll give you a few days to rework some of this stuff and see where that takes this review. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 22:39, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well my current concern is that i get someone else to assist. i trusted another editor to copy-edit and did a poor job (not Protodrake). So i'll have to look for another trusted editor to get it to GA.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 22:44, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Popcornduff did a good job at copyediting Galaga when I was nominating that for GA, maybe you can ask them? Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 22:46, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He may deny, as we had previous debate in Jet Set Radio, but i'll ask.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 22:57, 23 January 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Pumpkin Pie:: How's this coming along? Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 05:30, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: I've been having more free time to improving it. Trying to move all the comparisons to Tetris / Bejeweled into a single paragraph and see if i can summarize the more similar statements. Also looking into seeing if i can fix some of the reviews to "Reviewer X said statement Y" and combining the more similar ideas. The biggest challenge for me is creating a more detailed vg review template because of the remastered version is multiplatform.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 15:47, 13 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: I believe I did all the copy-editing I could do on my own. Any bigger issues I haven't addressed would most likely need the assistance of another editor. If there are minor issues that can be addressed quickly or if I introduced a new problem with my most recent edits, let me know, and I can always go back and fix it. Some of the reviews were really cut and dry with just a brief description of the game modes and a final summary. So sorry if you need more detailed description of some of those reviews. I also try not to highlight a negative if the overall review is positive.

I haven't given a full look over it yet, but it looks a lot better. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 23:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

One question I have is, should there be a separate vg review just for the remastered or should it all be in the same review box?Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 22:51, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

You can try to divide the one infobox that lists reviews for both the original and the remastered version. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 23:03, 18 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: i split the list, let me know what you think so far.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 14:21, 24 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Blue Pumpkin Pie:: I think it's looking a lot better now. I'd personally get rid of the GameRankings scores, since we already have ones from Metacritic and it's a bit pointless to have two aggregator websites listed. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 18:26, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: My main concern is that not all gamerankings score have migrated to Metacritic. As you can see that "Lumines Mobile" has a gamerankings score, but not a Metacritic. That's why i was hesitant to removing it.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 18:56, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think the ones that are already on Metacritic can be removed, and the ones that aren't can be kept. Other than that, I think this article is in good shape. Once that's done I'll pass it. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 22:49, 19 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Namcokid47: ok I have removed the GR scores that already come with MC scores.Blue Pumpkin Pie ^Chat ^Contribs 03:41, 20 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]