Talk:Super Mario World/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Canadian Paul 02:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will be reviewing this article in the near future, most likely tomorrow. Canadian Paul 02:09, 15 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, here we go:

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/Fail:

Some comments:

File:Super mario world box.jpg has been tagged for image reduction based on the fair use guidelines. Please rectify this; WP:VGIMAGES may be helpful.
It would be nice to see Template:Vgrationale used for File:Supermarioworld map.PNG to organize and formalize the rationale.
While not a GA requirement, it would be nice to see some alt text per Wikipedia:Alternative text for images.
The URL for references #7 and #8 are identical, which appears to be a mistake.
Reference #9 requires a proper citation, using a citation template or something similar - right now it's just a URL and a description. This goes for reference #20 as well.
References #10 and #17 both cite the same larger source, but use different style of citation - this should be rectified for consistency.
References #12 and #15 are also identical, but this time I believe that it was intentional - they should be combined, with the more properly cited version used.
I'm not sure that external link #3 meets the criteria of Wikipedia:External links.
Under "Gameplay" - "In addition to the running and jumping moves found in past games, the player can float with the aid of special items and execute new types of jumps." - I know that overly-detailed gameplay information is to be avoided, but even as someone who has played the game a lot (albeit, ages ago) I'm not certain as to what "new types of jumps" are being referred to. Do you mean like the the spinning-smashing thing? Anyways, a quick example here may be beneficial.
Same section, I don't think that "(pictured left)" is necessary, as the caption should be sufficient to identify that segment of the game.
Same section, perhaps per WP:OBVIOUS but it is written that "The overworld map displays an overhead representation of the current world and has several paths leading from the world's entrance to a castle" - This is a little awkward because what a world is isn't really explained until later on. I'm not sure that there's anything that you can really do about this, but it's something to think about if you can fix it.
Same section, "the first seven worlds feature an airship controlled by one of the Koopalings, while the player battles Bowser in his castle in the eighth world." - Don't they fight the bosses in fortresses, not airships? Also, I think that there were only seven worlds if you don't count the bonus stages (and if you do, that's still nine, at least according to the Super Mario Wiki). Looks like maybe this was copied from Super Mario Bros. 3.
Same section, "The new suite in the game is the cape feather, gives Mario a cape and allows him to fly for a short period of time." - Other than the fact that I think that this is supposed to be "suit", there's a word missing here (feather, which gives?).
Under "Plot", while it's not necessary to go into excessive detailed, it would be nice to mention a fact or two about the characters so that those who aren't familiar with the series (theoretically, they could exist!) will know what you're talking about. You already mention in the previous section that Mario and Luigi are the protagonists, for example, but even writing "After saving the Mushroom Kingdom, plumbers Mario and Luigi..." would give it a little extra context. The section itself is a bit iffy on the prose, but I'm going to make a few those fixes myself and you can let me know what you think of them.
Under "Re-releases" - "but the biggest alteration" - Here I feel that "most noticeable" would be a more neutral word, but both are kind of iffy, so I'm open to argument on this one.
Same section, "Super Mario World was one of the first games to be announced for the Wii's Virtual Console with a cost of 800 Wii Points." - This reads as if it was the first game to be announced with that particular cost, rather than overall; a little bit of reworking is necessary here.
Under "Music" - "...using only an electronic keyboard. Most of the music used..." - The double use of "using/used" consecutively is distracting to the flow... could one of these instances be replaced with another word?
Under "Impact", two-sentence paragraphs should generally be avoided, as they often disrupt the flow - if there's nothing else to say on the contemporary reaction (which I find somewhat surprising), then it should be combined with the paragraph below.
Same section, second paragraph - "The game has also been retroactively well-received." - I'm not sure that something can be "retroactively well-received"; even if it can be done, it sounds awkward. Something like "retroactively praised" might be better, but that sounds a little POVish so perhaps you can come up with something better.
Same paragraph - "The game was ranked as the fourth best game in the series by ScrewAttack." - It should be made clear which series that it is the fourth-best in (even if it's per WP:OBVIOUS).
Under "Legacy" - "Super Mario World is regarded as the last original television series related to the media franchise" - Aside from the question of "by whom?", this seems like the type of statement that requires a citation.
The lead should not introduce facts that are not present in the body of the article (particularly when they are uncited!) and there is some development information in the lead that is not present in the actual section.

To allow for these changes to be made I am placing the article on hold for a period of up to a week. I'm always open to discussion on any of the items, so if you think I'm wrong on something leave your thoughts here and we'll discuss. I'll be checking this page at least daily, unless something comes up, so you can be sure I'll notice any comments left here. Canadian Paul 02:16, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Excuse me but can you but the ones that are left down here it hurts my eyes to see so many lines. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 03:34, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do that now, let me look over the article. Out of curiosity though, why did you remove the only screen shot of gameplay? Canadian Paul 06:15, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Remaining items

~~Reference #8 requires a proper citation, using a citation template or something similar - right now it's just a URL, a description, and a retrieval date.~~
~~References #9 and #15 both cite the same larger source, but use different style of citation - this should be rectified for consistency.~~
~~I'm not sure that external link #3 meets the criteria of Wikipedia:External links.~~
Under "Gameplay", perhaps per WP:OBVIOUS but it is written that "The overworld map displays an overhead representation of the current world and has several paths leading from the world's entrance to a castle" - This is a little awkward because what a world is isn't really explained until later on. I'm not sure that there's anything that you can really do about this, but it's something to think about if you can fix it.
Under "Impact", first paragraph, you removed "retrospectively", but didn't add anything in its place, so now it's meaningless. Perhaps "The game continued to receive favorable reviews for many years" or something to highlight that not just contemporary reviewers thought it was good.
The lead should not introduce facts that are not present in the body of the article (particularly when they are uncited!) and there is some development information in the lead that is not present in the actual section.
~~I just noticed this the second time around, but Bowser links to a disambiguation page instead of the proper article.~~

Canadian Paul 06:32, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I do not want to look dumb but can you tell me xaclly what to do in the lead and gameplay. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 14:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Never mind about the gameplay one, I was just concerned that what a "world" isn't really discussed, but I suppose that shouldn't really be necessary and it would just clutter up the section anyways. As for the lead, you mention that:

"...the seventh game in the Super Mario series., released initially on November 21, 1990 in Japan and on August 13, 1991 in North America. Development was handled by Nintendo's Research & Development Team 4,..."

None of this information is present in the body of the article and most of it (the release dates and who handled the development) requires a citation when you do include it there. Also, I wanted to know why you removed the only screen shot of gameplay. Canadian Paul 15:54, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DONE. --Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 23:31, 16 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice work! I think that this article will need to be worked on even more if you want it to grow to A or FA class, but for now I believe that it can be passed as a Good Article, meeting all the criteria. So congratulations and thank you for all your hard work. Off to the next one for me! Canadian Paul 02:44, 17 April 2010 (UTC)[reply]