Talk:Wipeout (video game series)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 06:39, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one. Freikorp (talk) 06:39, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Is it reasonably well written?
Lead

I think you should avoid using brackets in prose unless you have to. "(formerly known as Psygnosis)" is an example of where you don't have to; the brackets could be replaced with just a comma.
Replaced with comma.JAG UAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"The series is later revived," - do you think you've used the right tense for this?
Oops. Fixed. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay

Neither of the sources at the end of the sentence containing the bracketed text "(mainly Goa trance, uplifting trance and big beat)" mentions any of these genres.
I've removed the mentions of those three in both the gameplay section and in the lead. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

What's the purpose of the bracketed text "(or "pick-ups")". Its clear from the wikilink Power-up what is being referred to. If "Pick-up" is how they are referred to in-game I suggest you specify that.
I think they're referred to as 'pick-ups' in-game, but I don't see the harm in just referring to it as power-ups as that seems to be a universal language. Removed JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"In most single race modes, securing second or third place will reward the player with a silver and bronze medal, respectively." - this footnote is great, but I don't see why you don't just put it directly into the prose.
Oh, that was a mistake! I have no idea how I did that? I didn't see that until now. I accidentally added two extra brackets at the end of the citation. Thanks for finding that, fixed. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"the ship and player in question will explode" - I think it would be more accurate to say "the ship in question will explode", as i'm sure rather than exploding themselves the player just suffers from the ship exploding :)
Haha, I agree that was badly worded. Corrected. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wipeout

You don't have a single inline citation in the first paragraph
Added a citation for the launch title claim. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wipeout 3

"The game also featured music from well-known British electronica artists, such as The Chemical Brothers, Orbital, and Propellerheads" - can you reword this to make it take into consideration that similar music/artists featured on the soundtrack of the first game. The sentence is very similar to the respective sentence for the first game. It doesn't take into consideration that the information there exists.
Reworded. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wipeout Fusion

"newly renamed Sony Studio Liverpool, formerly known as Psygnosis until 2001" - I think this is worded badly, as if the reader hadn't heard of Psygnosus until this point.
Removed the latter half of the sentence. Wipeout Fusion is the black sheep of the series and there really wasn't enough to mention here. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"the development team wanted to target Wipeout Fusion at an "older, savvier crowd" - can you give some indication of how they actually went about doing this?
Elaborated. They wanted to distinguish it from F-Zero, which some critics had compared it to (according to the source). JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"focusing on the feedback left by fans on the previous game, and improving on aspects where Studio Liverpool had thought they had previously failed." - one example of feedback and/or perceived failure would be of interest.
Elaborated. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Wipeout HD

This section does not mention that the controversial ads were later removed. Incidentally I only know this happened because I did the GAN for that article haha.
Ah, well spotted! Added. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Development

"(formerly known as Psygnosis prior to 2001)" - this has already been clarified to the reader.
Removed. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"(of which a beta version of Wipeout appeared in)" - this has also already been clarified to the reader. Perhaps you could reword both to simply acknowledge this, For example, "After the beta version of Wipout appeared in the film Hackers, ..."
Thanks, I went with your suggestion! JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"and a nightclub tour was initiated" - what does that mean?
Initiated seemed like a poor choice, so I rephrased it to ...was set up in order to help advertise the game. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"in order to stress that downloadable content does not have to be focused on small games" - I've already read this in the games section. Consider removing it from one of the two sections.
Removed in the development section. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

Is it customary to simply leave a 'Metacritic' row blank if it didn't receive a rating? I know for example that if a song does not chart in a particular territory it is customary to place a dash in the row rather than leave it blank.
I wasn't too sure as I've never seen it in a video game series article before, and there are only a few series GAs too. I've added a dash. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"IGN ranked it as the 13th best PlayStation game of all time" - what year did this happen?
2002. Fixed. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

"In addition, Wipeout 2097 also ranks as the third best PlayStation game of all time at GameRankings". Firstly, I'm not seeing this in the source provided. Secondly, is this information liable to change in the future? If so, perhaps clarify "as of 2017".
I strongly doubt that it will change in the future, unless a major publication reviews an old game which seems unlikely. Or at least I've never seen that happen before! And I've added the correct link this time, but it turns out that it's the joint fourth highest ranked. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Considering the games have been so well received, are you absolutely certain they have not been nominated for any other notable awards?
This always shocks me but I have never seen it win an award, or at least get nominated for anything prestigious. Other than Wipeout HD and Wipeout 2097 I don't think any others have been nominated for something noteworthy to mention in an article... JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:
Just curious, why does the reference section have four columns? I don't have a problem with it, it's just very uncommon to see.
Someone keeps changing the columns of all the GAs I write. I think it only makes sense to split it to four columns if an article has lots of refs, which seems to be the case here JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Inconsistent reference formatting. For example ref 1 places the source in italics and wikilinked, while reference has no italics and no wikilink.
I should have fixed all of them throughout now. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

As always I do strongly recommend you archive all your online sources, thought this is not a GA requirement.
You'll forgive me if I want to skimp on that haha! I remember it taking me half an hour to do it last time and this article has over 100 refs! I will archive the more important ones if that's OK. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
Issues already pointed out in above comments.

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:
Not a huge deal, but I note from the template at the bottom that 3 physical Wiepout soundtracks were actually released. I can't see these mentioned anywhere in the article.
I can't find any reliable sources for the Pure soundtrack as I remember trying to look for them when I was writing the Wipeout Pure article. If nothing can be found I might end up nominating it for deletion... it would be cool to bring all of the games' soundtracks to GA though JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Additional concerns:
What is "Wipeout Zone"? It's in the external links, though unlike all the others there's no indication of what it is.
I didn't see that until now. Removed JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

There appears to be a broken template at the bottom of the article.
The template was deleted yesterday. Removed JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Copyvio detection shows one source goes above the 30% threshold: [1]
I've copyedited the sentences in concern. JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

On hold. Well done on the article overall Jaguar. Looking forward to you addressing the concerns. Freikorp (talk) 08:55, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for the review, Freikorp! This has been a great journey, and thank you for reviewing half of them! With this out of the way, Wipeout can finally become a Good Topic. Wow, I'm tired all of a sudden. I think a week's break is in order... JAGUAR 17:51, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I think that break is well deserved. I'm very happy to pass this now. :) Freikorp (talk) 22:59, 20 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]