Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Hyborian War/archive2

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Ealdgyth via FACBot (talk) 10 July 2020 [1].

Hyborian War

Nominator(s): Airborne84 (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Conan the Barbarian is the central figure in this sword and sorcery play-by-mail/email (PBM/PBEM) game which occurs in the Hyborian Age created by Robert E Howard. The game launched in 1985 and has been available for play for 35 years, one of the longest-surviving games of the PBM genre. I believe this would be the first PBM game to earn FA status.

This is a renomination for FA. It currently has GA status and Gog the Mild was kind enough to give it a peer review after I addressed comments from the first nomination. Airborne84 (talk) 01:05, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Image review—pass

Thanks for your review Buidhe! Much appreciated. Responses below.

File:Hyborian War advertisement from 1985, year of inception.jpg — If there's no copyright notice for it, it would be {{PD-US-1978-89}}

There is a copyright notice in the larger advertisement next to the image.

File:Example command sheet for a turn in the game Hyborian War with the Border Kingdom.gif and File:Hyborian War command sheet invasion email example, "Battle Orders For Battle ,1 in Xachotl".gif could be considered {{PD-text}}, they are probably below the threshold of originality

I'm happy to change the tag to {{PD-text}}; but, as Shem and (probably) Xachotl within the image are terms from Robert E. Howard's works which Cabinet Entertainment still asserts copyright to, does that cause issues with the tag change?

The issue is that if the sheet is above the threshold of originality, the way you have it displayed won't be legible to readers so I don't see how FUR is met. b uidhe 03:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I'll defer to your judgement on the threshold of originality. If you feel that {{PD-text}} is appropriate in this case, I'm happy to apply it. I just don't have the relevant experience. If unclear, I can upload a more readable image of appropriately larger size with {{non-free no reduce}} tag. Please advise what makes the most sense. Thanks.

I will upload a higher-resolution image with {{non-free no reduce}} tag. (Done)

File:Hyborian Age map based on a map prepared by Robert E. Howard.jpg—I'm not satisfied with the FUR. The image is too small to read country names, and encyclopedic purpose is adequately shown by text.

I had the same concern, thank you. I'm not an image expert. I propose to upload a larger version (as small as possible that allows reading country names), with an accompanying {{non-free no reduce}} tag. Will that work?

I have uploaded a larger version of the map with a {{non-free no reduce}} tag. The image should be of adequate size now to read the country names, but not so large, I think, that a passing admin would feel the need to reduce the image size.

File:Small cutaway, low-res portion of the Hyborian War game map.jpg—I am not really satisfied with the FUR, "Difficult with text to illustrate how the game breaks up the Hyborian Age map into player and non-player kingdoms with accompanying land provinces and seazones". First, it's not obvious to me which are player and non-player kingdoms. Second, this looks very similar to many similar game maps which readers are likely already familiar with, so I don't see how contextual significance is met.

Great comment, thanks. I updated the image's legend to identify which kingdoms are non-player kingdoms. And you are right, the rationale was inadequate. I updated it to highlight why this map is different than existing Hyborian Age maps (esp. province size and scale). Please advise if it still needs adjusting.

File:Set Piece Battle (Version 3) example in Hyborian War between the Border Kingdom and Brythunia.gif I am not persuaded by the FUR; the image is not enhancing my understanding of the game. There is not enough in-text commentary for contexual significance. b uidhe 03:31, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I added some text in the main body to on battle frontage and terrain, pointing to the image. I also did what I intended in the first place, but did not, which was to link the battle orders image to this resulting image. It's not an exact translation (I couldn't get RSI to upload some images with free-use licenses), but it's close enough to show that the orders from one image results in a configuration on the battlefield in this image. Updated the FUR. Please advise if I missed something or anything is otherwise inadequate. Thanks.

@Nikkimaria: would you mind taking a look at this? I admit I'm not the most familiar with FURs for video-game related articles so could use input, eg. if multiple maps can be justified. Thanks! b uidhe 23:44, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

As a general rule, the more non-free media included the stronger the FUR should be for each. In this case there are quite a few non-free images, and in my opinion the FUR for the second map (File:Small_cutaway,_low-res_portion_of_the_Hyborian_War_game_map.jpg) is not strong enough to support its inclusion. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:49, 16 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for weighing in Nikkimaria. My concern in this case is that the second, smaller cutaway map shows a portion of the Hyborian War game map with provinces which are one of the three elements of gameplay. None of the maps of the Hyborian Age do that, including the first map in this article. I propose that the main map is necessary to show the scope and scale of the broader game setting, while the second map highlights a very small portion of the RSI game map to visually show the reader what the first cannot: the scale of the province or seazone—the single geographic element of gameplay (with the other elements being troops and characters). Again, if it's a showstopper, I'll remove the second image, but I think it will reduce to some degree the encyclopedic value of the article for the reader. Please advise and thanks again. Airborne84 (talk) 01:28, 17 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Update on image issues—Buidhe

Thank you for your work on this Buidhe—it's probably more of your time spent than the average nomination and I appreciate it.

Header image: This FUR seems weak to me, as advertising isn't the best way to identify the subject. (The actual image content is not discussed in the text and the "battle" visual depicted does not occur in gameply, am I correct?) Is there no free illustration that could serve this purpose? For example, what does the actual product look like and is it below threshold of originality?

Unfortunately, there is no box or other product associated with the game. Hyborian War is similar to other play-by-mail games in its general lack of graphics and images. The "setup" is the printed game rules and the game map which can be seen here in its entirety. There are some images/sketches on the individual country startup sheet covers, but they have a copyright notice on each, are very narrow in scope, and generally aren't appropriate for a lede image, IMO. For a long time, the lede image I used was just the simple name "Hyborian War" until I came across this early advertisement and I said "finally, an image that shows exactly what this game is about". It's stated in the lede and in the main text: "A central focus of the game is conquest and expansion through military action and diplomacy." It is taken from an advertisement, but it perfectly shows the central focus of the game, while highlighting the game's central character, within the Hyborian Age setting. No free existing image that I know of will do so. I strongly recommend retaining.

FUR states "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding." Since this is an advertising image not a cover, and it would be possible to play the game without ever seeing the ad, I just don't see how its omission would be significantly detrimental to the reader's understing of the game. b uidhe 23:35, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Buidhe. I'd say that's due to a failure on my part to adequately link the image to the game in the lede. The lede now says "A central focus of the game is conquest and expansion through military action and diplomacy." I could add after that in the lede the passage from gameplay that says "Military activities such as raids and invasions figure prominently." That's a clear link to the image. Would that help? The gameplay section in the main text also covers the military activities in more detail. Having played the game, military activities (raids and invasions) dominate gameplay (as the name suggests). I can replace with an image of the text "Hyborian War", for example, but this is the single best image I have found that shows the central focus of the game. Airborne84 (talk) 00:16, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Buidhe, I replaced the lede image. Can you check the new one for acceptability? Thank you for your time. Airborne84 (talk) 02:41, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That is an acceptable non free logo. Passing b uidhe 02:45, 25 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The two text-only images are below threshold of originality and have been tagged as {{PD-text}}

No issue.

Were you talking about this image as well Buidhe?

Two maps: I agree with Nikkimaria above, to comply with NFCC we should pick the one that is most valuable and remove the other one. You can use {{external media}} so that a reader can click through to it, assuming it's hosted by a non-violating website.

Agreed. Perhaps in the future the company will release their game map with a free license to allow its use here to show the province details. I'll remove the second map. Thanks. (Done)

File:Set Piece Battle (Version 3) example in Hyborian War between the Border Kingdom and Brythunia.gif I think this should be removed for insufficient contextual significance, as although set piece battles are briefly mentioned in text, the previous text-only image already shows this aspect. I don't think NFCC#1 or NFCC#8 is met in this case.

OK. This was in response to the previous nomination where a reviewer suggested something along these lines. However, I agree there is some redundancy. If there is concern from other reviewers, I think there is room for using a different image that shows an open field battle or a set piece battle that is underway so there isn't overlap with the other image. Image removed. Again, thanks for the careful look here. Airborne84 (talk) 00:03, 18 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Buidhe, anticipating that another editor might note that I haven't accounted for all the points from the first nomination now, with the removal of the images, I've added another image that doesn't overlap quite so much with the set piece battle orders sheet. Would you mind checking it out? Much appreciated. Airborne84 (talk) 23:38, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It's possible that these types of images are copyrighted by the player and not the company, since they are the result of the player's ideas and commands. The company's computer just processes them and prints them out. However, I am not the expert and went with the conservative route. Airborne84 (talk) 23:42, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

That's an improvement, but not enough imo because "open field" is only mentioned once in the article text—not the kind of extended discussion that could support an additional non free file. The copyrightable parts of this image are the individual illustrated figures, which presumably were created by the company. b uidhe 23:43, 20 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, thanks. Removed. Airborne84 (talk) 04:22, 21 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Other comments

Quoteboxes are discouraged because they can unduly emphasize one person's statement. These ones are unnecessary and distracting. All of them would be better integrated into the text. b uidhe 03:31, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough. They are moved into footnotes. Unless you feel that it's a show-stopper, I would like to keep the quotebox with RSI's description of Cimmeria, Conan's homeland. I don't think it falls into the category of emphasizing a person's statement as you mentioned. Airborne84 (talk) 22:38, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It looks like advertising to me and also violates MOS:layout because it sandwiches the images. Why can't it be integrated into text? "RSI described Cimmeria, Conan's homeland as ..." b uidhe 03:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Forgot about the WP:Sandwich issue. Thanks.

I saw the citation needed tag on the topic sentence about mixed reviews in the late 1980s. I don't have a source for the sentence. Was aiming for a reasonable topic sentence for a paragraph which also provided a less than glowing side of the game and company to balance the positives and ensure NPOV. Am open to a recommendation here. Thanks. Airborne84 (talk) 23:02, 14 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I would say it is better just to remove the sentence and let the reader evaluate the reviews. b uidhe 03:22, 15 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done. Thanks.

Support from Hurricane Noah

I am not exactly familiar with game articles, but it looks like the article has everything it needs. I'm going to support promotion to FA based on the quality of the prose. Noah^Talk 22:24, 22 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Noah. I can't take credit for the prose though. That would go to Gog the Mild and Smuckola for copyediting my blunt attempts at stitching words together into a readable product. Greatly appreciate the review. Airborne84 (talk) 00:04, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Ichthyovenator

A very well-written and comprehensive article! Just a couple of thoughts:

Thanks for weighing in!

~~I wonder if the order of the two subsections under "play-by-mail genre" should be reversed so that a general overview of what it is comes first. Not a requirement but maybe something to think over.~~

I think that would work fine as well. I'm not attached to either way. The real expert in this area is Gog the Mild though and I'd value his input as a third opinion. Gog the Mild, do you have thoughts on this?

No feedback either way, so went ahead and made the switch Ichthyovenator. I think this works well. Image and new transition to setting seem fine. Also reworked the first "spell-out" of "play-by-mail game" as (PBM) between the two paragraphs from the reversal. Thanks! Airborne84 (talk) 19:56, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

This wasn't a requirement either way, I just found it helpful since I personally had no prior knowledge of what PBM games were. Good job with this! Supporting now. Ichthyovenator (talk) 20:36, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I think it's an improvement then. Much appreciated!

~~Robert E. Howard is linked first under "development" rather than when his name first appears, under "setting".~~

Nice catch. Fixed.

"Magic is also part of the Hyborian Age, with wizards wielding great, but not irresistible, power" - is "irresistible" the best word here? I understand what is being conveyed but isn't "irresistible" more like "appealing" or "alluring" rather than the opposite of defeatable?

Fair enough. Changed to "overwhelming". Think that reflects the source without the added connotations. Let me know if this doesn't work.

"Overwhelming" fits well :) Ichthyovenator (talk) 22:54, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

~~"The central figure of the Hyborian Age is Conan of Cimmeria" - under setting; this is the first mention of Conan in the text so should probably be linked to Conan the Barbarian.~~

Again, nice catch. Fixed. Not sure how I missed that one.... Airborne84 (talk) 21:00, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ichthyovenator (talk) 13:50, 23 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support Comments by Gog the Mild

Nb, it is my intention to claim points in the WikiCup for one review for the combination of this review, the source review, and the citation spot check.

Hi Ichthyovenator. I reviewed this at GAN, copy edited it for GoCE and helped Airborne84 a fair bit in getting it ready for FAC, see here, so I am pretty sure that I will be supporting. Having been so close to the article for three months, and nothing from this genre having appeared at FAC before, I wanted to get some fresh eyes on it before commenting myself.

@FAC coordinators: you may also like to note that while I had not come across Hyborian War before seeing it at GAN, in my misspent youth I played numerous PBM games and had several articles and reviews published in Flagship, the UK PBM magazine, which probably makes me as much of a subject expert as you are likely to get. I also have a passing acquaintance with the Conan universe and own a couple of Howard's books. As such the article gives an accurate account of how PBM works/worked and the game mechanics seem at one with those I was familiar with. I am holding myself in readiness to carry out a source review and/or a first FAC spotcheck if required. Gog the Mild (talk) 10:13, 24 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

For the avoidance of doubt I am formally supporting. I believe the article to be comprehensive as regards the topic and to reasonably put it in context. It includes contributions from all of the sources or types of sources I would expect and the prose is IMO up to FA level. (Warning: I did a fair bit of copy editing, so take this opinion with a pinch of salt as I may be judging my own input to an extent.) It is soundly structured, stays focused, and has a helpful use of images. I do not see any - non-source - areas for improvement. Gog the Mild (talk) 12:37, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SG review

Really appreciate you taking the time to review this SandyGeorgia! Airborne84 (talk) 05:12, 30 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I cannot get this source to open, but it looks like Terrablood is listed as the author, but publisher is missing??

Terrablood. "Terrablood's PBM Archives: Section One – Kingdom Reports for Hyborian War". Retrieved January 16, 2020. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:21, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The archives in External links for Terrablood will not open either ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:22, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed the source and used a different reference. I adjusted that source in External links; it should work now. (Also removed two of the External links as they are in the Refs and are redundant.)

In the image caption, should we say, “Map of the Hyborian Age”? Can an age be mapped? Or is it better, map of countries during the Hyborian Age? (I dunno ... ) SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to "Map of Hyborian Age kingdoms." Please advise if that doesn't work.

External jumps do not belong in Notes, I don’t think?

RSI also maintains a complete set of Hyborian War rules online at Main Rules. According to A. Kaviraj, cover artist for Suspense and Decision issue #1 (November 2013), "Reading through the rules of Hyborian War is a mind-blowing experience."[35]
According to Robert Paquin, the Road of Kings website is the largest Hyborian War collaboration website, offering various forums for players to discuss gameplay as well as other topics.[52] SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Removed the external jumps.

This statement is sourced to a forum which requires log in:

These websites allow players to organize games of specific formats (such as no contact between players)[69]

Could you provide a quote of what The source provided there, to help convince me this is a reliable source for the statement? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:36, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The best, most concise quote is probably "This will be a regular-speed game, total privacy (no contact, no posting)." The context is that the website administrator who posted that works directly with Reality Simulations, Inc. (RSI). The website admin puts a game together on the Road of Kings website, advertising the rules (as in the no-contact example noted), and once 36 players are signed up, sends the player information and their RSI account numbers to RSI which then begins the game. (RSI actually sends out a promotional flyer for the Road of Kings website and the Grimfinger website in each game setup.) I slightly adjusted the wording though because in this case it's not the players organizing the game, it's the website admin. It now reads: "These websites allow the organization of specifically-formatted games (such as no contact between players)".

Gog the Mild is a competent copyeditor, but he may not have reviewed the image captions ... I am having all sorts of ce issues with this image caption, which Gog might better address ...

Thank you Sandy. Indeed, looking through my notes I seem to have missed the captions. Sloppy of me and thanks for the prompt. I'll get on to it. Gog the Mild (talk) 15:47, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am now happy with the image captions. Gog the Mild (talk) 22:11, 1 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Here, the player can decide how to array characters and troops and what tactics to employ during the battle, including magic.

What does “here” add? Why not “choose battle tactics”. Array? I leave this to you all since I am neither a gamer nor a good copyeditor, but that sentence is convoluted. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:52, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It was indeed convoluted. I like your suggestion, so changed to the simple "Orders allow players to choose battle tactics."

What is the source for Skills required in the infobox? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 12:54, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

None other than they are general skills required for a game of this type. Since no direct source, I removed that entry in the infobox.

A lot of information about developers is mentioned only in the infobox—not the article—and is unsourced. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I've removed some of the developers that are sourceable to the RSI website, but are otherwise probably not notable. I added the map illustrator Liz Danforth to the main text as she appears to be notable across various works in the gaming community, and all developers in the infobox have sources in the main text now.

It is set within the Hyborian Age world of Conan the Barbarian created by Robert E. Howard.

Hyborian Age is modifying world, which is odd and seems to call for a hyphen, which is odder. And Age is a period. How about ...

It is set during the Hyborian Age in the world of Conan ... ? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:20, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Well put. I went with your suggestion. Thanks.

The game has been continuously available for worldwide play since its inception ...

What is “worldwide” adding here? Isn’t it obvious that anyone with access to mail or internet can play? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:24, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

In this case it's consequential that the game is accessible worldwide as the email option is only available "in" to RSI, but not "out". I.e., players can email turn orders to RSI, but RSI sends all turn results by postal mail to players, apparently due to a contractual constraint. Between a slower 28-day turnaround game option and an extra Australia office, RSI has been able to offer the game worldwide. IMO, for a game with a postal play-by-mail aspect, worldwide access is noteworthy. I clarified this in the gameplay section—that RSI mails all turn results by postal mail.

It uses a computer program to simultaneously adjudicate player ...

What is simultaneous with what? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:27, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

It adjudicates player orders at the same time as other player orders. That makes it a closed-end game where everyone starts at the same time. Some games are never-ending and the company adjudicates player orders whenever they are received; players can enter and leave at any time—an open-ended game. Since that is way too much nuance for the lead, I just deleted "simultaneous" from the sentence: "It uses a computer program to adjudicate player orders."

Although it still relies on postal mail or email ...

What does “still” add? Redundant? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:29, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Deleted "still"

The word “various” is overused in the lead, including twice in one sentence. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:31, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Removed various instances. :)

The game's setting is in Robert E. Howard's Hyborian Age ...

Again, confused how a time period is being used. Should this be ...

The game is set during Robert ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed. Adjusted as you suggested.

Although some games have long since been played by mail, such as chess and Go, and more recently Diplomacy, the professional PBM industry began in 1970 when Flying Buffalo Inc. launched its first multi-player PBM game, Nuclear Destruction, in the United States.[11]

Sentence needs to be disentangled ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 14:06, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Disentangled. (Split into two sentences and tweaked.)

Generally, some of my prose queries could be because I am not a gamer, but based on this look at the lead only, I suggest another pass with Gog the Mild, and then please leave a note on my user talk to continue reviewing. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:35, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

On the numbers in the Reception and legacy section, see MOS:HASH. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 16:20, 29 June 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Done! Also scrubbed the article for WP:MOSNUM and NBSP formatting as you noted in your edit summaries.

Direct quote in the lead which is uncited, and content not contained in the body ... lead should summarize body, and all direct quotes require citation.

Gameplay is multifaceted and has been described as "marvelously complex". SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:49, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Added the quote in the main text with inline cite.

There is a problem with RSI links in citations. RSI 1985 goes nowhere, and one RSI 2020 goes to Setup rules, which is 1985 copyright, so where does the 2020 come from? And other 2020 link to pages that have no date, so what is 2020? These dates should reflect date of publication, pls check all ... SandyGeorgia (Talk) 02:53, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed all. Either removed date where there is none, or added the correct date where there is.

The word various is used six times in the article, and is a hopelessly unhelpful word ... might you review those instances with Gog the Mild, attempting to vary the wording with something more specific? One example of how the word Various tells us nothing:

They can also collaborate through various means to progress their game goals.

Better to either drop it, or say what those means are ... pls review all instances. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:03, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed. "Various" removed, and means are explained whenever mentioned in the article.

Next year, this statement becomes inaccurate:

The game has had an active player base for 35 years.

Avoid making statements that become dated, see MOS:CURRENT. ... has had an active player base since 1985. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:07, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Changed to: "had an active player base since 1985"

With these changes, I think you will be good to go. Because I know zilch, zero, nothing about gaming, I do not feel qualified to support, but I do not see anything holding you up once the changes above are complete. Per Gog’s knowledge of the game, I trust the article is comprehensive. Sorry for all the typos, brevity, and lack of italics ... iPad typing (sucks). SandyGeorgia (Talk) 03:40, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Sandy. Yep, the article is comprehensive so far as I am concerned. You probably noticed that, following the advice of a well known Wikipedian whose name temporarily escapes me, I suggested a swift withdrawal when this was first nominated for further background and context to be developed off-FAC. To my mind this has been done. Of course, I am just one editor, there is no similar article to act as guidence and I am probably a bit close. My major concern was how comprehensible the jargon and cant would be to a non-gamer. Apparently reasonably, and thanks for your pointing out various areas where this and the prose generally could be improved. (PS I have removed all instances of "various".) Gog the Mild (talk) 10:05, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Yep ... I saw my role as an independent reviewer to make sure it made sense to a non-gamer. Best, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:26, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

PS, did you all check in with Ealdgyth as she requested in the first FAC? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 13:32, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

He did but I've been swamped outside of wiki and did not have time to get back to him. It's on my talk page. Mea culpa for not even replying there, sorry! --Ealdgyth (talk) 13:35, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

SandyGeorgia, I think I've addressed your remaining comments above (please advise if not). Greatly appreciate the review!! The article is better for it.

Ealdgyth, no problem at all! I believe I adequately addressed SandyGeorgia's last remaining comments. The article should be ready for you now! :) Airborne84 (talk) 16:01, 2 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I did check my available sources and nothing mentioned this game. I won't have time for a full review, unfortunately. --Ealdgyth (talk) 15:48, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I am satisfied, and with the Fisch and Gog reviewing, am more reassured that the article is comprehensive. I would be a support if I knew more of the topic. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 18:00, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you SandyGeorgia. Greatly appreciate your time. And Ealdgyth, appreciate you checking your sources! Airborne84 (talk) 21:56, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Ruhrfisch

It has been several years since I reviewed at FAC, so I am mostly going to comment on the prose. This seems well done, but there are a few places where I think more context could be provided (if there are sources to support it). I have played Dungeons and Dragons (decades ago) and currently am playing Axis and Allies online, but have never played a game by mail like this. - Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:55, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch, thanks! Standing by. Airborne84 (talk) 15:15, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Really appreciate the review!! Thanks for your time on this. Airborne84 (talk) 17:23, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

The first sentence of the second paragraph (The game is set during Robert E. Howard's Hyborian Age within the heroic fantasy genre, also known as sword and sorcery.) is mostly a rephrasing of the second sentence of the 1st paragraph It is set during the Hyborian Age in the world of Conan the Barbarian created by Robert E. Howard. Perhaps the second paragraph could start with something like The game is set within the heroic fantasy genre, also known as sword and sorcery.?

Done!

I think the lead should mention the 36 playable kingdoms of three different sizes, each with different criteria for winning, and not just Conan wandering around ;-)

Excellent catch, thanks. Done!

Play-by-mail game overview

Would this sentence Turnaround time is how long a player has to prepare and submit "orders" and the company has to process them and send turn results.[3] be clearer as something like Turnaround time is how long a player has to prepare and submit "orders" (moves and changes to make in the game) and the company has to process them and send back turn results.[3]

I really appreciate this comment. I wrestled with whether this sentence was clear to the average reader. Reworded as you suggested.

Somewhere later in the article it should be made clear if Hyborian War is an open ended or a closed end game (or can be either, depending).

Closed end. Done! I did this in PBM Game overview.

History

Since this section is about the PBM genre, it seems odd to have it end in the 1980s. Would this be a place to add a sentence or two on "play by email" developing later, the rise and fall of magazines devoted to PBM, and how the field in general is less popular than it once was?

Done!

Setting

I think adding a sentence or two here would help Provide context to the reader. A sentence on the Conan stories themselves at the start would give context for those less familiar with Conan's history, something like "Howard published 17 Conan the Barbarian stories before his 1936 death, with several stories and fragments published after." I also think it is worth mentioning the Conan movies, which came out in 1982 and 1984 (a few years before the game debuted). Even if there is not a source linking the movies to the games, I still think it can be mentioned (and the reader can draw their own inferences).

Done. I wasn't able to give an exact number. One RS gives 400 stories and 500 poems written overall, but doesn't parse them between pre and post death or Conan vs. non-Conan stories. I think I was able to give reasonable context for the average reader though. Please advise if not.

Is there anything that can be cited / said on how the Conan character and Hyborian setting are licensed for use in this game? Could be here or later in Development.

I stated in a footnote in Development that game materials are marked as Copyright 1985 by Conan Properties Inc. There is nothing more detailed than that to cite, unfortunately. While that means RSI must have a license from 1985 that's probably renewed periodically, I think it would be a stretch to say that.

Gameplay

This seems to be a reference to one of the non-free images that were removed during FAC The eight-unit vertical frontage in the battle-order image example represents a battle occurring in open, tundra, or oasis terrain.[46]

It points to the image in the section. The "front line" for the troops in the image is at the top of the image, not the left or right. I added the words "numbered" and "Xachotl" in the text so now it reads "The eight-unit numbered vertical frontage in the Xachotl battle-order image example". If you think another way of phrasing it is better, please advise.

I thought this section was well done and have a pretty clear idea of the general outlines of the game and how it is played. I still have some questions that could probably be answered here or in notes. Is the only cost to play the varying costs per turn (or is there a registration or set up fee, or do you have to buy the authorized Hyborian War starter kit or map or player's manual? I know there can be up to 36 kingdoms active in a game, but can someone play as more than one kingdom in the same game? Do games need all 36 players to begin or can a game start with fewer players (and if so, does the computer play the remaining kingdoms, or take them over if a player drops out)? At any given time, are there multiple games ongoing? (I assume so).

Done—mostly. Two areas I couldn't address: (1) RSI certainly could start a game with less than 36 players, but doesn't say if it actually does so in sources, and (2) someone playing more than one kingdom in a single game. The answer is emphatically no. But I can't find a source stating it on RSI's webpage or elsewhere. I think it's implied in how hard they make it to play a "friends" game, but it's not outright stated that I can find. I address the rest of these in a footnote.

Game analysis

Any idea how long it took to reach the first 200 games played? The article could at least give the year Cote's analysis was published (1994), as well as the analysis of over 400 games (2020).

Done. I went with 21st century for the latter since it's unclear exactly when the second list was published. It was retrieved in 2020.

Development

Any idea when Schoonover began developing the game?

Unfortunately, this doesn't appear in the sources.

Are the programming changes essentially rule changes? Or just new ways for the computer to process everyone's moves?

This again is not described in the sources. It's unfortunate as it would be good to add.

When I first read the article I thought this section might work better earlier (after Setting, perhaps), but since it refers to developments throughout the history of the game, I think it is fine where it is.

OK, this appears to follow the structure of FA-level video games as well (can't compare to FA PBMs as none exist)

I prefer "an homage"

Done.

Reception and legacy

I would move the issue number to the footnote here, so instead of It was reviewed in the 1987 issue No. 77 of Space Gamer/Fantasy Gamer, with... I would make it something like It was reviewed in 1987 in Space Gamer/Fantasy Gamer, with...'

Done.

In Note i, please use ordinal forms for the ratings / ranks, so In the Paper Mayhem Game Ratings as of March 30, 1989, readers rated Hyborian War 37th of 44 games.[17] In the Jan/Feb 1990 issue of Paper Mayhem, readers rated Hyborian War 42nd of 53 games.[18]

Done.

Can Robert Paquin breifly be given context - reviewer?

Done.

Hope this helps, overall well done and intend to support once these issues are addressed. - Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:21, 4 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Ruhrfisch. Really appreciate your review on this. Please advise if I addressed your comments adequately above. Happy to engage further as needed. Thanks for your time. Airborne84 (talk) 06:16, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for all the edits and glad my comments were helpful. I still have two minor quibbles and a suggestion.

Per WP:CITELEAD, direct quotations in the lead need to be cited with an inline reference, so "marvelously complex" needs a cite. Since the lead is a summary of the article, I do not think it needs to have citations for anything else.

Added inline citation to the quoted words in the lede.

I think per the MOS, sword and sorcery should be linked in the lead (first appearance)

Linked. Delinked second use.

I still find the reference to the battle-order image quite confusing ("The eight-unit numbered vertical frontage in the Xachotl battle-order image example represents a battle occurring in open, tundra, or oasis terrain.[58]"). I think this is in part because it is the only place in the article to use the phrases "battle-order" or "vertical frontage" and one of only two places to mention Xachotl, and the reference to the image is buried in a farily dense sentence filled with several unfamiliar words. Would something like this work better? "The order for a set piece battle pictured here shows eight units in columns, and represents a battle occurring in the provice of Xachotl in open, tundra, or oasis terrain.[58] "

I adopted your version. Thank you for the suggestion.

Feel free to edit away and hope this helps, - Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 18:13, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch thank you again for your review. Please advise if there are any remaining comments that need addressing. Airborne84 (talk) 23:57, 5 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

All of my concerns have been met and I am happy to support promotion to FA now. Please let me know if you need me for anything else here. - Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:02, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated! Airborne84 (talk) 02:27, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass

Cite 87 looks like either a duplication or an error.

It does look like a duplication, but the citations point to two different refs in the bibliography. One is Paper Mayhem issue No. 40 and the other is No. 45. The material appears on page 2 of both sources, adding to the appearance of a duplication.

Appreciate the source review! Airborne84 (talk) 23:36, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

D'oh! Gog the Mild (talk) 23:45, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The sources used all appear to me to be reliable. I am unable to find any other sources which would materially add to the content of the article. I found no unattributed close paraphrasing. Everything that I would expect to be cited, is. Gog the Mild (talk) 16:17, 6 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Citation spot check - pass

Note e is not, technically, cited.

Good catch on a late add, thanks. Cited.

You cite Grimfinger, 2020 twice; but the bibliography only has Grimfinger, 2006.

Fixed. Removed the 2006 date from the Grimfinger ref and inline citations as it points to an RSI copyright date.

Cite 1: check. But, "The source must be named in article text if the quotation is an opinion". So maybe 'Gameplay is multifaceted: the PBM commentator Mike Scheid described it as "marvelously complex".'?

Funny, I've been wondering since I put that in if attribution was required, but didn't see it noted anywhere. Now I know. I attributed as you suggested with a slight tweak in the main text vs. the lead to keep the latter concise unless you think it should be in the lead.

Sorry, but this is, SFAIAA. the only place in the MoS where italics are used for emphasis. So they really mean it. You could resolve it by removing the quote marks in the lead.

No issue. I attributed to Mike Scheid in the lead as in the main text. Thanks for pointing that out. Probably saved a {{by whom?}} tag getting plopped on the lead if it gets to TFA.

Cite 94: I struggle to see where this supports the text cited. Could you flag it up for me. (But Mosteller p. 53 comes close to supporting it.)

Is it the 21st century part? I'll assume so. It's cite 96 now because I added a couple, but I was partly pointing to this sentence on page 64: "Hyborian War has always enjoyed a good deal of loyalty from its player base". That's necessary but probably a bit insufficient to link to today. Its connection to today is his note of the "group of loyalists" creating fan websites to collaborate and store info. The article is also published in 2014, and the author uses the phrase at one point "that was then and this is now", so he's pointing to the 21st century. If it's something else or I'm talking about the wrong citation, please advise.

Yeah, I read all that, and I don't feel that it is strong enough to support what you have written. Have you looked at Mosteller p. 53 to see if that might support it, or a tweaked version of it?

Agreed, Mosteller p. 53 works fine with a wording adjustment. I changed it to: "RSI's Hyborian War continues to maintain a sizable player base into the 21st century." Please advise if any concerns.

Cite 69: couldn't check.

If you'd like any specific passages from this source, just let me know.

No, thanks.

Cite 67: check.
Cite 41 ii: check.
Cite 90: check.
Cite 37 a & b: check.
Cites 76 & 77: check.
Cite 8: check.
Cite 5: check.

OK. I'm happy. But there a couple of issues to sort out above. Gog the Mild (talk) 17:34, 7 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Gog the Mild. Much appreciated. Ready to reengage on the above as needed. Airborne84 (talk) 04:34, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Gog the Mild (talk) 12:09, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Adjustments made Gog the Mild. Please advise if these work. Thanks. Airborne84 (talk) 17:07, 8 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through.

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.