Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sonic Advance/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
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 archived by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 22:05, 15 February 2018 [1].

Sonic Advance

[edit]
Nominator(s): JOEBRO64 12:01, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello fine folks! This article is about a 2001 video game that Sega released for the Game Boy Advance. It is extremely notable for being the first original Sonic the Hedgehog released on a Nintendo gaming device. After rescuing it from being stuck in start-class for years, I bombarded it and, within a few days, got it up to GA-status. It has just undergone a copyedit by the GOCE and I now think it can stand among our best articles. Enjoy! JOEBRO64 12:01, 24 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Tintor2 (talk) 13:58, 24 December 2017 (UTC) I like this article but I think somethings could be further explained before becoming FA.[reply]

  • Reference 3 needs lines for the ISBN 9780970646866.
    • I'm a bit confused by what you mean by "lines". Can you be a bit more specific?
  • Can you add a more specific caption to the GameBoy Advance picture. Seems a bit pointless unless you add something "the console was chosen because ____" If not you could add a free image of Yuji Naka
    • I wasn't really able to find a specific reason why the GBA was chosen, so I changed it to the Yuji Naka picture.
  • Can sales be more specific? Like the game sold "1.21 million copies" but was it in the entire world or just in North America?
    • That's from the US alone, I've clarified this. The only source that provided worldwide sales was VGChartz, which is unreliable.
  • While many people know of Super Mario World's popularity, you could expand it a bit for newcomers like saying "compared them positively to Super Mario World (1990), a highly acclaimed video game"
    • Done.
  • Reference 17 needs translation, just go to the article and add "trans-title= TRANSLATED TITLE". Same thing writh reference 26
    • Done.

Other than I don't find other notable issues. Just ping me when you have solved and I'll give you my support. By the way, if you have free time one of these day, could you comment on my peer review here? It's Holidays season so take your take. Cheers.

@Tintor2: I've resolved all your concerns except for the ISBN one; I'm just a bit confused by what you mean. Thanks for reviewing! I'll take a look at your peer review soon. JOEBRO64 14:11, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I'll support. Good luck and Merry Christmas.Tintor2 (talk) 16:38, 25 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Aoba47
  • Please add ALT text for the image in the infobox.
    • It already does, it was just at the bottom of the infobox. I've moved it.
  • For this part (as they journey to save their homeland and stop Doctor Eggman from taking over the world), I am not sure what the difference is between “save their homeland” and “stop Doctor Eggman from taking over the world”. I think that you could remove the “save their homeland” part and preserve the same meaning.
    • Done.
  • For this part (The story follows Sonic, Tails, Knuckles, and Amy) in the lead, do you think that you should use their full names (i.e. Amy Rose, etc.)?
    • I didn't use their full names because it kinda bloats up the first paragraph and, in my opinion, is a bit harder to read since all the names are grouped together.
  • For this part (The game takes place over six levels called zones.), I would add a link for “levels”.
    • Done.
  • For this part (As the Sonic games released for the Dreamcast allowed players to download the Chao Garden minigame onto the VMU,), I would spell out “VMU”.
    • Done.
  • For this part (Sega announced Sonic Advance and two other GBA titles, ChuChu Rocket! and Puyo Puyo, on January 30, 2001), I would suggest adding a note to clarify that ChuChu Rocket! was rereleased on GBA in 2001, but it was originally released in 1999. Otherwise, it is a little confusing if someone clicks on the link to the game.
    • Done. I turned it into a footnote since it makes it easier to read.

Wonderful work with this article. Once all of my comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to promote this. If possible, I would greatly appreciate it if you could look through my FAC. Either way, have a wonderful rest of your day or night. Aoba47 (talk) 05:31, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Thank you for reviewing another one of my FACs! I've responded above. I'll comment at your FAC soon. Thanks again, and I hope you have a good holiday season. JOEBRO64 20:36, 27 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Image review:
ALT text is OK. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 18:45, 28 December 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Source review
  • Fn 23, what makes Siliconera a reliable source? I can't find anything about their editorial or fact-checking procedures, editorial staff, etc.
  • Fn 29, what makes The Magic Box a reliable source?

Otherwise looks good. --Laser brain (talk) 00:39, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Laser Brain: Thank you for taking a look! Both Siliconera and The Magic Box are listed as reliable per WP:VG/S. JOEBRO64 00:54, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Laser brain: Messed up the ping. Sorry! JOEBRO64 00:56, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Hi, I'm generally willing to read and accept WikiProject consensus discussions on RS issues, but in these cases I don't see any additional information or discussion on why these should be considered reliable. Can you point me to where such discussion has occurred? In particular, I'm looking for specific evidence of how these sources meet WP:RS. Thanks! --Laser brain (talk) 13:13, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Laser brain:
  1. The most recent discussion on Siliconera was in September. Basically, their staff members all have experience at other reliable publications, and the site itself is usually cited by other reliable sources. From the discussion's participants, "they do tend to fill a niche of Western-centric coverage of the Japanese games market even smaller titles" and "it is a very good source for Japanese-only games".
  2. The Magic Box translates sales data from the Japanese sources Famitsu and Media Create, both of which are reliable. Most recent discussion is here. They're useful because Media Create continually refreshes their lists on a weekly basis and the only way to get access to their backlog is limited to businesses/organization, and Famitsu is not only in Japanese, but pre-2003 issues are very hard to find.
Hopefully that clears things up. Again, thanks for reviewing. JOEBRO64 20:23, 18 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you! I am satisfied with these responses and have no further concerns. --Laser brain (talk) 14:23, 19 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Coordinators

@FAC coordinators: is this good to go? The source and image reviews have been completed. JOEBRO64 20:47, 1 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

That's good but I would like to see some further general commentary. Andy, I don't know how you're fixed for time but since you've got some familiarity with the article now, would you be able to perform a comprehensive review for prose, etc? Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:40, 3 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Ian Rose: Sure, I can do it in 1–2 days. --Laser brain (talk) 19:36, 4 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Laser brain
  • I just finished an initial read-through and will make more comments later, but an initial show-stopper: I don't find the Legacy section to be adequate for FA class. The first brief paragraph asserts that this game signaled an end to the console wars, but the text we've written here doesn't really go into enough detail. The GamesRadar source doesn't really even support that point. We need some better research and more substantive journalism about such an assertion. The second section speaks a bit about the Dimps relationship but I also think this needs expansion with more discussion about this relationship. --Laser brain (talk) 14:26, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
    • @Laser brain: I've done some refining to the legacy section. Added some articles that call it one of the best games in the series with some of their commentary. As for the console wars assertion, I've toned it down and added a few direct quotes to make the claims clearer. Also added a bit of commentary from Nintendo Power as well. As for the Sega/Dimps relationship, I've added some discussion about how Dimps' games have been much better received than Sonic Team's. I based the structure of the new legacy section on FA Super Mario World's; hopefully it looks better now. JOEBRO64 21:03, 5 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose by Deckiller

[edit]

Oppose—1a. Examples from the lead:

"Sonic Advance[a] is a 2001 side-scrolling platform video game originally published by Sega for the Game Boy Advance (GBA)." "Originally" can be omitted in this context, as the re-releases are outlined a few sentences later.
"It was the first game in the Sonic the Hedgehog franchise released on a Nintendo platform" — here is a case where including "to be" is not redundant; the sentence in its current form is vague and might trick the reader into thinking that Sonic Advance is the first game in the series and that the entire series was released on Nintendo platforms.
"and Sega produced it to commemorate its tenth anniversary." — this clause feels tacked on and messes with the flow of the lead; either the sentence should be restructured or this fact should be relocated elsewhere in the lead. It also could mislead some readers; they might think the game was celebrating the 10th anniversary of Sega or the Nintendo console, not the series.
"Development of Sonic Advance began after Sega shifted their focus to third-party software development, due to the poor performance of their Dreamcast console." — Sega shifted its focus not "their" focus.
"The company recruited Dimps, a Japanese development studio consisting of former Neo Geo Pocket Color programmers, to lead development, assisted by longtime series developer Sonic Team." — this sentence is a bit of a mouthful and might contain some trivial information for a lead. Do we really need to know that this studio worked on games for another console in the lead? I don't think so. Plus, omitting that clause would improve the readability of this sentence.
"Sonic Advance is the first in the Sonic franchise developed by Dimps, who would return to the series many times in later years." — you can rework the first clause into the sentence I just mentioned. You can also omit "Sonic" here.
"Two sequels, Sonic Advance 2 and Sonic Advance 3, were later developed and released for the GBA in 2002 and 2004, respectively." — clunky; reword to something like "Two sequels, Sonic Advance 2 (2002) and Sonic Advance 3 (2004) were developed and released for the GBA."

Other random examples:

"On its release, Sonic Advance received positive critical reviews, according to review aggregation website Metacritic." — the first clause is redundant.
"IGN admired the clever new ideas, such as the ability to grind on rails, and determined that Sonic felt better on the GBA, rather than the Genesis." is that IGN calling the ideas "clever", or the article writer?
"Sega would continue to contract the company in following years to create many games in the series, including two sequels to Sonic Advance..." — lots of opportunities for trimming in this sentence. Lean and concise is the way to go!

I could make these changes myself, but I wanted to demonstrate that the entire text can be tightened and improved. Decent/passable prose is not the same as "engaging and of a professional standard"; we must constantly scrutinize our writing until it's perfect. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 03:20, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Deckiller: I've just gone and given the article a loose copyedit. I'll do some more later today. JOEBRO64 12:10, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
@Deckiller: I've just performed various copyedits based on your suggestions. The prose should be tighter now. Thoughts? JOEBRO64 20:53, 6 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Awesome. I'll try to take a look at it this weekend. I might make a pass myself and see if I can help. —Deckiller (t-c-l) 06:39, 7 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment: This has been open for over six weeks and despite two supports, has a standing oppose and reservations from Laser brain; there is currently no consensus to promote. With this in mind, a fresh start may benefit the article. It can be renominated after the usual two week wait. In the meantime, perhaps the nominator could work with Deckiller and Laser brain away from FAC. Sarastro (talk) 22:05, 15 February 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Sonic_Advance/archive1&oldid=1086353082"