Wikipedia:Peer review/Tales of Symphonia/archive1

Tales of Symphonia

Similar to Paper Mario, any information and any suggestions are welcomed. —Eternal Equinox | talk 15:38, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Eternal, I've decided that you are the busiest person in the FAC/peer review sections as of late, between these peer reviews and We Belong Together. Just don't stress yourself out with all the writing, and be sure to go outside and see the sunlight when you have a chance! :)

As for article suggestions, the majority of my suggestions for Paper Mario stand here -- i.e., sales, influences, awards, competition, and anything that would help someone who knows nothing of the Tales of... series, such as myself, understand its significance better.

After an admittingly quick overview of the article, I would suggest that the "Links to Tales of Phatnasia" be turned into prose. There's enough information there to be a couple paragraphs instead of a list. The "Playstation 2" section should be worked into the article itself. As well, the lead should be rewritten to focus less on its many release dates and more on why the game is noteable. Remember that the lead is what pulls you into an article you might not have read otherwise. If the lead is a list of release dates, you might lose people who would otherwise be curious of the article, no matter how good the article is.

Hope this was helpful. Best of luck, Eternal. --Ataricodfish 20:16, 18 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Quick note here - part of criterion three for featured articles states that the article should comply with revelant WikiProjects. WikiProject CVG recommends this for lead sections:

Lead section: The name of the game in bold italics, release date, platform, and other identifying information go first.

The release dates should stay, although I agree that the lead will eventually need expanding. --Pagrashtak 01:52, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ah, thank you Pagrashtak for bringing that to my attention, as I was not familar with that particular WikiProject and their suggestions regarding release dates in the lead. If that's accurate, then Eternal doesn't need to remove all that from the lead, although I would put it into the last paragraph of the lead and not start with release dates. --Ataricodfish 05:08, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This issue has been brought up before; WikiProject consensus is that names, release dates, and platforms should come first, as specified. --Pagrashtak 05:31, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Sounds fair. Alright, I'll remain quiet on the lead then. Thanks for bringing this to my attention, as I mentioned earlier, I was unfamilar with the Wikiproject and just offering my own personal suggestions, and don't mean to mislead. Obviously, go with the Wikiproject first. Best of luck! --Ataricodfish 08:27, 19 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hello. I normally don't play video games, but stumbled upon this game last November in a sale bin. I bought it, and it quickly became one of my favorite games. I think you've done a fabulous job with this article so far, and with some work it can become a featured article. Here are a few suggestions I have:

Move Storyline before Characters because the text in the Characters section about exsphere and regeneration do not make much sense unless you've either played the game or read the Storyline section first. Just to be safe, it's be best to assume the average reader of this article has not played the game.
Don't say "Lloyd is our hero", as that's written in the first person.
Don't list Sheena's summon spirits. They're not that notable.
Expand the part about discrimination under Themes. It plays a major part in the game and deserves more than a couple sentences.
Don't go into so much detail in the Battle section. It almost sounds like a players manual, not an encyclopedic entry.
In the PS2 version section cite some sources about load time, and that the general consensus is that the graphics and sound are inferior to the GCN version.

Again, you've done a great job with this article. Good luck! Jtrost (^T | C | _#) 00:07, 20 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Hmmm...

I prefer this order for RPGs: Gameplay, Storyline, Characters. Storyline definitely comes before characters because it's a pain to talk about the character's relations and nuances without already having lightly introduced the rest of the cast.
Characters: I'd rather prose-ify the whole section rather than have eight highly detailed one-paragraph sections.
Bad phrasing: "Lloyd is our hero" was mentioned above. "He is the only character other than Presea..." is unnecessarily confusing. The entire article could stand a good copyedit.
Storyline: Two really big paragraphs. Ouch. Split it into four or more paragraphs.
Themes: Another really big paragraph. Crikey.
Gameplay/Battle: Good up until the descriptions of "ultimate techniques"; cut out the ultimate techniques and the Japanses PS2 techs. Far too FAQy.
In general, avoid hard numbers referring to explicit game mechanics (ex. "Zelos' level 2 Personal skill...") or specific buttons ("The A button controls attacks and B controlling special moves; if "Guard" is mapped to R...") especially since this is a multiplatform game.

The rest, I think, has been covered above. Nifboy 03:39, 3 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]