Talk:Cow Clicker

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Cow Clicker has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
February 25, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
WikiProject Video games (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
Note icon
A request for a screenshot has been made to help better illustrate the article. (VG images department)
WikiProject Internet (Rated GA-class, Low-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Internet, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the internet on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.
 GA  This article has been rated as GA-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Low  This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
 

Original reference[edit]

The original blog entry about Cow Clicker is available at http://www.bogost.com/blog/cow_clicker_1.shtml ... I added it as one of the references, and I think it belongs there. I suppose the counter-argument is that it's a "self-referential" reference ... but then again, I fail to understand how an article referencing the original blog post can be a better reference than the original blog post itself when it comes to backing up claims like "Bogost is a critic of social network games that are free of challenges and demand little more than clicking on things at regular intervals."

Except for that, the article has definitively been improved since my last edit. Keep up the good work! :-)

Anonymous, 2011-11-20 17:45 CET — Preceding unsigned comment added by 81.191.119.38 (talk)

Article in Wired[edit]

Tanz, Jason (Jan 2012), "The Curse of Cow Clicker", Wired 20 (1): 96–101, 116–118 .

Story of its creation, success, and fate; should be good for article expansion and sourcing. postdlf (talk) 16:19, 19 January 2012 (UTC)

Done. I think that was very useful. ViperSnake151  Talk  19:52, 21 February 2012 (UTC)

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Cow Clicker/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Call of Cthulhu (talk · contribs) 01:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

  • Will review, comments to follow within the next few days. The Call of Cthulhu (talk) 01:28, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
  • I'll make some copyedits and MOS fixes as I go through. Please let me know if you disagree with any of them.
  • No dabs or dead links.
  • Lone image looks correctly NFCC tagged. You might think of adding a picture of Bogost like in this article.

Lead

  • "The game is intended to be a deconstructive satire of social games, particularly those developed by Zynga, whose core gameplay focuses on clicking on items at intervals, de-emphasizing the artistic aspects of video games in favor of promoting social interaction and monetization." I'd suggest breaking this up in two. Maybe begin the second around "de-emphasizing".
  • The lead feels a bit sparse. Might want to add some info about release/development/gameplay etc.

Gameplay

  • "Money can be used to skip the six hour time limit between clicks" Should this be "Mooney"?
  • Check for compliance with WP:NUMERAL, specifically, I think numbers less than ten should be written out instead of given as figures. I fixed a couple.
  • I tightened some of the writing a little. Might want to check for unnecessarily wordy phrases later on. As a general point, I highly recommend Tony's exercises at WP:REDEX to build skill in that area.
  • Watch for singular "they" too, try to avoid that.

History

  • Generally speaking, you don't have to put a citation after every sentence, but you should put one after every sentence that contains a direct quote.
  • Watch for repetition of "Bogost", try to use a pronoun when context permits. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Call of Cthulhu (talkcontribs) 18:04, 30 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Watch for long sentences in the "Updates" section. Breaking them apart might make them more readable.
  • "Paying 10 credits would extend the countdown by a single hour, while 4,000 would extend the countdown by an entire month.[5] While $700 worth of payments extended the countdown into September" Some repetition of "while" here. — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Call of Cthulhu (talkcontribs) 18:08, 30 December 2012 (UTC)

Reception

  • "Cow Clicker received attention soon after its release from critics such as Alexia Tsotsis of TechCrunch, who acknowledged the game's intent as a commentary on the impact of social network games in an interview with Bogost, and believed he was foreseeing the transformation of the internet into a "compulsive virtual dystopia" through Zynga's use of social gaming." This is a pretty long sentence, you should probably break it up here.
  • "developers introduce elements influenced by games into their services without providing the normal "experience" a game traditionally incorporates" I'm not sure the quotes are needed here.
  • Might want to avoid the emdashes two sentences in a row like this, not a big deal but might want to vary things up a bit.
  • Check for consistency in whether you italicize Cow Clicker
  • " Playdom's Scott Jon Siegel however," I'm not sure this is a good use of "however". — Preceding unsigned comment added by The Call of Cthulhu (talkcontribs) 18:30, 29 December 2012 (UTC)

References

  • Try to standardize whether you link to the media outlet (via wikilink) in the references section.
  • NPR, Edge, and Bogost's blog are missing dates, if they're available they should be added.
  • There aren't many sources in the article, but I did a bit of searching myself and there doesn't seem to be a lot of sources period--so I won't hold that against the article. I noticed this source and this source though. Is there anything in them worth adding? (If they're both reliable sources.)
  • Also, check this and this. That's about all I could find though. The Call of Cthulhu (talk) 15:44, 29 December 2012 (UTC)
  • Also just noticed this one. The Call of Cthulhu (talk) 19:18, 2 January 2013 (UTC)
  • At this point, I'm leaning towards failing on 1a and 3a grounds. I feel like the article's use of the available sources is a bit spare. The writing/organization is Ok, but I'm not sure it's quite up to GA standards. I worry that I might be being a bit harsh though, so I've put in for a second opinion. Cthulhu (R'lyeh) 21:24, 5 January 2013 (UTC)

Second opinion[edit]

Hi. I am willing to offer a second opinion. It will only be an opinion based on my understanding and interpretation of the criteria. The final decision on passing and holding will be up to The Call of Cthulhu (talk · contribs) AIRcorn (talk) 05:57, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Comments
  • I am totally confused by the gameplay. Click to earn clicks? The friends cows in your pasture doesn't make much sense to me either. From the lead The addition of friends' cows to the player's pasture allows the user to also receive "clicks" whenever the player's cow is clicked. So who receives clicks for whose cow being clicked?
  • In an interview with CNET following the conference, he compared Zynga's games to "behaviorist experiments with rats" making reference to the Skinner box and its tendency like some of B. F. Skinner's experiments on rats to give variable reinforcement rather than regular rewards. This sentence is a bit awkward. Can "like some of B. F. Skinner's experiments on rats" be removed or incorporated better? It seems redundant with Skinner box.
  • (which would allow sites to incorporate opportunities for sites to have clickable cows of their own). Not sure exactly what this is saying.
  • Not seeing any real concerns with broadness, although I am surprised that there are not some more negative reviews
  • May want to link in game currency to Virtual economy as it is something some people (i.e. me) are not familiar with.

Overall I would say it is not a bad little article. If you have a specific question or disagree with a comment let me know. AIRcorn (talk) 06:27, 14 February 2013 (UTC)

Thanks for the second opinion. Per your comments and the recent improvements to the article, I will pass it now. Good work everyone! Cthulhu (R'lyeh) 18:26, 25 February 2013 (UTC)

More references[edit]

Here are a few more refs that could be used:

--Odie5533 (talk) 06:55, 3 January 2013 (UTC)