Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars/archive5

Comments by SandyGeorgia

• The game game would set in Paris with a Knights Templar story line.
  • I don't know what "the game would set" means (would be set?), nor why this kind of information requires two sources.
    • Yes, would be set, heh. For why I used two sources, read the "Spotcheck by nominator Khanassassin" table. I used another source, to gain the source, and... OK, please just read it so you understand. :)
• Eoghan Cahill and Neil Breen, who worked at the Don Bluth studios in Dublin, drew all the backgrounds in pencil; the team then digitally colored them in Photoshop.
  • There's already a link to the studios-- an additional link to Dublin isn't needed (WP:OVERLINK, most folks know what Dublin is, if they don't, they can click on the studio link).
  • "All" is redundant-- they drew the backgrounds.
  • What about something like:
    • Eoghan Cahill and Neil Breen from Dublin's Don Bluth studios drew the backgrounds in pencil and digitially colored them in Photoshop.
  • Much more direct and less convoluted. Please audit prose throughout for same.
    • You're right, this is much better. Done.
• Cecil contacted composer Barrington Pheloung, who agreed to compose the music for the game.
  • A composer who agreed to compose-- fancy that :) Try to vary the prose.
    • Hehe. Yeah... According to the WikiEntry, a composer is a "person who creates music", so I'll just replace "compose" with "create", and "the music for the game" with "the game's score".
• Audio features of the game include recorded sound effects, orchestral music and voice acting. Revolution had already cast Hazel Ellerby as Nicole Collard, but had trouble finding a voice actor for George Stobbart. Hazel, who went to the Guildhall School of Music and Drama in London,
  • More WP:OVERLINK-- Most folks know what London is and what an orchestra is.
  • I'm having a hard time understanding why sound effects, music and voice acting are mentioned like this-- are they not common in most games? What is the significance of this information?
    • Yeah, you're right. This isn't really a necessary sentence...

Just samples; an independent copyedit would help. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:08, 5 December 2012 (UTC)

I took care of some overlinking in the article to, like "Paris". :) So, I've taken care of your "samples". I know "samples" doesn't take care of the whole article, but the article's been copy-edited a gazillion times! A peer review (two, but one got archived before anything was written on it, lol), a Guild Copy-Edit, and a copy-edit of the lead and plot by a user, plus I resolved every issue ever listed on the GAN and any FAC.  :) --Khanassassin ☪ 14:23, 6 December 2012 (UTC)

Comments by SandyGeorgia 2

• Do you want the comma here ?

• The player assumes the role of George Stobbart (an American tourist in Paris), as he attempts to unravel a conspiracy.
  • It's now "George Stobbart, an American tourist in Paris, as he attempts to unravel a conspiracy." So, yes, I want it. :)

• As a non-gamer, I encounter this statement in the lead and have no idea why it is significant: I am required to click out to the article to understand that this engine was developed by the producer of this game and what it does ... if you can add just a few more words to the lead, it will be able to stand-alone. Comprehension of the lead shouldn't require any reader to have to click out to a link.

• It was the third game built with the Virtual Theatre engine.
  • Done.

• This you can take as a personal pet peeve-- others may disagree. In an encyclopedia, IMO parentheticals are not usually a good thing (although there are plenty of times where they are needed). Anything worth saying in an encyclopedia is ... well ... worth saying. Why is this a parenthetical and not just part of the same sentence? The parentheses seem to demote the importance of the phrase, and if the phrase isn't important, then why is it in the lead? Just my opinion ... others may disagree ... but please review parentheticals throughout.

• drew all the backgrounds in pencil (which were later digitally colored in Adobe Photoshop).
  • OK, done. :)

• Unnecessary wordiness:

• The game is serious in tone, but also features humor and graphics in the style of classic animated films.

• Maybe something along the lines of: The game features humor and graphics in teh style of classic animated films but its overall tone is serious. Others may have better suggestions, but "serious in tone" is extra wordiness.
  • Done.

• I don't understand the "it saw ports" construct-- perhaps that's a non-gamer problem ? Does that mean ports were added to those platforms to accomodate this game? Does that mean only newer versions have it? I just have no idea what the sentence is saying. Since the lead should be comprehensible even to non-gamers, some help is needed here.

• After its initial release on Windows, Mac OS and PlayStation, it saw ports on Game Boy Advance, Palm OS and Windows Mobile.
  • "It was ported" instead of "saw ports"? A game port is just a release of the game for a platform which it was not originally released on. Sort of a re-release. So, I think "was ported to" will do. Done.

• Do you want this comma? (That's a question, not an oppose-- I'm not seeing the reason for the comma, though.)

• The game spawned a number of sequels, collectively known as the Broken Sword series.
  • Done.

• Again, this might be a non-gamer thing, but I'm not following. Why are they released "on" and not "for"? And what is the "from 2009 to 2012" applied to? Does that mean only 2009 to 2012 versions of Android? Or does it apply to the whole list starting with Wii?

• A director's cut version was released on Wii, Nintendo DS, Windows, Mac OS X, iOS and Android from 2009 to 2012.

• • Actually, when it comes to ports, it should be "ported to", as "port" is sort of like "brought" (ported to = brought to). "From 2009 to 2012, a director's cut was..." - I think this'll make it clear that I'm referring to all of the platforms, from Wii to Android.

That's the lead-- you may choose not to alter some of the wording (some of it may be personal preference), but I hope this helps demonstrate the confusion from a non-gamer standpoint. Next, I skipped down to a random section to see how things are progressing:

• It has been noted by both fans and publications that The Shadow of the Templars possibly influenced Dan Brown for his best-selling novel The Da Vinci Code, due to the many similarities between the stories.[8][55][56][57][58][59]

• Ok, the number of citations here are telling me that this sentence is probably controversial, that the "possibly" is probably a weasle word to cover the controversy, and so I conclude that the "it has been noted" is passive voice to also (not) address the controversy. I suggest that whatever the controversy is, it should be dealt with more explicitly, with attribution, eliminating the overciting and focusing on the strongest sources. The entire thing is screaming Weasel at me.
  • I guess in a way it is. But the reason I added "possibly" is because Dan Brown never said: "Yeah, I was writing The Da Vinci Code, and I was like 'this should totally be like Broken Sword, man!'". But, a lot of fans strongly believe that he did play the game and it was an influence, or just simply noted that the story's pretty similar. Many publications, websites and magazines, also did this. But it's not a confirmed influence, and we don't want and Dan Brown lawyers to chase me for this. Hehe. Also doesn't "has been noted by both fans and publications" make the sentence non-passive?
    • Anyway, I worked a bit on the pharagraph now, I think it's better. :)

• In this paragraph, one reference is present tense (is), while the very next reference is past tense (drew).

• Eurogamer writer and co-creator of the upcoming adventure Richard & Alice Lewis Denby said that Broken Sword is his biggest influence. In his review of the game, Declan Skews of Video Games Interactive said that the 2010 adventure Deponia drew inspiration from Broken Sword.
  • Done.

Comments by SandyGeorgia 3

Looking again at prose:

• Cecil humorously stated that he would never claim so due to the threat of Brown's "very serious" lawyers but is flattered by other people thinking so.[8] Publications have also considered Broken Sword's story superior to The Da Vinci Code's. Joao Diniz Shances of Pocket Gamer said Broken Sword's story is a "tale, some would argue, that effortlessly outclasses Dan Brown's similarly themed and tricksy novel."[58] In an article about Broken Sword, Computer and Video Games described the Knights Templar legend a "great mythology to base a game on and the secrets of the Templars make for a captivating narrative," also saying "And remember; [Broken Sword] came out years before the Da Vinci Code made that sort of thing popular."

• How do we know it was "humorously" (what does the source say)? Claim so ... thinking so ... not a great sentence. Publications? But only one is listed. Rly? There's a lot of "mysterious unnamed fans" in here making some grandiose claims.
  • Removed "humorously" (the source never says it) and the "Publications" line. "Mysterious unnamed fans"? Of course he didn't name fans: "OK, there's User:JohnX231 from Adventure Gamers, and this guy who follows us on twitter named Harold Green, and they said that the stories are really similar." I'm a part of the fanbase myself, and there's a lot of association of the game and the book on social networks, forums etc. by fans, and as you see, as well as publications: Pocket Gamer, Computer and Video Games etc. Re-wrote a bit.

So, I skipped down two sections:

• Future film

• WP:MOSDATE#Precise language -- when that film comes out, it will no longer be future. Different wording is needed, something involving plans or planning or in development or whatever, but not "future".

"Film" alone or "Film adaptation" will do, I think.

• Something wrong here:

• In May 2007, ComingSoon.net reported that Cecil, encouraged by the success of The Angel of Death, began work on a Broken Sword: The Shadow of the Templars theatrical film adaptation with CastleBright Studios' producers Jay Douglas and Nav Guptatheir CastleBright Studios production company.
  • Done.

• Justin Kaplan united Cecil with the company, ...

• United?
  • Done.

• In July 2008, Cecil noted he was in conversation with several small studios from Los Angeles. However, he also noted that while he was interested in making a film, the series was already successful, so a film would not be necessary; Cecil thought that if the film would be bad, it could only damage the series' reputation.

• noted ... also noted ... vary the prose. "if the film would be bad, it could only damage", awkward.
  • I think I re-wrote this nicely.

Comments by Axem Titanium

• Comments:
  • Try to avoid parentheticals where possible. Consider if the thing is important enough to include and if so, see if you can reword it so you don't need a parenthetical. Emdash is your friend!
    • Uh, English isn't my first language, so I'm not sure what those are. Are they, like, minor things? Like a, "by the way" remark of something? And what do emdashes have to do with this? Sorry...
      • There are a large number of parenthetical statements used as asides. Try to integrate them better using commas and emdashes—long dashes which are used to break up text. See? Like that.
        • Do you mean the ones in brackets?
          • I'm referring to clauses using parentheses ( ). Axem Titanium (talk) 15:22, 30 November 2012 (UTC)
            • I thought those were brackets ( ). Heh. But I think I'm done with this too now. :)
  • "acclaimed by critics who lauded" feels awkward. Also avoid passive voice. Perhaps "Critics lauded the game's story..."?
    • Done - changed to "Critics lauded..."
  • "with around one million copies being sold by the mid-1990s" --> "with one million copies sold by the mid-1990s"
    • Done.
  • Is there a reason why the box art is in Spanish?
    • Not really. It's been like that since forever. I uploaded an English version, but one user reverted it to the Spanish version, saying they're was a water mark on it, heh. I didn't see it though. This is not a problem, I'll just change it after I resolve the rest of the issues. :)
      • Alright please do. :) There's no reason why a game developed in English should feature Spanish box art on English Wikipedia.
        • Done. :)
  • Use a collapse box to hide most of the release dates. See Final Fantasy II for example.
    • Yeah, it's why better like this, isn't it? Done.
  • "easy navigation" --> "navigation"; easy is very colloquial
    • Yeah, you're right. Done.
  • "the player gets" --> "the player receives"; colloquial
    • Okay. Done.
  • "In The Shadow of the Templars, the player character's death is possible" need context here, why is this mentioned? Perhaps, "Unlike in most adventure games,"?
    • Done.
      • You missed a word. :P
        • Hah! Yeah, it's removed now. :)
  • Some of your semicolons in the plot section aren't appropriate, i.e., the two sentences aren't connected enough to warrant a semicolon.
    • I removed the ones I thought weren't needed, three in total.
    • Those were added after the copy-edit. I'm not really a semicolon-ish type, but I think that most of the semicolons make sense (there were five or so?) except one in the first paragraph about George talking to Nico and then discovering the clown's nose and stuff
      • I removed a few more.
        • Thanks. :)
  • Can you thesaurus the word "deduce"?
    • Yeah, there's like a gazillion of them. "Concludes, assumes, figures out..." Why? are they're to many in the plot?
      • It's used 4 times in the plot section which is probably 2 times too many.
  • The plot section feels a little like a play-by-play. I learn many people's names but they're only used once or twice. Is it possible to condense it and gloss over minor characters?
    • This is play-by-play. :)
      • Fine fine I won't bitch about the plot too much. I still think it's got a few too many named characters. Feel free to leave them unnamed to make the plot section more readable. It is more difficult to read if you must keep track of many names, especially if they're only used once or twice (e.g. Plantard, Marib, etc.).
        • Oh, cool. But I don't think I'd like to remove "Marib", because that's the name of a village not a person. Is we'd just say George's "going to a village in Syria" without the actual name wouldn't be much better. :)
          • OK, done (I think...) --Khanassassin ☪ 16:51, 3 December 2012 (UTC)
  • First sentence in Dev section is very long with many commas. Please split.
    • Done.
  • Generation 4 lacks accents in Reception section. Dunno which is correct.
    • No no, you were right. Added.
  • "While most critics praised the game's voice acting and puzzles, PC Gamer US called the voice acting "the worst thing in the game" and "not too professional," feeling that some puzzles required "too much pixel-hunting."" That last clause is completely unrelated to the rest of the sentence.
    • You're right. I split it into its own sentesce.
      • Also, "while" is used three times in that paragraph. See WP:1a for alternatives and why you should usually avoid "while" altogether.
        • Done.
  • The Listings section is very dry. Is there a way to summarize it into maybe 2 lines? Like "Shadow of the Templars was listed as 'best adventure game of all time' by x, y, and z website"?
    • I've tried, but my horrible writing makes it sound like crap... heh
      • Well not all of those publications are notable, for one. I've never heard of Altered Gamer or NowGamer. See WP:VG/S to make sure all your sources qualify.
        • eah, Altered Gamer doesn't look like Mr. Notable. However, I have no doubt that NowGamer is: It's extremely often used as a source on Wikipedia, on GAs/FAs too, it's published by the notable Future Publishing, and it's also quite well-known (solid Alexa rank and a pretty big number of visitors) etc. So, I'd be cool with a removal of the Altered Gamer list, but not with removal of the NowGamer list. Just sayin'. :) Oh, and, NowGamer's not listed as a reliable source on that WP:RS page, but also not as an unreliable.
          • Sure, NowGamer's fine, but the point being that you should pick through all your sources to make sure they're reliable. A "Sources Spotcheck" is mostly mandatory nowadays at FAC.
  • The Goat Puzzle seems like it deserves more than that short paragraph in terms of its legacy.
  • Semicolons in Sequels section again need work.
    • Done.
  • "but noted that it his feelings were that it" what's going on here? I can't understand.
    • Yeah, the first it shouldn't be there, heh. I removed it now, so... :)
  • Throughout the article: avoid passive voice, yo!
    • Sorry, I'm probably not right, but I don't see many passive voices (I always say that "Cecil's intentions were" or "Steve Ince drew" etc. etc. :) ). So, help me out? :)
      • "it was announced", "The idea of a film was encouraged", etc.
        • I think I'm done with the passive voices, in the Film section of course, but is there anymore?
          • Seems fine now.
• Alright done. Axem Titanium (talk) 17:41, 26 November 2012 (UTC)

Comments by Cryptic C62

• "Unlike in most adventure games, it is possible for the protagonist to die." It might be worth clarifying that this was unusual for adventure games at the time. It might also be worth mentioning what happens when the protagonist dies -- checkpoint system? load/save? start from the beginning?
  • Reworded a bit, added the save-start thingy. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 19:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
• The Plot section is fairly underlinked, particularly considering that some of the locations used in the game are real places.
  • According to previous reviews, linking Paris, France, Scotland, Ireland etc. would be overlinking, as pretty much everybody knows those places. Bannockburn, however, is a lesser-known town, meaning I should link it. I think Syria is also a slightly lesser-known country, so I guess I should link it... But, what else should I link? Manuscript perhaps? --Khanassassin ☪ 19:19, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I linked a few words that I thought should be... --Khanassassin ☪ 19:23, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
• In the Reception section, there are four consecutive paragraphs which all begin with "Adventure Gamers". The phrase stands out visually, which may give the skimming reader the false impression that the publication is the most important or the most authoritative.
  • Would just throwing the reviews of the paragraphs around a bit work? Hehe :) But really, would it? --Khanassassin ☪ 19:14, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
  • I did the above, btw. I also saw that Adventure Gamers' writer has a name, which I now added, so its no longer "Writer for...", but with the actual name. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 20:12, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
• The organization of the Reception section is a bit problematic, as some gameplay elements are discussed in multiple paragraphs. The third paragraph says that the "voice acting is "of supreme quality"", while the fifth paragraph calls it "the worst thing in the game". The same thing happens with the puzzles, which are described as "inventive and challenging" in one paragraph, but "disappointing" later on. If the viewer reads only one of these paragraphs, they may be lead to believe that the voice acting was universally praised or universally despised, which is clearly not the case. A more logical organization would be to keep all of the voice acting comments together, all the puzzle comments together, etc.
  • Yes, that's true, but - as you see, the first paragraph focuses on the acclaim of the plot, the second on the acclaim of the artwork, the third on the acclaim of the puzzles in music, while the last section focuses on, as you say, 'despisement' of the game, all elements (voice acting, puzzles...) included. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 19:10, 5 January 2013 (UTC)
    • I can understand why you would want to organize the section in such a way, and I certainly don't think the current layout is bad, I just don't think it's optimal. If a reader comes in wondering "What did people think of <aspect>?", it is highly likely that would find the relevant praise paragraph, read it in its entirety, and then leave thinking "I guess everyone loved <aspect>!". There's just no good reason to have statements about the same topic being presented in separate paragraphs. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 19:55, 7 January 2013 (UTC)
      • Cool - I think it's done now. :) --Khanassassin ☪ 16:31, 8 January 2013 (UTC)