Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review

Skip to current requests

This page is for computer and video games that need input in order to become at least an example article, or even become a Featured article candidate. It is aimed at half-developed articles that require further expansion, and you believe the community can play a major part not only in editing directly the article, but also giving creative input.

Before adding an article, check whether the peer review is the best place for it. For stubs, the Gaming collaboration of the week is more suitable.

CVG Requests for peer review are listed here to expose articles to closer scrutiny than they might otherwise receive. See Style and How-to Directory for advice on writing great articles. Or look at the discussion of the perfect article and try to reach as close to as many of those ideals as possible. If an article needs extensive work, please list it on Pages needing attention, Requests for expansion or Cleanup. Please list article content disputes on Requests for comment rather than here.

Note: Peer review is the process of review by peers and usually implies a group of authoritative reviewers that are equally familiar and expert in the subject. The process represented by this page is not formal peer review in that sense and articles that under go this process cannot be assumed to have greater authority than any other.

Purge server cache

Instructions

How to make a request

• Anyone can request a video game related peer review here. When posting your request, include a brief description of the kind of comments/contributions you want, and sections of the article you think need to be reviewed. The best way to get lots of reviews is to reply promptly and appreciatively on this page to the comments you do get.

• Procedure for adding nominations:

1. Add the parameter peer-review=yes to the {{cvgproj}} template on the article's talk page (not the article itself) to let other editors know that the article is being peer reviewed.
2. From there, click on the bold link that appears in the new peer review notice. This will open a page to discuss the review of your article.
3. Place ===[[name of nominated article]]=== at the top.
4. Below it, write your reason for nominating the article and sign by using four tildes (~~~~).
5. Place {{Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/name of article}} at the top of the list of nominees on this page.
6. Finally, if the article is under the scope of WikiProject Massively multiplayer online games, transclude the specific request on WikiProject MMOs Peer Review page.

How to respond to a request

• Scan the list of requests below, and if one catches your fancy, follow the link to the article and read it. If you think something's wrong with the article; i.e., it's too long, there's no lead section, poor grammar/spelling, factual errors, etc., post a comment in the appropriate section on this page.
• If the issue is trivial and/or you have the time and knowledge to fix it, it is advised that you make an effort to resolve the issue. If you do so, please make a note of it on the page to keep others informed about the article's progress.

How to remove a request

• To free up the page for active traffic, and to make peer review a more dynamic and valuable process, you are invited to move inactive requests to the current archive link. Inappropriate listings, listings untouched for a month, and articles that have gone on to be listed under Wikipedia:Peer review or as featured article candidates can and should be removed, as well as apparently forgotten requests where the requester has not responded to comments (if you post a request, please do not discourage reviewers by ignoring their efforts). Please see the request removal policy for specifics.
• After removing the listing from this page, replace peer-review=yes with old-peer-review=yes in the {{cvgproj}} template on the article's talk page.
• If your request is removed, please feel free to put it back at the top of the list later.

How to resubmit a request

• Procedure for requesting a brand new peer review request:

1. Move the peer review page to Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/example/Archive1
2. Edit the page Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/example, remove the redirect.
3. Resubmit the request and make a note where the old request is via a wikilink.

Requests

Characters in Castlevania: Sorrow series

This article recently received GA status, and personally, I would like to make it my first FA, but it does need a great deal of work. Any comments, concerns, and offers of aid would be greatly appreciated. Thanks. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 08:03, 6 June 2007 (UTC)

I'm guessing that this is based on Characters of Final Fantasy VIII, and I can't really touch character articles, but here's my thoughts based on that article. All I can really say is to work on the out of universe stuff, such as digging anything else up about conception. It's looking a little tired. Reception a little small for the size of the artice too, and that could be attacked at the FAC. Any merchandise?--Clyde (talk) 01:15, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I've been digging for quite a while. Hardly any of the reviews touch the characters (although this could be a notable point in itself), and they concentrate primarily on the gameplay. Also, there's a complete lack of Aria of Sorrow information, likely owing to the game's age. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 23:36, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

My work has never lead me to to the castlevania series, so I don't think I'd be much help (try working with early 90's games; that's a treat). If there is absolutly nothing level to look through, I'd let it go. The FAC people may want more. It looks like you only have some mainstream online websites. No others, Edge, IGM, GI, GamePro, 1up, Famitsu?--Clyde (talk) 18:17, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Not any that I can find. Oh well. At least it went from this to the present version. Thanks for the comments in any case. Sephiroth BCR ^(Converse) 05:28, 25 June 2007 (UTC)

Age of Mythology

It narrowly failed GA recently, and apart from the reviewer's comments, I'd like to see if there's anything else needed to get it to GA (and beyond!) G1ggy! _{Review me!} 23:54, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

AndonicO

First off, I don't have much time now, so I wasn't able to read much more than the article's lead section. I just thought I'd give you the automated peer review results for you to digest while I try to find time to go through the whole thing:

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • are considered
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: armor (A) (British: armour), armour (B) (American: armor), defense (A) (British: defence), ization (A) (British: isation), any more (B) (American: anymore), programme (B) (American: program ).
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 22 additive terms, a bit too much.
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, · AndonicO ^Talk 12:10, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've read the article. Here are a few things I think you should fix:

• In the lead, you mention the reviews, sales, and expansion before you explain what this game is about. Try to make the lead section like that of Starcraft, it's structure is quite good. Also, you don't have any references in that section. Make sure everything there is to source is sourced (take a look at Starcraft, Empires: Dawn of the Modern World, and Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War).
• The "Gameplay" section seems too long. Here's what I'd do:

1. Drop the sub-section headers, just write plain paragraphs. Readers will notice the difference between the "Units" and "Heros" sections without big letters telling them that they're different, don't worry. :) (Again, try to copy the format on the three RTS FAs.)
2. Don't explain the civilization's differences, per WP:INFO, wikipedia is not a game manual.
3. You have a paragraph on resources, but you mention "Favor" again; try to merge them.
4. You mention relics in the "Hero" section, but you have another for relics too. Merge, as above.
5. In the "Units" section, you re-explain the resources; that's a bit repetitive.
6. "Norse infantry are capable of constructing and repairing buildings (Norse gatherers and dwarves can not construct buildings)." should be something like: "Norse infantry are capable of constructing and repairing buildings, as gatherers and dwarves do not have this ability." It'd be more fluid, and a bit less redundant.
7. "Cavalry are melee units mounted on horses, camels, or war elephants. Archers are either on foot or mounted, and attack at range." Those two sentences partially contradict themselves (due to not being correctly explained). Cavalry is melee, but archers can be mounted, so not all cavalry is melee (some are archers). If this is correct, I recommend you make it clearer.
8. Don't mention anything about the expansion anywhere in the "Gameplay" section (only in the lead, or "Development"), it has it's own article. (Example: "The Atlanteans have Destroyers, which are infantry who possess a huge multiplier against buildings. They also have access to the Fire Siphon, which is a cross between ranged and melee weapons, as they possess short range but do more damage than most other ranged siege units." is just after a section explaining non-expansion siege units, so, apart from not belonging in the article, it will confuse readers.)
9. "Examples of myth units are minotaurs, colossi, centaurs, phoenixes, valkyries and mummies.", if you really need to give examples, only give two or three (one from each civilization maybe?). ^{By the way, the colossus link is a disambiguation page; might want to remove that one, since there's no article.}
10. Cut down the "Heroes" section, and add a paragraph on them just after that on normal units (and move the mythical units paragraph after that one). There's no need to explain the Heroes, but if you must, do it only for one of them (as an example), per WP:INFO.

• The "Scenario editor" section's image says it has modifications installed; is it possible to have a screenshot of the "normal" scenario editor?
• The "Reception" section might as well have the stub template on it; look into Empires: Dawn of the Modern World or Rise and Fall: Civilizations at War for a good example (the Starcraft one isn't too good either). Make sure you say what 4+ review websites said about the game overall, it's graphics, sound (music, sound effects, and voice overs), combat, naval warfare, resource management, campaign, multiplayer, AI, skill required, if it's complicated, if they liked it, and their lasting impression. Also, you should say which awards it won (or was considered for at least).

Hope that helps (especially because it took a while to write :))! I can help you copyedit the article if you'd like help (but I can't add anything, since I've never played the game). · AndonicO ^Talk 17:56, 5 June 2007 (UTC)

Kingdom Hearts

Kingdom Hearts recently was re-evaluated as a B-Class from a Start-Class article. Since then several other sections have been rewritten and additional content and references have been added as well. Myself and other editors would like to see Kingdom Hearts make it to Good Article Status and eventually Featured Article status. Any comments and ideas would be appreciated. (Guyinblack25 14:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC))

Fair use rationales for images, a few more sentences/another paragraph is possible for the development section and a once over for prose should make this a very strong contender for FA :) Judgesurreal777 07:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Fair use rationales for images have been added. Extra content has been added to the development section and more is being sought after. I will go over the prose and try to find someone else to as well. Do you have any other recommendations, and do you think it is at Good Article level? Thank you for the input. (Guyinblack25 17:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC))

Once you put in place a bit more development info, it should be ready for FA, it is totally ready for GA. Judgesurreal777 21:59, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, and there is one citation needed :) Judgesurreal777 22:00, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• "Kingdom Hearts is heavily influenced by its parent franchise, Final Fantasy, and carries many gameplay elements over into its own action-based, hack-and-slash system." - The words "heavy" and "many" are going to need removing or sourcing. I'll read through the whole thing tomorrow, that was just a snippet :) --Teggles 07:46, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions. We've done copy edits on the article and have tried expanding the "Development" section as best we can. Unfortunately we've been having trouble finding information to expand the "Development" section further. Any ideas on where we can look to find the information? (Guyinblack25 16:49, 11 June 2007 (UTC))

Sources can be found in various reliable sources, such as the IGN website, the Square Enix website, the Gamestop website and so on. Sjones23 12:54, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

I've looked through the News and Press Release articles on IGN and GameSpot, but information on the actual development of the first game is sparse. Square Enix's website only directs you to the official website, and their press releases only go back to 2003. I've run across some tidbits while looking for the development info of the sequel, and have added the new information. Hopefully the content is enough, because I keep running into walls. Any other suggestions on where to find development info and/or to improve the article? (Guyinblack25 16:05, 15 June 2007 (UTC))

Well, I've added a little bit more to the "Development" section and a few other bits here and there and have done more copy editing. Do you guys think it's ready for Featured Article, or is there more needed? (Guyinblack25 15:37, 20 June 2007 (UTC))

I think it is ready. I've nominated it at Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Kingdom Hearts. Greg Jones II 17:04, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

TimeSplitters 2

I've been doing a lot of work on this article trying to at least get it up a B ranking and possibly higher. I requested it get assessed a couple of times, but it remained start-class.Wi Account ki 21:39, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Clyde Miller

An interesting game I had a lot of fun with. Some suggestions.

• "The soundtrack for TimeSplitters 2 can be found here." Remove any and all external links within the article itself and move to the external links section.
• The external links section could use some cleanup. I'd keep only the official site, the timesplitter wiki, and the moby games one. The IGN should be in the references section in the form of a review; the Gamefaqs is game guide material and a dead link anyway, TSmusic box should probably be a ref for audio, and the last two are random fan sites.
• The See Also needs to be slimmed down to only links that don't appear in the article. I'd say race and series.
• References should be done using Template:cite web. Try and get an author, publisher, title, url, date of page, access date, and format if needed.
• Trivia should be removed or integrated into the article. There should be no trivia section at all.
• "The game was praised for its vast array of multiplayer options, its diverse range of unique story mode levels, and its co-operative mode." Wait what? How about an intro sentence? Maybe a reference to overall scores; I usually use MetaCritic or GameRankings. Also this sentence is completely unreferenced.
• Reception section needs to be expanded. There needs to be more critical opinions and points whether they be direct quotes or paraphrasing. One PP on general scores and comments, one paragraph on good things, one PP on bad things. I've also seen it written by going down the line showing opinions on gameplay, then graphics, then sound etc.
• If there is so much written about sound and it is already mentioned in the lead, I'd write an audio section, perhaps listing the songs in template form, talking about it's creation or reception, or anything else notable about it.
• There are many statements that need to be citied and have POV problems. Look also at WP:CITE. I'll give you a list later or put in fact tags.
• Story mode comes after gameplay mode.
• Some picture placements bother me. The dam one should be moved up put on the right, and the setup of the story pic and gameplay pic bother me.
• Remove the list of arcade modes.
• Prose has problems. I'll try to point them out later.

More on the way.--Clyde (talk) 23:14, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

Other things.

• The cover has no fair use rationale and the game images should have more detailed ones. See here for ideas.
• Perfect Dark is an FPS featured article, which could give you some direction. Also VG FAs are a good place to look for ideas.
• The publication box lacks some reviews. I have a ton of websites on my userpage you can go to here.
• Anytime there is a game (I.E. TimeSplitters: Future Perfect) it should be in italics (TimeSplitters: Future Perfect) Done
• The plot section could be a bit longer. Maybe describe what happens in the levels, but not too long. See other story sections for ideas. You may also want to put in a character section (small list of characters introducing them to the reader).

I also dropped some fact tags that need to be taken care of. Prose is a whole different can of worms, so let's deal with that later.--Clyde (talk) 00:39, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Krator

I had written a lenghty assessment on the article a while ago, but nothing was done about most of the points.

• Some things need to be changed, though. Remove the external link, and change the prose to fit a more encyclopaedic tone. An example of the current bad state is the last sentence: "but it is not known when". Done
• Gameplay starts out well-written, but gradually turns into the game guide information often seen in bad video game articles.
• Remove the list in Arcade.  Done
• Remove the distinction between modes. These are not specific to the game and irrelevant - what a 'story' or 'arcade' mode is should not be explained here. Done
• The whole section has no citations. Look up some reviews of the game, and see what they write about the gameplay, then use them to reference the article.
• Gameplay needs copy-editing.
• Reception is too short - discuss what some specific reviewers have written if not enough reviews exist. Also discuss pre-game release reception (previews).
• Remove trivia.  Done
• Remove fansites from external links.  Done

--User:Krator (t c) 01:01, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

PS: I would appreciate marking points in this review with a {{done}} template, if any edits are made because of it.

MotorStorm

I am very interested in the topic and want to improve it to (eventually) FA status. Mawfive 04:37, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The article needs quite a bit of work. The lead is very small, non-free images lack fair use rationale, references are improperly formatted (try {{cite web}} and fill out the parameters), the Reviews section is a list of reviews with no prose, sectioning needs work ("Release" contains some material that belong in "Reviews", the rest of "Release" and "E3 Video Footage" should be in the same section), many portions needs references. The basic structure of most video game articles is (lead)/Plot/Gameplay/Development/Reception. Read the article and imagine placing the text you're reading into one of these sections, then restructure. Feel free to expand on it if the article warrants it. Pagrashtak 05:51, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Half-Life 2: Episode One

Valve's first journey into episodic gaming and the first expansion for HL2. Now exorcised of any cruft, I was hoping to progress this article to GA status and (hopefully) FA before Half-Life 2: Episode Two is released. Looking for any critiques and suggestions to help improve the article further. The article isn't that long, but I think it's as long as it can be without it being padded out - but I could be wrong. Thanks in advance for all help. - Qjuad 15:04, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

I see some print references with external links on the titles that lead to the home page of the magazine. Unless there is an online version of the article you are citing, there should not be any external links. Author information should be added to references when available. There's no need for a separate Awards section if it's going to consist of two short sentences. Incorporate into Reception. The Critical reception section overlaps too much with the review box. There's no need to have "PC Gamer US: 85%^[1] in the box and then repeat "PC Gamer magazine gave an 85% in the US edition^[1]" in the text. Try to make the text focus a little less on the score. The article could use some copy editing. I don't have time at the moment to do so myself, but a see quite a few sentences that are too wordy. For example, instead of "...Gordon experiencing some kind of vision that lets him review the explosion of the Citadel's Dark Fusion Reactor." you can say "...Gordon experiencing a vision of the Citadel's Dark Fusion Reactor exploding." (Is that supposed to be capitalized?) Pagrashtak 16:25, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments; I will get to making the appropriate changes soon. Qjuad 18:27, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

It's not bad. However: the Plot section is too long, trim some details. This section also needs copy editing. The Article requires more comparison with Half-Life 2: What is different? What is new? What has been changed/lost? This could be incorporated into a "Gameplay" section, something that all CVG FA's and GA's have (I think). Otherwise, it ain't bad. Goldfritter 18:26, 29 May 2007 (UTC)
PS: would be glad to help, when this review is done... I love me some gewd PC Games!

Thank you for your comments and offer of help; I will get to making appropriate changes soon. Qjuad 05:12, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Beyond Good & Evil (video game)

This article is currently rated as Stub-Class, any input to bring it to Good article standards or at least B-class is very appreciated. --MrStalker 09:50, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

• Try expand the lead to two paragraphs
• Remove the trivia section
• Expand the Reception section, scores from websites, quotes from reviews sales figures, any award wins/ nominations. M3tal H3ad 11:56, 2 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Qjuad

Agree with the above. I also recommend moving the plot section either before or after the gameplay section. Also, add citations of the in-game script to plot section; specifically the key moments in the storyline. If the script isn't readily available, then a gameguide can be cited. - Qjuad 03:28, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Actually, you don't need to cite a script or gameguide for plotline cites. Take a look at Final Fantasy VII or any other Final Fantasy FP (take your pick, there's tons of them!) and you'll see the accepted citation format is simply citing the exact text from the English version of the game. Green451 15:39, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Clyde

Took a look at it and did some polishing. My suggestions:

• Lead needs to include reception and language localization to fully summarize the article.
• Use the manual of the game or reviews to reference the gameplay section.
• Include in gameplay a good picture of a standard in-game moment to give the reader a feel for how it is played.
• It is unclear what the "original" language of the game is, although it is most likely that it would be French, given that the game was written and designed by French designers in France." Needs a ref; borders on OR.
• "This is one of the few games available on the market that gives practically no clues as to the native language, as everything is localized, including signs." Also needs a ref, same reason.
• Rename the entire development and sequel plans to a "sequel" or "legacy" section under reception, since that is what it is about.
• Write a development section (interviews with makers during development, marketing, previews, expo appearances, problems, changes etc.). Maybe use the interview in the external links as a start.
• Wikilink publishing dates, and make sure to inlclude them on every reference.
• I'm lead to believe there is a soundtrack that accompanies this video game. Please include a section about it.
• As previously mentioned, reception needs to be expanded. Look here or here for well written ones (preferably the former).

Have fun.--Clyde (talk) 14:10, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Pokémon Diamond and Pearl

The games have been released, and I'm trying to get the article into an acceptable standard (A-class or FA-class). I'd like to know possible improvements including the use of citations, etc. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 12:36, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

I don't see a development section. The lead tells us twice that the game takes place in Sinnoh. The "Pokemon" section needs a better title. The reader should have a reasonable expectation of what the section will be about from reading the title. That section also needs references. This sentence is unclear: "The mascots of Pokémon Diamond and Pearl are Dialga and Palkia, like Groudon and Kyogre or Ho-Oh and Lugia before them." "As their names suggest, Dialga represents Diamond, and Palkia represents Pearl." - how do their names suggest that? Pagrashtak 18:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

While I work on the other problems, the lack of material I can find for "Development" seems to be an issue. - Sotomura (Tetsuya-san) (yell : see) 10:32, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

The articles listed here and here should give you a good start. Pagrashtak 00:32, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Wild Arms (series)

After today's huge re-write, the Wild Arms series page is looking quite a bit better! This is the latest of my "get as many Wild Arms pages up to snuff as I can" project, and I'd appreciate any help you guys can give. Also, I'm aware the image MichikoNaruke.png doesn't have a fair use rationale or possibly even the right copyright tag, but I don't know what to put! Thanks for looking. Nall 04:56, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

I'd say this is at least GA status, and would reccomend listing it on the candidates page. However,

• I noticed that the picture you mentioned does indeed need a rationale. Pictures of people don't often appear in game articles. My recommendation would be to think to yourself why the picture is needed in the first place. Think logically; ideas might be

• The image is being used in an informative way and should not detract from the series
• Use of this image does not limit or prevent the license holders' ability to sell any game in the Wild Arms series
• The image helps explain the music of the Wild Arms series
• The image is of web resolution

• The lead has a little OR, as does Recurring themes. If you need a list examples of facts likely to be challenged, let me know.
• "While some critics praise Wild Arms for its unique approach to storytelling". Needs ref.
• Critical reception section feels lacking. Maybe include a table of overall scores from MetaCritic or GameRankings? I'm not quite sure.
• The external links section has the official website in Japanese. Maybe to compensate include the official entries of wild arms at the publishers and developer websites. If this is not possible, that's okay.

Top notch work.--Clyde (talk) 19:37, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

I'm glad someone got around to reviewing the article, thanks again Clyde. After a long wikibreak I may be able to tackle this one again. I'm going to look at the problems you suggested and see if I can polish it up a bit more. Changes will be added to this page as they are made. Thanks alot! Nall 00:42, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Mana (series)

The main article of the Secret of Mana series (as most people know it), is in great need of help. I want to get it to at least GA. Thoughts? Thanks so much! Judgesurreal777 19:15, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Wow this article is long.

• I would recommend splitting some of the common elements into their own articles, but make sure to include conception, creation, reception, and refs or it will be deleted as cruft. I think Rabites is a good example of something that needs to be split, expanded, and have a main article link in the series article.
• Images need fair use rationales.
• Lots of references are needed. Even has a couple of fact tags. Any fact that could be challenged needs a citation.
• Where is the reception, development, and audio sections?
• The games section needs to be structured more like this. I would suggest removing the images of every single game and summarize some of the games better.
• Once you write more of the out of universe sections, I would expand and reference the lead.

Have fun.--Clyde (talk) 19:52, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

• Your first suggestion implies that a lot of this material deserves its own article, which it doesn't since most of it is fancruft. But thank you for your other suggestions! :) Judgesurreal777 23:08, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

• If it is cruft, why is it still here?--Clyde (talk) 03:54, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

::Big non-sarcastic smile:: That's why its being peer reviewed! :) You are giving me some cover to do some major trimming! Judgesurreal777 04:49, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Well my favorite quotes are

• "A general rule of thumb to follow if unsure: if the content only has value to people actually playing the game, it's unsuitable. Keep in mind that video game articles should be readable and interesting to non-gamers; remember the bigger picture."

• "Articles on computer and video games should give an encyclopedia overview of what the game is about, not a detailed description of how to play it or an excessive amount of non-encyclopedic trivia."

Basically this.--Clyde (talk) 15:08, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

I thought of something. I would be more than happy to help write the lead (I've done quite a few), but after writing the entire article, you're probably more fit to do it. If you want me to, I will, but as the main contributor, you'll probably produce a better one.--Clyde (talk) 19:29, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

I'd say go ahead, write one, it can always be added to by others :) Judgesurreal777 23:47, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

All right, but it is the last thing to be written after all the stub tags are gone.--Clyde (talk) 23:54, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review articles

The following were nominated to standard peer review, but deal with video games, so are also shown here using the magic of templates.

Guitar Hero II

previous PR

Grand Theft Auto (series)

I want this article to reach Good Article status, but I don't know how to improve the article myself. I'd like some suggestions on how we can improve this article. - .:Alex:. 15:52, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

• Firstly, the cleanup templates should be noticed? The trivial content could be merged into the article, and citations provided for the "Similar games" section. --Phoenix 04:05, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Archives

WikiProject Video games Peer review archive Template:WPCVG