Talk:Everhood

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.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the indie task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Copy vio

Hi, I don't know why there was a copy-vio tag on the article. I wrote everything and it was cited from the articles in question. I'm leaning more towards that site pulling the information from Wikipedia. As there was no comment here. I'm not sure why the article was moved to draft as it had several citations to independent articles cover it. I've restored the information claimed for copy-vio, as visitng that site, there is barely any content on it. Andrzejbanas (talk) 01:03, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I am just an editor passing through, but from the look of this it seems to be a Wikipedia-to-external copy as Andrzejbanas says, instead of the other way around. Also I don't see where the text "Everhood was described by Screen Rant as..." appears on the external site (the lead appears in a box on the right with a link to Wikipedia, so that's clearly not copyvio). — Goszei (talk) 03:58, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

On closer inspection, the sentence "The player must avoid waves..." is copied directly from the Screenrant source, but my observation on the lead still stands. — Goszei (talk) 04:09, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone ahead and changed that sentence. The article was a start status previously and I don't really see any other reason why it's in drafts. I've contacted the user who placed it here and have got no response so I'll be submitting it for review shortly. Andrzejbanas (talk) 02:03, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

The topic passes WP:GNG and I didn't see anything that would be obvious copyvio, so I accepted the draft. As far as AFC is concerned, this passes the publishing criteria. — HELLKNOWZ ▎TALK 10:14, 4 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

long section wow

the plot's summary has enough text for a "not reading allat" edit. per mos:plotlength most lore heavy feature things (mostly movies) have a soft limit of 700 words for them. treating that as a thing to be followed, the current one would be around 700 words too long

for that, i arbitrarily decided to make a draft for a slightly less long version. look at it here wowie

would appreciate input for improvements on that, or a reason to keep it as is cogsan • (give me attention) • (see my deeds) 19:36, 19 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

got tired of waiting, removed the length juice

holy fr*ck that was a lot of characters down the drain cogsan _{• (give me attention) • (see my deeds)} 20:26, 16 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]