Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates

This is an old revision of this page, as edited by Nat91 (talk | contribs) at 05:10, 3 December 2006 (→‎[[Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon]]: support). The present address (URL) is a permanent link to this revision, which may differ significantly from the current revision.

Mystical Ninja Starring Goemon

Self-Nomination I've spent the better part of last week creating this entirely from scratch. Conveying the quirks of the game (like the Japanese humor) was a bit difficult, but I hope to have pulled it off by using a bevy of sources. The CVG magazine project came in help here. In line with CVG featured articles, I've kept the plot summary comprehensive. The prose roughly should come in around 30k. Objections will be corrected swiftly and zealously. Thanks for reviewing. --Zeality 04:33, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment. It looks good, but what's with all the inline citations? For example "Concerning graphics, reviewers noted graphical consistency and rich detail in reproducing the Japanese countryside in three dimensions.[1][29][32][5][3][30][15][33]" This is a no-no for a FA. No more than two per sentence is generally acceptable. Nat91 05:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • That's only the case in one section ("Reception") and is used to back up general claims about how reviewers regarded the game with lots of specific examples, apparently. It's hard to criticize an article for being too well-referenced, isn't it? Furthermore the sources cited tend to be ones already used earlier in the article; it makes sense that if you use a source once, and then there are other points in the article where you can back something else up with the same source, you'd do so. A potential way to be more tidy without losing the referencing would be to have a single citation at the end of all these sentences and then, within that citation, give as many references as desired ("for examples of this criticism, see A, B, C, D, E, and F."). Everyking 12:37, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • The problem should be fixed now that I've trimmed questionable reviews. I've left a message. --Zeality 14:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support. I think it's a great article. The number of references used should not be a reason not to promote this article. Personally I think that it would be better to have a MediaWiki feature which would enable readers to hide the references if they prefer. Anyway, great job on the article. jaco♫plane 16:05, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support, Although im quite new here, I believe this is a great article that deserves to be a FA. Armanalp 16:19, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - too many portions of in-universe information, per WP:FICT. — Indon (reply) — 16:52, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
— Indon (reply) — 11:54, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Argue against per WP:FA? 1b, precedents of RPG game plot-heavy featured game articles [1], [2], [3], [4], [5], and reminder that over half the article is analysis and out of universe information, meaning it is not solely a summary of that work's plot per WP:FICT. The plot summaries are in-universe; the rest is out. The summaries are "long" because WP:CVG believes that representing all major details of a topic includes representing its story. Aside from Japanese reviews and sales figures, all relevant and important out of universe information is there. The plot summary provides the reader with a full understanding of the game's story without sacrificing anything. --Zeality 14:22, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose. This badly needs a copyedit. There's lots of choppy prose (the second paragraph of the lead is a good example; lots of short sentences with lots of use of "it", with a sentence about the sequel crammed in between sentences about the critical reception), lots of names of games not italicized, and three totally unnecessary blockquotes in the story section. Also, there are three music samples (why do we need three when one would suffice?), and some of the reviews are from very shady sources (I've never heard of half of these sites, and I thought epinions was just random user reviews). - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 17:49, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Fixing the other stuff is trivial, but I've modeled the prose after Tony's guide on encyclopedic writing. This is a comparison to another FA:

snip examples

The sentences are concise and grammatically sound. There are few additive words in the article, and all are very short (such as also, too, and maybe a couple howevers). I'm not sure how I can fix this; I've spent the last few months shaping my prose in this fashion to avoid bloated sentences, unnecessary words, excess clauses and circumlocution in general. Chrono Trigger, Chrono Cross, and Frank Klepacki are written in the same style. --Zeality 18:04, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I skimmed the story and the gameplay, but the lead still isn't very good and neither is the criticism section. It feels very choppy and stilted and there's way too many sentences beginning with "It". Also, "Impact" shouldn't be italicized; it's not a long-form work. I would guess than minigames get quotes or just proper noun capitalization; whatever you do, be consistent. A little nitpick; abbreviations aren't usually okay, but it's okay to refer to a CD as a CD instead of "Compact Disk." - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:12, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I'll try to make things more streamlined, appealing, and uniform throughout the article. The shady ones come from sites Game Rankings link to. I think I can solve the aesthetic issue by cutting them out of sweeping critical statements. I still may leave one or two in if certain assertions or quotations are pretty dependent upon them. --Zeality 18:24, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just remember that not everything on Gamerankings is reliable; lots of one-man or two-man shows get in. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 18:29, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
One non-mainstream assertion is still there; specifically, the note about the game slowing down in certain places. With Tony and your advice I've copyedited the article. The reception section should flow much easier. I've trimmed Kabuking, but may I keep Festival Temple just to illustrate the soundtrack's style? The musical numbers are pretty unique, so they aren't totally representative of 90% of the game's music. Lastly, the italics issues should be fix. --Zeality 14:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I'll take another look at this when I'm ready to read it carefully, but I already see some mistakes: italicize "the Legend of Zelda series" like "the Legend of Zelda series" not "the Legend of Zelda series". Only italicize the proper name. - A Man In Bl♟ck (conspire | past ops) 14:35, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just noting for viewers that I've had four people look it over and correct typos (I made some of the edits). Since 10-31, I've also added a sequel section and addressed questions presented blow. --Zeality 21:30, 8 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose - You're going to have to give some indication to how this fared commercially, how many units did it sell? In what regions? It'd also be nice if some Japanese reviews could be sourced, such as from Famitsu. And I'm not really a fan of [1][29][32][5][3][30][15][33] as mentioned above. Just a few is enough to back up the claim, not listing every single source which agreed. - Hahnchen 17:53, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    • I wish to god someone here had Famitsus or knew someone who did; FF4's FAC process suffered a similar objection. I've searched sales data and haven't come up with anything (not even from VGCharts). Unlike our recent heavy-hitters, MNSG is relatively obscure and the gaming press has had little reason to discover its sales figures. --Zeality 18:08, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I was able to add three statements to the article from Konami press releases. Specifically, the game was popular enough to warrant the creation of an animated television show. The search continues tomorrow. I found some high-traffic Japanese game sites but they don't have anything that far back. I'm hoping to find more in that area. Finally, the sales figures thing will probably end up inactionable...I've pored over their financial reports and haven't found a thing. --Zeality 04:00, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've found review sites and added statements and reinforcements from three. I have no idea of their notability, but I made sure that they didn't allow external users to comment, covered several games, and had a rating system. Change in reception section. Again, nothing for sales figures... --Zeality 18:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just an update; Hanchen has found "Shrine of Data", a Japanese site that kept records of sales figures until recently. I posted at WP:CVG concerning its reliability (Perfect Dark uses it as well). This just leaves Famitsu. --Zeality 22:13, 12 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • comment - if konami is publicly owned you may be able to find something if they release yearly statements on their website. nintendo does this, and while it's time consuming to find, you can know straight from the horse's mouth how well many of their games did. -Zappernapper 18:48, 30 October 2006 (UTC) (edit conflict) glad i was right, lol[reply]
  • Question -- for other reviews more than for the nominator -- with regards to the using too many references for the same statement, would it be acceptable to use a single footnote which lists the references used for a statement? That seems like it would be easier to read. Personally, I'm curious, because FA has seemingly accepted similar generalization from multiple references before (statements like "critics have said" followed by multiple references to critics making the claim) but there's no obvious way to do it when the claim requires a lot of backup. -- Bailey(talk) 21:20, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Not badly written at all, but could do a run-through with someone else's fresh eyes to clean up the writing here and there. I certainly wouldn't oppose this one just on the basis of 1a.
    • "Mystical Ninja was considered a hybrid of Super Mario 64 and the Legend of Zelda series.[1]"—"considered TO BE a hybrid" would be better, but I wonder why you can't just make the statement, since you have a reference citation and you don't say who did the considering. "Mystical Ninja was (?is) a hybrid of ...".
    • This is fussy, but "only" should be correctly positioned, typically later rather than earlier in a clause: "Players can only control one out of four characters at a time." --> "Players can control only one out of four characters at a time." See why?
    • The "his or her" thing is a real problem in English. Take this: "If a character loses all his or her heart points, he or she restarts at the entrance to that particular field map and the player's lives are reduced. If the player loses all his or her lives,...". There are two solutions to this ungainliness. One is to pluralise (my preference unless it causes problems): If characters lose all OF their heart points, they restart at the entrance to that particular field map, with reduced numbers of lives." (Check my hunch at the end: "reduced lives" is fuzzy.) The other solution is to stretch the grammar by using "they" and "their" for a singular subject, which is increasingly considered to be acceptable. I'd try to avoid this, but it's certainly better than lots of "his or her". Another solution is "his/her" and "s/he", which I use sometimes, but it's not all that great, is it.
    • "Players can also visit towns, which are safe from enemies." "Also" could be removed; it's the start of a paragraph, too.
    • "dragon-utilizing ferry service"—ouch, "utilise" is one of the ugliest words in the language. Can you reword it somehow. "Using" is the typical replacement, but maybe "dragon-powered" or "-pulled"? Tony 05:23, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I've done a general round of copyediting; the reception and lead should be improved. I've made an appeal on WP:CVG's talk page for a little help. --Zeality 14:25, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: Can't you collapse the references for the game text into a single citation? This is currently being discussed at WP:CVG; I suggest that you reference a page with a dump of the game's script. Of course, secondary sources are always preferred over citations of the game itself, but I understand such secondary sources probably don't exist for Mystical Ninja Goemen. --Tristam 06:11, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I started the discussion anew on CVG's talk page since the last was contained in a separate topic. I'll change per recommendations there. --Zeality 17:13, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comment: This sentence kind of bugged me:
  • Several reviewers and writers smirked at Konami's plot summary—one interviewer even laughed out loud after the director of the game revealed story details.

The first part isn't so bad, but the bolded text.. is this truly notable/encyclopedic? I understand that sometimes individual reviews are referenced for a particular statement but it just seems wrong to be that specific. Not that I have any particular WP guideline to cite... JayMars 15:53, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not really; I'll remove it. Came from an interview at IGN. --Zeality 17:07, 2 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I did some searching and found that it came from a site. I'm trying to have a fan scan a new image. --Zeality 22:01, 3 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Just wrapped up editing; I'll leave a note on his talk page he has a new policy on the talk page so I'll wait for him to see this pop up on his watchlist. Still a bit depressed that no one from WP:CVG is copyediting, but that's life. --Zeality 23:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Conditional support. I just realized I had forgotten to vote here. I still don't like the 3 and 4 inline citations. Do you really need more than 2 to back up the claim? But overall, it's a great article. Nat91 19:01, 1 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There are no more than 2 per line now. --Zeality 23:32, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Mystical_Ninja_Starring_Goemon&oldid=91730874"