Talk:Defenders of Ardania

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
Good article Defenders of Ardania 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.
Article milestones
Date Process Result
April 30, 2013 Good article nominee Listed
Did You Know
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.
 
WikiProject Apps (Rated GA-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject Apps, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of apps 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 quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
 

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Courcelles (talk · contribs) 21:54, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  • "Defenders of Ardania has an ESRB rating of Teen, a PEGI rating of 12, and a Unterhaltungssoftware Selbstkontrolle (USK)" Why spell out only one of three acronyms in a row?
  • "The game was released December 6, 2011 for the iOS[2] and on March 14, 2012" Next sentence, "The game was first released for the iOS" This is a bit redundant, might want to rework a touch.
  • PC in the first sentence and infobox. Do we mean Windows, Mac OS, or both?
  • Redlinks in the reception section... are these actually notable?
  • Ref 13 has a publication date you don't ive, and is "If the $4.99 price tags seems a bit much, there is a lite version available to give the game a free test drive." actually a criticism, given the very preceding sentence?
  • Dates of publication are also available for refs 6, 14 and 15; check all, I stopped when the first four I checked had them.
  • "While critics praised the idea of the game, they found fault in the execution." Yet ref 6 only seems to be one person's opinion. Need stronger refing for this sentence, even if it is just repeating other refs.
  • "[1][11][7]" should be in numerical order.
  • "y to force your way past a virtual stalemate."." both full stops are not needed.
  • Mix of dmy and mdy date formats.

Well, it looks like a lot, but it isn't bad, and I'll be happy to pass it when you take care of what I've found. Courcelles 22:35, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the review. I will address the points in the order you gave them:

  • Changed. I have no idea why I did it that way, so in the absence of a reason not to change it, I changed it.
  • Changed.
  • In the context of computer gaming, PC gaming is generally taken to mean Windows. If games are ported for Mac and Linux, it would be specifically mentioned, as this is still remarkably uncommon for all but blockbuster games. That being said, I have changed it to be explicit.
  • I have no idea if they are notable or not, as AFAIK WikiProject Video Games has not extablished a greenlist of reviewers for mobile. I did only choose sources that had editorial review (or what looked like it), so they *might* be notable.
  • Removed the mention of price, I could have been looking too much into it.
  • Dates of publication are in.
  • I added one more source for that.
  • Fixed.
  • Changed. It's a weird quirk I have about punctuation and quotes, but nothing worth arguing over.
  • I use MD,Y in prose and DMY in citations. Is that not acceptable?
  • I think it is ugly, but after looking, the current version of MOS:DATE does allow it when there are no strong national ties for a topic. Courcelles 23:24, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

Thanks again, Sven Manguard Wha? 23:08, 30 April 2013 (UTC)

  • Okay, good work, let me do the paperwork. Courcelles 23:25, 30 April 2013 (UTC)