Talk:Espio the Chameleon

Might not be enough...

...for a full article. It's just that what more can you really say about the character to merit encyclopedic importance?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:12, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

I've been a little lazy in finding reception. There's probably more from Sonic Heroes era. Also, the Appearances section is far from complete. Tezero (talk) 14:31, 9 May 2010 (UTC)

The reception is pretty weak, I'd say. Only the second reference really deals with his reception - the first merely mentions him, and the second is calling him fleet-footed, which is an observation, not an opinion on the character. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 02:51, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

I deleted the reception section, at the time of reading it, nothing in there constituted as "reception", they were merely random quotations about him. They didn't supply any sort of feelings for or against him. Sergecross73 msg me 20:46, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

First of all, that's not totally true. Second of all, it's about as true as it is here for almost any video game character on Wikipedia. Third of all, just removing the section is not constructive just because it's not the best type of reception (that would be "Espio is cool"/"Espio sucks" type stuff). Tezero (talk) 21:37, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Is this really needed?

Espio isn't really a major character in the Sonic story/game line. Really more of a minor recurring character. Cream doesn't even have a page, and she's a major character. IMO, this page should just be deleted. EpicVahi (talk) 19:36, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The article's stayed alive because it has critical reception and a little bit of development history info. Things like this show that the character is reasonably notable in the real world, regardless of how prominent he is in the games. For example, some editors here have provided a great article on Fawful from the Mario series, even though he only appears in three spin-offs. Tezero (talk) 22:18, 27 May 2010 (UTC)

"Critical Reception" Section

Critical Reception usually infers some sort of evaluation or opinion on the topic. A majority of what is there does not qualify as "Critical Reception". Maybe some of it could be put elsewhere, but it's not "reception". Let's review:

• GameZone staff writer Louis Bedigian claimed that "Espio must think he's part hedgehog because he can speed boost and become invisible"
  • That's not reception, that's a writer saying what Espio does.
    • The "part hedgehog" quote seems striking enough for inclusion. Tezero (talk) 22:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
      • No, it doesn't. The reviewer isn't saying the reviewer thinks Espio is a hedgehog, the reviewer is saying the reviewer thinks Espio thinks he's a hedgehog. It doesn't express any sort of feelings/review/judgement on the writer's part, he's basically saying "Espio thinks he's fast." That's not critical reception. Sergecross73 msg me 22:22, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
        • Fine. I removed it. Now, though, there are only three pieces of reception. Tezero (talk) 22:31, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• While playing Sonic Rivals 2 before its release, IGN writer Greg Miller compared a race between his character Tails and Espio to "[r]unning against the wind".[14]
  • That's not reception on the character Espio, it's a comment on the game's AI. And it's again, just a random statement. He's not saying he likes/dislikes this characteristic, that it's a good or bad thing. Rather, he's just basically saying he's fast. (I think.
    • I did remove that because it was weak. Tezero (talk) 22:12, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• Espio has been generally well-received by critics. Sega Magazine called him "[a]nother Sonic wannabe."[13]
  • That is critical reception material, I give you that. However, being a "wannabe" is a negative trait, so stating that right after he is generally well received doesn't make sense.
    • Hence "generally". Still a valid point about flow, though, so I moved the ScrewAttack thing up. Tezero (talk) 22:15, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
• Staff of ScrewAttack noted his abilities to accelerate while climbing up walls and climb on ceilings as the most interesting of the Knuckles' Chaotix cast.
  • This is critical reception. You need more comments like this. I apologize if I deleted this amongst the other poor examples.

Sergecross73 msg me 22:05, 26 May 2010 (UTC)

Bleach

The voice actors were added by an IP at one point, and I have confirmed them to be legit, with the following exception: an episode of Bleach. I removed that one, but where would it have come from? It would certainly establish cultural significance if it turned out that Espio made a cameo in another show, but it still sounded dubious. I'm just thinking aloud, but if anyone has any thoughts about it, reply here. Tezero (talk) 16:39, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   The article uses a lot of pronouns. I suggest mix things up a bit with "Espio" and "the character" to improve flow and readability. I'll also give the article a light copy edit after your sweep to address the GAN issues.

   Done. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

   The article is divided into too many subsections and gives undue weight. I suggest:

   • Combine "In the comics" and "In the anime" into a "In other adaptations" section
     • Done. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
   • Remove "Merchandising" and "Critical reception" subsections and have the content all under "Cultural impact".
     • Done. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

   The paragraph length is too varied. I suggest combining some shorted portions together to make larger paragraphs. For example, does every game appearance need a separate paragraph?

   Done. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   What makes "Video Games Blogger" and "AnimeMate" reliable sources?

   • Never really thought about the first of those. I only used it because it was the most reliable-seeming thing on the Internet that listed all the characters in Mario & Sonic at the Olympic Games. With the second Olympics game, however, I was able to use the instruction booklet because my brother owns the game. What kind of source do you suggest I use instead? Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
     • GameSpot's Tech Info on the first game lists Espio's voice actor. That demonstrates inclusion. If you want a source that shows the character as a referee, then I'm sure a video review (maybe from GameTrailers) would show that in the footage. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC))
       • Done. Tezero (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
   • About AnimeMate, I realized that it didn't seem like the most reliable thing out there, but it was the only non-fansite I could find that verified the existence of the Espio plush toy (that piece of merchandise is too obscure for Amazon, I guess...). I don't think it should be a problem, though, because the site shows a picture of the plush toy, and you can't really fake something like that. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
     • Since the picture is the only thing being used, I believe the usage is within reason. Keep in mind though, that others may not agree should the article come under review. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC))

   Some references are missing information:

   • Ref2 & 29 "Sonic Heroes". Xbox World & "Chaotix: 32X Review". Mega Zone - publishers?
     • Done. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
   • Ref5 "Fast talking". PlayStation.com - publication date?
     • Done. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)
   • Instruction manual references should include info similar to a book. See {{cite book}}
     • Done. I used Template:Cite manual as I think that's the preferred template for use in video game-related articles. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
   • Include the author if available for websites (if nothing else, "[PUBLICATION] Staff" will do), magazines (same thing), and comic books.
     • I assume you are referring to instances such as when IGN lists the author as "IGN Staff" when there is no other author. For all the sources used in this article, however, either there is an author or the source doesn't list authors. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
       • That's fine. Not that big of a deal. I sometimes add "[PUBLICATION] Staff" when no author is listed at all, but I don't think it's strictly followed rule. It mainly let's others know that there is no author listed and it maintains reference formatting. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC))
   • Include the release year or date for video game references.
     • Done. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)
   • Include the broadcast network for television episodes.
     • Done. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The major aspects are covered, but some beefing up in development and reception would be a good idea to maintain a qualtiy rating.

   I can only use what there is. This issue is especially unfortunate with this character, because characters generally get the most reception and interviews about them in their first game, but Espio's first game was a fairly obscure 32X game. Most of what I have is from Sonic Heroes, which was somewhat prominent. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

   What's currently there is fine. Just keep in mind that the article might lose its GA rating should the quality bar raise in the future. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC))

   I've added anything I've found. There just isn't that much. Tezero (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC) Found another reception thing, this time from Electronic Gaming Monthly. Tezero (talk) 22:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Neutrality looks good.

   Though I think "generally well-received" in the reception section should be changed to something like "received a mixed reception".

   Changed to "received mixed critical response" simply because using "received" and "reception" in the same sentence like that irks me somehow. Tezero (talk) 22:02, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

   Stability looks good.

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   File:EspioTheChameleon.JPG should be reduced as the file size is a bit big. Check out File:Mewtwo.png and File:Ivy Valentine.png for examples of sizes.

   Scaled to one-half of the previous size. It might look a little pixelated now, though. Tezero (talk) 18:26, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

   The fair use rationales, specifically the "purpose of use" sections, could use some expansion.

   Done. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   The article looks pretty good, but lacks polish to pass GAN. I put the nomination on hold until the above issues are addressed.

   Let me know if you have any questions or need clarification here; I have this review watchlisted. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 20:34, 17 June 2010 (UTC))

   I addressed some of these issues. I'm not ditching you; I just don't have any more time to edit right now. Be back soon. Tezero (talk) 22:13, 17 June 2010 (UTC)

   Fixed all the concerns. Tezero (talk) 19:01, 18 June 2010 (UTC)

   I gave the article a copy edit sweep as well. The only issues I have left are the sourcing above and the reviewer quotes in "Cultural impact". I think some should be paraphrased to use more professional wording, specifically Sega Magazine's second preview.

   Once those are addressed, I'll pass the article. Keep up the good work. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:00, 21 June 2010 (UTC))

   Done. Tezero (talk) 18:22, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

   Everything looks good. I passed the article. Good job. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 22:37, 21 June 2010 (UTC))

Wikiprojects

So I have to wonder, since it's already been deemed inappropriate to be part of the wikiprojects for "amphibians" and for "anime"...are any of those really appropriate? I can maybe see video games, but really, he's not prominent or relevant in hardly any of those areas. Sergecross73 msg me 15:20, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

I removed "Television" because it was only there due to the "Anime" project. He is at least somewhat prominent in the comics, though. About the "Japan" one, though, WP seems to have a weird thing where we add that project to any video games, characters, anything that was created by a Japanese company (examples: New Super Mario Bros., Super Nintendo Entertainment System) so I'm not the one to talk to about that. Tezero (talk) 18:27, 23 June 2010 (UTC)

Image

Hey, since when has there been no image? It got removed or something and seems to have never existed. Tezero (talk) 00:24, 7 October 2010 (UTC)

Possibly etymology

Is there any connection between his name and espion being the French for spy? (as in espionage) — Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.130.116.230 (talk) 22:39, 9 October 2011 (UTC)