Talk:Sakura Wars: So Long, My Love
 | Sakura Wars: So Long, My Love 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. Review: December 15, 2017. (Reviewed version). |
boxart
[edit]Since the Wii version is already uploaded, I want to discuss it here. The PS2 version to date seems to be the more popular, and thus more widely recognized, based on sales figures and both versions vary widely from each other so putting up 1 or the other or a neutral cropped version won't solve the issue. I do know Walmart and Bestbuy just recently started stocking the Wii version, but not sure how many.
Bottom line is I'm not sure the current Wii boxart is and will remain the most widely recognized version in the English market.陣内Jinnai 19:06, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- You're probably right. However, everything I've seen over the years have said that there should only be one box art, and that's why I reverted. ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 20:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- Don't disagree with that. I just started this discussion as I think it should be changed to the one on the PS2 (I think that one was a hacked job or a pre-release version in addition). None of the PS2 covers have that artwork. Since it would be replacing an existing boxart image I didn't want to replace it without discussing it.陣内Jinnai 20:09, 21 June 2010 (UTC)
- Well someone's changing it again. Any thoughts, anyone? ♫ Melodia Chaconne ♫ (talk) 19:59, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
- New image is uploaded. This one is one is the actual PS2 image, minus the PS2 logo which i cropped out.陣内Jinnai 22:08, 16 July 2010 (UTC)
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Sakura Wars: So Long, My Love/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 09:30, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Wikilink Video game localization into the article where appropriate
- Why is the musical Cleopatra linked to the historical figure Cleopatra? I get that the play is no doubt about her, but the link implies it's a link to a musical. I'd say it's not important to mention the name of the play at all.
- "As a perfectionist, she becomes devastated when Shinjiro is injured after an attack but learns that everyone makes mistakes as they otherwise cannot grow", "Diana has the power to glimpse into the future and see people's fates but Shinjiro eventually convinces her that even if the circumstances look dire, she can fight her destiny and give her a new path to follow.", "Subaru questions why Shinjiro is able to succeed even though he is flawed. Subaru opens herself up to the group eventually recognizing everyone's importance in her life, including Shinjiro's", - this all seems like too much information, the wording doesn't seem very encyclopeadic either. I'd say lose as much of it as you can.
- "Azuchi Castle appears in New York" - just to clarify, the castle materialises in New York city by some kind of magic?
- "the Sixth Heaven appears over New York" - what does this mean?
- "After resolving to fight Nobunaga without sacrificing anyone to the Five-Ring Mandala, the only method to seal Nobunaga, Shinjiro is promoted to the rank of Captain as they go off to fight Nobunaga" - this sentence needs reworking. 3 uses of Nobunaga reads poorly. Maybe just cut "as they go off to fight Nobunaga" as it seems redundant anyway. Also I don't see the need to mention the name 'Five-Ring Mandala'; it just makes things more complicated
- "their dark clones" - what are dark clones?
- "while the game only spanned eight episodes, it had far more story content than the previous full-scale entry" - how many episodes does a full-scale entry have?
- "as they each shared the same wish." - this is redundant; get rid of it
- "Due to previous issues with missed bugs in previous NIS America localizations" - two uses of 'previous' reads awkwardly
- "One reviewer referred to it as a "first-class" game that did not frustrate." - this is an awkward sentence, and I don't think it adds anything to the article
- "and reliance on stereotypes" - what kind of stereotypes?
- "due to the age of the hardware" - the sentence this is in is too long, so I'd drop this part. I'd also say 'said the game should not be overlooked' instead of "called the game one that should not be overlooked"
- I'd wikilink save point
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- I'm assuming good faith about the reliability on some of the Japanese sources on account of the fact my Japanese language skills are not fantastic
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail: My head hurts after reading the game's plot. It seems like the most bizarre storyline imaginable. Anyway that's neither here nor there I guess. This is what I've found on the first read through. I think I'll read over it again once these issues are addressed. It strikes me as another one that could benefit from a thorough copyedit, just throwing that out there. Well done on gathering all the information though; it's very thorough. Placing on hold. Freikorp (talk) 10:13, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- I've done my best to fix all the issues you raised. I've basically needed to rewrite/cut down the plot synopsis, which was a hangover from before my rewrite. And trust me, the entire Sakura Wars is this bonkers when it comes to their plots; the readable versions in other game articles are the most stripped-down versions I could manage, and this one is bulkier and weirder than the others. Thanks for picking up the bits I missed in the rest of it, and I found a couple more that I'd missed. As to the Japanese sources, I've been very careful that all the information there is in the cited sources. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- Much better. Happy to pass this now. :) Freikorp (talk) 12:40, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- I've done my best to fix all the issues you raised. I've basically needed to rewrite/cut down the plot synopsis, which was a hangover from before my rewrite. And trust me, the entire Sakura Wars is this bonkers when it comes to their plots; the readable versions in other game articles are the most stripped-down versions I could manage, and this one is bulkier and weirder than the others. Thanks for picking up the bits I missed in the rest of it, and I found a couple more that I'd missed. As to the Japanese sources, I've been very careful that all the information there is in the cited sources. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:08, 15 December 2017 (UTC)
- Pass or Fail: My head hurts after reading the game's plot. It seems like the most bizarre storyline imaginable. Anyway that's neither here nor there I guess. This is what I've found on the first read through. I think I'll read over it again once these issues are addressed. It strikes me as another one that could benefit from a thorough copyedit, just throwing that out there. Well done on gathering all the information though; it's very thorough. Placing on hold. Freikorp (talk) 10:13, 15 December 2017 (UTC)