This article must adhere to the biographies of living persons (BLP) policy, even if it is not a biography, because it contains material about living persons. Contentious material about living persons that is unsourced or poorly sourcedmust be removed immediately from the article and its talk page, especially if potentially libellous. If such material is repeatedly inserted, or if you have other concerns, please report the issue to this noticeboard.If you are a subject of this article, or acting on behalf of one, and you need help, please see this help page.
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography, a collaborative effort to create, develop and organize Wikipedia's articles about people. All interested editors are invited to join the project and contribute to the discussion. For instructions on how to use this banner, please refer to the documentation.BiographyWikipedia:WikiProject BiographyTemplate:WikiProject Biographybiography articles
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
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism 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.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women 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.WomenWikipedia:WikiProject WomenTemplate:WikiProject WomenWikiProject Women articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Women writers, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of women writers 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.Women writersWikipedia:WikiProject Women writersTemplate:WikiProject Women writersWomen writers articles
This article was copy edited by a member of the Guild of Copy Editors.Guild of Copy EditorsWikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsTemplate:WikiProject Guild of Copy EditorsGuild of Copy Editors articles
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed
How is it going? I will take on this review and likely complete it by Sunday, August 13, or unlikely Monday, August 14. Seems like an interesting article and I look forward to reading! Adog (Talk・Cont) 13:57, 11 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Hello once again. For my GA reviews, I provide comments and suggestions for grammar and sentence structure for the editor-at-large. If you do not agree with a suggestion, think it is improper or inappropriate for the content, you do not have to implement it. With that, this should be my shortest review thus far. The below is for my first skim through. I will read it more thoroughly after:
She was fired after CGW was sold to Ziff-Davis in 1999, and she subsequently retired from games journalism. This sentence could possibly do without the second "she".
She became known for harsh criticism of video games she disliked. CGW thus billed her as "controversial," might be better without the comma. If the comma is still functional, on Wikipedia, they are located outside quotes I believe per MOS:LQ.
Same with the quote about the comma need to be placed outside: CGW editor Johnny Wilson described Scorpia as "one of the most refreshing people you could ever meet," ...
However, he also cited one example where the two clashed, over the role-playing game Darklands. I would remove this comma, as it adds a slight stop when there should not be a pause.
Scorpia wrote a negative review that criticized the game's bugs, and Wilson attached an editorial sidebar that gave a more positive view. may read better as Scorpia wrote a negative review criticizing the game's bugs, and Wilson attached an editorial sidebar with a more positive view.
Starting from the sentence She subsequently started a free website, where she blogged. and beyond, there is a lot of repetition of "She". I would change some to "Scorpia" to reduce redundancy as the reader will think about "she, she, she".
... and she said she bought her first computer ... runs a bit awkward. Since it is part of an interview, I would consider rephrasing this to something like: ... and in an interview with writer [Insert name] on RampantGames.com, Scorpia mentioned she bought her first computer ... or ... and in an interview with a writer on RampantGames.com, Scorpia mentioned she bought her first computer ...
This is a really bad idea, and I'm strongly tempted to revert it. Please remove this. It doesn't matter where she said it. This kind of attribution is only necessary for opinion-based statements, as in WP:ATTRIBUTEPOV. Attributing content unnecessarily like this runs counter to WP:NPOV itself, which says "Uncontested and uncontroversial factual assertions made by reliable sources should normally be directly stated in Wikipedia's voice." If people want this kept, I would really like to see a quotation from a guideline or policy that explicitly says this is necessary. NinjaRobotPirate (talk) 01:51, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@NinjaRobotPirate: Ah, then the mistake is on me. As per my statement above, editors know certain areas (policy, genre, functions) more than I do, and I am not opposed to, or admitting to, a mistake in judgment or perception of such. If by people, you mean me, I have gone ahead and reverted it to its previous version. What tripped me up is part of the statement "she said she", which I have not seen elsewhere, and was not sure we can attribute the primary subject to her own words in the article; thus, my suggestion. Is the present satisfactory or should the statement still need a re-wording? Thank you for your input and providing a well-intentioned explanation! :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 12:46, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
In addition to her writing and online presence, she provided hints to players ... I assume "hints" here is like a hint you get from looking up what to do next when you get stuck on a level or a quest or a mission. I would revise it here for clarity, or if the hint means something different, revise for that.
The sentence: CGW editor Johnny Wilson described Scorpia as "one of the most refreshing people you could ever meet," and he praised her encyclopedic knowledge of games' puzzles. does not have a reference after the sentence, although I assume it is 8 at the end of the paragraph. I believe anytime you quote, you should have the ref. at the end of the sentence for the reader's clarity, even if the whole paragraph is cited by one source per WP:MOS#Attribution.
To reduce said, per MOS:SAID, the sentence: She said that someone intimated to her ... I would rephrase to: Scorpia stated that someone intimated to her ...
She said she was already known as Scorpia because of her work ..., same issue with RampantGames interview, I would rephrase to In an interview with Arinn Dembo of Gamasutra, Scorpia stated she was already known by the pseudonym because of her work ...
Her favorite video game is Ultima IV: Quest of the Avatar. Seems like an oddball fact in the section. I say that since my favorite games change every so often, and songs change every week. Was it her favorite video game she reviewed, or of all time? Is there relevance to her personal life?
I mean, if you're a film critic, like Roger Ebert, who has sections on his favorite films, I think that information would be fine if a game critics favorite game is mentioned. GamerPro6403:59, 27 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 4-5, is that a reliable source? Seems like a blog (WP:SPS), and I am not sure if the author is well-established in his field. Also, ref. 4 links to the comments and not the article for some reason.
According to refs. 1 and 9, they seem to imply that Scorpia left the magazine rather than being fired, which would contradict the statement: Scorpia was fired after CGW was sold to Ziff Davis in 1999. The following sentence has the same issue: She said that someone intimated to her that the magazine wanted to go in a different direction as both 1 and 9 imply that she observed this regime change-in-direction rather than another person relaying this info to her.
Reading Scorpia's interview with Game Developer, it seems like she was let go along with others: "The mag changed a great deal after Russ sold it to Ziff-Davis. A number of people from the "Russ regime" were dropped besides me. CGW was going in a different direction, and I, among others, didn't fit in with it. That wasn't said to me in so many words, but it came through. Seeing what CGW eventually became, overall, I'm not too sorry that I left it. However, I don't believe that being a woman had anything to do with being dropped. This was something more in the "new broom" mold than anything else." GamerPro6405:44, 5 September 2023 (UTC)[reply]
*She insisted it was "really more work than most people realize," is missing a quote in the quote, so "'really more work than most people realize'", Since doing GA reviews, I come to know {{" '}} and {{' "}} is a thing! I would suggest using these for this.Adog (Talk・Cont) 20:30, 28 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is pretty well written, with some grammatical or sentence structure issues to be addressed. The general manual of style is ok, with some minor fixes needed. The article has a proper reference layout with no major outstanding issues. I do have some questions about some of the source's reliability or statement of facts that are presented. Please see above. According to Earwig, likely no issues, but looking at the first source there is a phrase similar to one in the article, I would double check and possibly rephrase. I checked all the sources since the article is small. I have just a few issues with some sources. See the above as well. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is broad in scope and focused on the subject. It is nice and concise. The article fairly portrays Scorpia and herself. I do not have any issues with the overall content. Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The article is stable, as there are no ongoing or active edit conflicts. The one image is relevant to the article, and its paperwork is in order. Adog (Talk・Cont) 16:05, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@GamerPro64: Alright, my bud, I have fully reviewed the article. I do have some concerns and questions about the above, some from my general knowledge and some from not understanding the genre of video game articles that are fully on Wikipedia. I want to make sure the ducks are in a row for this article since it is short. I will put this on hold if not edited in 48 hours to give you time or if you are busy. :) Adog (Talk・Cont) 19:02, 13 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
@GamerPro64 All good, thank you for letting me know! I will also be on vacation from August 23-26 to let you know as well. Though, I will be around if you need anything before or after. :) Mainly doing the GAN Drive this month to get some experience reviewing and to expand my knowledge on wonderful subjects such as this! Adog (Talk・Cont) 05:23, 15 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Also as a side note, I will be departing on vacation from August 23-26. If you happen to complete the fixes during that time, know that I am temporarily unavailable but will be back to answer or assist. Adog (Talk・Cont) 05:25, 22 August 2023 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.