Talk:The Darkness II

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

'Darkness' or 'The Darkness'[edit]

Throughout the article, the entity is referred to both as the Darkness and The Darkness. Is 'the' apart of its name? I say this because the article which it is linked to (Read: The Darkness) refers to it without the capitalised 'The'. Just double checking, this is a real easy fix either way. Thanks! --Leiovus (talk) 14:42, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Edit: There seems to be an overwhelming usage of 'the Darkness' in the article, so I'm going to go with that and quickly patch this up. Feel free to correct me if needed, thanks again and sorry for seemingly answering my own question, but the point is absolutely still open to discussion if need be. Thanks again. --Leiovus (talk) 14:45, 16 March 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:The Darkness II/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AntiGravityMaster (talk · contribs) 02:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Staring a review of The Darkness II, will update with details shortly. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 02:41, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Improvements by section[edit]

Lead[edit]

  • There's a single citation in the lead for "Demon Arms". This doesn't seem to be anything particularly likely to be challenged, it's verified later in the body by other sources, and the rest of the lead is absent of cites. I'd recommend removing it due to redundancy. See WP:LEAD for more details. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • If "Hell" is capitalized within the game (I'm assuming it most likely is) it should be capitalized here, and either way, it should be linked to the Hell article. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done

Gameplay[edit]

  • Opening paragraph calls the Demon Arms "demon tentacles", then "demon tendrils". Stay consistent with the nomenclature. If what the Demon Arms are isn't obvious, I'd suggest introducing them as "...Additionally, he is armed with a pair of Demon Arms, which resemble tentacles and can be used to slash enemies or pick up various items within the environment..." or something similar. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • These three sentences "When exposed to light, Jackie's health regeneration and Darkness abilities are disabled and the Darkling will vanish, leaving Jackie with firearms as his only defense. Jackie's vision will blur and he will experience a high-pitched ringing. The player must avoid directly exposing Jackie to light sources or disable them by shooting out lights or destroying power generators." should be rephrased/merged to be less fragmented. The second sentence is particularly jarring. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - I have rearranged the sentences a bit.
  • "Collecting relics, which serves as collectibles, earn a small amount of Essence." should be "serve as" and "earns". AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • Some more links would be good, for things such as "samurai sword", "blunderbuss", and "...various firearms, such as submachine guns, shotguns, and assault rifles..."
 Done
  • "Vendetta" is italicized here. Since Vendetta is not a large work, it should be put in quotes rather than italicized. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - I put a quotation mark for the first instance of mention. I don't think we need a quotation mark every time we mention this mode, but I have remove the WP:ITALIC.

Plot[edit]

  • This section is completely citation-free. While there may be some redundancy with previously listed citations, it's a bit jarring to go from a section with frequent citations into a section with absolutely none. The lead is an exception to this and generally does not need citations if the information therein is sourced later in the article, but the plot section should have some. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
We rarely have sources for this section per WP:VG/PLOT

Development[edit]

  • "Vendetta" is in plain text here. Since Vendetta is not a large work, it should be put in quotes rather than italicized. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done

Reception[edit]

  • "Sales" section should either be expanded if there is more information on it or merged into one of the other paragraphs if not. AntiGravityMaster (talk) 03:18, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - There isn't much information about the game's sales, so I have merged it to the reception section.

GA Review[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    Various small spelling and structure errors. Easily fixable.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
    Plot section uncited.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    These issues aren't too major, but they're holding back the article from meeting the criteria. You can use the {{done}} tag to indicate when a concern has been met. Feel free to shoot me a message when you believe the article is ready for reconsideration. Good luck!
@AntiGravityMaster: - Thanks for the review! I think I have fixed most of the issues. OceanHok (talk) 04:08, 24 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review (revised)[edit]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:The_Darkness_II&oldid=1206582243"