Talk:Windosill

Windosill 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: March 11, 2015. (Reviewed version).

A fact from Windosill appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 5 April 2015 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:

Did you know... that Windosill influenced games including Blek, Donut County, and Monument Valley?

A record of the entry may be seen at Wikipedia:Recent additions/2015/April. The nomination discussion and review may be seen at Template:Did you know nominations/Windosill.

Wikipedia

Video games: Indie Low‑importance

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

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

This article is supported by the indie task force.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

DYK nomination

{{Did you know nominations/Windosill}} czar ⨹ 22:19, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Images

I have contacted Smith about licensing free use images. czar ⨹ 22:15, 8 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 14:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I haven't took a video game GAN in a while. I'll finish this soon, but please let me know if you need more time ☯ Jaguar ☯ 14:03, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
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:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

Can the gameplay/plot part of the lead be expanded a little? It doesn't give a overview of what the player is supposed to do for the reader. "The player advances through eleven rooms through interacting with each level's environmental objects" - what about the game's mechanics/engine?
"It was developed by artist Patrick Smith" - is he the only member of Vectorpark or were there others who worked on the game?
"The game was first released for Windows, OS X, and web browsers in 2009" - do you know what month/date it came out? It's just that app games' releases are usually more precise
"Windosill has influenced games including Alto's Adventure, Blek, Donut County, and Monument Valley" - Monument Valley links to the valley in Utah rather than Monument Valley (video game)
There is very little on development in the lead section, given that the development section is the largest. At the moment the lead doesn't summarize the article
Gameplay section is looking a little dry. Are there no free use images that can be used to illustrate the gameplay? I have a feeling I took this GAN a little early as the section looks incomplete! Is it possible to expand?
Smith's main inspirations in the development section are unreferenced. It's the part that ends with "Italian Renaissance painters Paolo Uccello and Piero della Francesca"
"He coded his own 3D and physics code" - code overload. Would it sound better with programmed?
"Windosill 's first half was free-to-play and the second half could be unlocked with payment" - this sounds like it's in past tense. Was it made completely free-to-play at a later date?
Would you consider renaming the "Development" section to "Development and release"? The last paragraph of the development is essentially about its release and sales which differs from actual development. Please feel free to ignore as I don't know if it helps!
"Critics described Windosill as not just a game but "a toy" in itself." - should this be moved before Campbell and Rattray are introduced? The first paragraph of the reception section is usually there to summarize
"Still, Anthony Burch of Destructoid wrote that the puzzles were designed" - sounds informal
The Legacy section is too short, can it either be expanded or merged with the reception section as a level 3 header? I did a similar thing to Jumping Flash!. Also Monument Valley links to the Colorado range

References

All references are working and are formatted per VG standards

On hold

Some issues there are preventing this from meeting the GA criteria at this time, but I trust that you can handle it. It should be easy to make the lead summarize but the Gameplay section is looking a little dry and also the Legacy section is too short. The references look good, though. Please let me know if you need more time or have any questions; I look forward to hearing your reply! (I swear nothing is available outside iOS, I've never had a Apple device in my life...) ☯ Jaguar ☯ 14:41, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Czar: I notice that the GA bot didn't give you a notification, I've pinged you so you can hopefully see this ☯ Jaguar ☯ 19:40, 9 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar, appreciate the review (and the ping—not sure why the bot skips me). I think I got everything. I had left a note on the talk page that I contacted the dev and am expecting images soon. I expanded the gameplay a little, though the sources really didn't say much more apart from its simple interactions. There is no formal release date for the game. I had a note in the infobox that the May Steam date appears wrong because journalists were reporting that the game was out in April. Smith also said he didn't have a browser version at first, so it magically shows up some time that year. "2009" works the best. I think it's normal to include the Release in the Development unless the Release is notable enough to warrant its own section. The "a toy" part should be fine since it's in the critic summary section. czar ⨹ 03:44, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Close - promoted

Thank you for the improvements, czar! The article is looking better than before given that it has been expanded as much as possible and the lead now summarises. I forgot that this is considered an "old" app game, given that 2009 was six years ago(!). ☯ Jaguar ☯ 18:46, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar, thanks! I think this is actually my 50th GA, with much credit to your reviews. I have a few book articles sitting at GAN, if you're interested... czar ⨹ 18:54, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]

No problem czar, and congratulations on your 50th GA! I saw your educational GANs in the queue back when I was in the GA Cup, so I'll take a few of them soon. Funnily enough I remember seeing God's Choice lying around in my college library but I've never read it. I'll take that one first and will review a few more soon ☯ Jaguar ☯ 19:00, 11 March 2015 (UTC)[reply]