Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Mass Effect 2/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The list was not promoted by GrahamColm 10:01, 23 March 2013 (UTC) [1].

---

Mass Effect 2

Mass Effect 2 (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

• Featured article candidates/Mass Effect 2/archive1
• Featured article candidates/Mass Effect 2/archive2

Nominator(s): Niwi3 (talk) 18:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

I am nominating this for featured article because I believe it meets the FA criteria. As far as I know, I'm the only editor of the article and have been working on it for the past 8-9 months. The article passed a good article nomination on July 9, 2012, and since then I've further improved and expanded it substantially. I've also created three separate articles, Mass Effect 2: Arrival, Mass Effect 2: Lair of the Shadow Broker and List of Mass Effect 2 downloadable content, to better organize the article. This is the first time I nominate an article for FA Status, so apologies for any inconveniences this nomination may cause. Regards.--Niwi3 (talk) 18:04, 23 February 2013 (UTC)

• Comment - You've picked a poor screenshot, replace it with one which isn't entirely in red. Try and show shooting and the mass effect powers together with your allies if you can. - hahnchen 15:11, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for taking your time to review the article.--Niwi3 (talk) 16:03, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Comments from DavidinNJ

At the current time, the article's content is excellent, its referencing is good, its structure is good, and its prose is mediocre. Here are my suggestions:

(1) Remove the bolded material from the references. For definitions, just define the item in the sentence. For example, I would have "The Citadel Council is an executive committee composed of representatives ..." rather than "Codex - Citadel Council: The Council is an executive committee composed of representatives." For quotes, the person's name should be unbolded, and outside the quotation marks. For example, I would change "Illusive Man: Shepard -- we caught a break to ..." to Illusive Man: "Shepard we caught a break to ..."

Fixed. However, I cannot move the person's name ouside the quotation marks due to the parameter |quote=. Thanks. --Niwi3 (talk) 10:00, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for the changes. This is my first time dealing with the videgame citation format. I don't like the idea of the author being inside the same quotation marks as the quote, but if that's the template design then that's what should be used.

(2) I would break the "Gameplay" and "Reception" sections each in 2 subsections. I would break "Development" into 3 rather than 2 subsections. It makes it easier to read.

I've broken the gameplay section in 3 parts. What do you think? Also, any idea on how to break the Development and Reception sections in subsections? Thank you for your comments. --Niwi3 (talk) 10:58, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Rename "Development". Call it something like "Product design", and have 3 sections - "Planning", "Development", and "Technical issues". "Reception" could be broken into "Awards", "Plot and characters development", and "Technical features". Those are just suggestions. If you have better titles, feel free to use them. DavidinNJ (talk) 12:35, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Done. What do you think? Also, I don't think we need more subsections in the Reception section, mainly because I don't know where the PlayStation 3 paragraph would fit better. I'd love more opinions from other reviewers if possible. Thanks. --Niwi3 (talk) 14:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

(3) The biggest issue I see with this article is the writing. It presumes that the person has a substantial knowledge of video gaming and software. I have a decent amount of experience with those topics, and I found myself confused at times. For example in the Gameplay section, the article reads "During conversations with NPCs, Mass Effect 2 employs a radial command menu, called Dialogue Wheel, where dialogue options depend on direction.[4]" The Technical Issues subsection states, "There were also issues with regards to crashes, video hitching and long load times on single core computers but these were later addressed in a patch.[56] Many readers will not understand the concept of dialogue options or video hitching.

Replaced video hitching with temporal freezes, and wikilinked dialogue options to the article interactive storytelling. What do you think? Thanks. --Niwi3 (talk) 10:32, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Contact me if you have any questions. DavidinNJ (talk) 04:27, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

• Oppose This article is not FA quality, and I see no evidence that it will meet featured article criteria anytime soon. This Wikipedia page has very extensive content, and good structure and referencing, but the writing quality is far below the FA standard. For example, there is a section on characters in the article that is very difficult to read. I substituted a table of characters, but the nominator of this article removed the table, and prefers the prose as-is. Furthermore the article utilizes a lot of jargon that may be difficult for people not versed in video gaming to understand, and is a bit one-sided in that it only cites positive reviews of the game. Overall, this is not a bad article, but it is clearly not among the best of Wikipedia. DavidinNJ (talk) 02:23, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the table is unnecessary because it wastes a lot of space and contains redundant information (the comment "part of Commander Shepard's squad" appears in almost every entry of the table); I'd love more opinions about this from other reviewers, if possible. As for the Reception section, Mass Effect 2 is a game that received a lot of positive reviews, so I think it's obvious that there are more positive reviews than negative reviews. I might agree with the writing being difficult for people not versed in video gaming to understand, but could you be more specific? Thank you for your time, comments, and interest.--Niwi3 (talk) 10:58, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments from FutureTrillionaire

In the gameplay section, The manual (this is the correct manual, right?) doesn't seem to support this statement: "Importing an old character allows several decisions the player made in the original game to impact the story of Mass Effect 2" Page 3 mentions that an old account will get expereince and resource bonuses, but doesn't say anything about the impact on the story.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:58, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

It also says that it keeps all the details of the character, including history (of the previous game). But I agree, so I replaced the reference with the review of IGN so it's less confusing. Thank you for taking your time to review the article, much appreciated.--Niwi3 (talk) 09:54, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

The manual does not specify that galaxy the game is set in is the Milkyway galaxy. The citation for that part says page 17. However, some of the info referenced about the ship is on page 16, and info about scanning planets for resources is on page 18.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 16:36, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks! --Niwi3 (talk) 17:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

While the manual does talk about Squad points, it doesn't seem to say anything about experience points. Another ref might be needed at the part about experience points.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 21:00, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

Done.--Niwi3 (talk) 22:02, 26 February 2013 (UTC)

"Shepard and the squad members are protected by a health bar"? I don't think this is the right way to word it. Is the health bar actually protecting them?--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 01:31, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I agree that this is confusing wording.anstosa (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks.--Niwi3 (talk) 11:13, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

The statement "if Shepard dies, the player must start the game again from the last saved point" is not supported by the source (at least not that page).--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:49, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. --Niwi3 (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

By the way, Gamepressure.com is not listed at WP:VG/RS. Are you sure this is a reliable source?--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 22:51, 9 March 2013 (UTC)

It's a third-party, published source that seems stable. In any case, I can replace it with Mass Effect 2's Prima Official Game Guide if you wish. Thanks. --Niwi3 (talk) 11:37, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Nevermind, the website is part of Gry OnLine, which is listed as a RS.--FutureTrillionaire (talk) 14:31, 10 March 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Anstosa

The second intro paragraph is not cohesive. First sentence talks about changes from the original game, the second talks about the soundtrack composer, and last ones talk about DLC. DLC can arguably be a change since it's difference DLC than the original game had, but I think the soundtrack should be omitted from this paragraph at least. anstosa (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

I've removed the soundtrack composer, and added info about how developers approached the story, which is different from the original game. What do you think? Thanks.--Niwi3 (talk) 10:58, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Much better!anstosa (talk) 17:55, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

In the second paragraph of Gameplay, I don't think "allows the player to [...] tackle missions" reads like an encyclopedia. Use less emotional verbs like "allows the player to [...] find and complete missions" anstosa (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed.--Niwi3 (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

In the third paragraph of Gameplay, I think NPC is a more appropriate description than AI. anstosa (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed.--Niwi3 (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

In Development > Technical issues "indecipherable" sounds too opinionated. Consider "difficult to read". anstosa (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed.--Niwi3 (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

In the Sequel section, "was envisioned as a trilogy from the very start" doesn't sound encyclopedic. Perhaps "from its inception"? anstosa (talk) 04:52, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Fixed. Thanks!--Niwi3 (talk) 11:06, 27 February 2013 (UTC)

Comments from Rsmary

The article says the game was released for Windows and Xbox on January 26, 2010. I did a little searching and found that some sites list that ME2 Platinum Hits for Xbox was released Jan. 19, 2010. They don't seem very reputable to me though, but can someone else also take a look into it? It seems weird to me that the Platinum Hits version was released before the original version, but it would be worth looking into. I'm curious where the Jan. 19, 2010 date came from. --Rsmary (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

To be frank, I didn't even know there was a Platinum edition of this game. Here, it says that a "Platinum Collection" was released on June 21, 2012 in Japan. --Niwi3 (talk) 12:19, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I would ignore the January 19, 2010 release date. It doesn't look like that's accurate, and from what I can tell the Platinum Hits Xbox edition was released around the same time the PS3 version was released (based on all the forum posts I went through). The Platinum Hits edition just came with DLCs and other things. Thanks for looking into it with me! --Rsmary (talk) 00:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

In the lead, the third sentence "Set within the Milky Way galaxy [...] called the Collectors in a suicide mission" sounds a little awkward. It's a little long, possibly because the "in a suicide mission" part cuts the flow of the sentence. Also, I'm not sure if it's the most accurate representation of the member recruitment. Shepard isn't trying to recruit an already existing team, he/she is trying to recruit individual members to make a team. --Rsmary (talk) 00:56, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I agree. Fixed. What do you think? Thanks. --Niwi3 (talk) 11:28, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds great! --Rsmary (talk) 00:04, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

In the Plot section, third paragraph, the sentence "Squad members survive or perish along the way depending on their loyalty, upgrades to the Normandy, and selections of specific members to perform certain tasks." doesn't flow well. "Squad members survive or perish along the way depending on their loyalty" doesn't follow the same pattern as "upgrades to the Normandy" and "selections of specific members to perform certain tasks" since the last two listings are things you can do in the game while the first listing is something that happens. It's also a little random because it doesn't sound like a linear part of the plot, thus doesn't follow well with the paragraph itself. What can we do with this to improve it? --Rsmary (talk) 04:23, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I'm not sure if I understand you clearly. As far as I know, there are mainly 3 factors that determine whether the squad members survive or not, and all these 3 are things you can do in the game. It's not random. It all depends on the player's choices. --Niwi3 (talk) 11:52, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Sorry for the confusing comment. I totally misunderstood the sentence; the actual meaning was made clear after I read your comment. Maybe we can rephrase it as "Squad members may survive or perish depending on their loyalty to Shepard, the upgrades made to the Normandy, and the tasks assigned for specific members to perform." I'd love your opinion on what phrasing you prefer. Thanks! --Rsmary (talk) 23:57, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Sounds better and seems more accurate. Thank you for your suggestions, much appreciated! --Niwi3 (talk) 11:20, 2 March 2013 (UTC)

I think the grammar of the article can use a little bit more tweaking. There are areas with misused commas, subject-verb disagreements, and a couple of other tiny misspellings. If they're not changed, I'll probably do a more thorough read and edit those myself when I get the chance. Will strikeout this comment when I'm done. --Rsmary (talk) 02:45, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I went through and made some minor changes to the article: removed a lot of unnecessary and misused commas, changed all the subject-verb disagreements I could find, and rephrased some sentences to improve flow and length. However, I do think there may still be some grammatical improvements to be made that I probably missed. --Rsmary (talk) 04:43, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

Thank you for your excellent copy-edits, much appreciated. --Niwi3 (talk) 10:36, 1 March 2013 (UTC)

I've made further improvements, especially in the Gameplay section. I think it sounds better now. --Niwi3 (talk) 10:47, 5 March 2013 (UTC)

References

• Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Graham Colm (talk) 22:58, 22 March 2013 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.