Wikipedia:Peer review/Metroid (series)/archive2
Metroid (series)[edit]
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I want to know what this article needs in terms of content and comprehensive before I begin making major overhauls to it, because I'd like to ultimately bring it to FAC eventually. Gary King (talk) 20:12, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
- Comments by David Fuchs
Whoops, Ruhr just reminded me about this. I've been sucking into my own world of projects. Anyhow...
- You telling me you can't have a 3 paragraph lead for 23 KB of info?
- I know you were bugging me about 'shopping a logo, but IMO Samus is actually more representative of the series as a whole anyhow, so it's a better fit. A more substantial FUR would be nice, however.
- Metroid (series)#Antagonists reads just like I suspect it was created; a chopped up and combined hash of non-notable character articles. It's poorly stitched together and overly long. Covering only the important antagonists from multiple games (metriods, ridley, dark samus, etc.) would be a better route.
- The story secition looks as though its trying to decide whether it's an integrated list or summaries with subsections. Organizing it in a table like Myst (series) or just streamlining it to prose like Halo (series) might be better options, especially since you then just have a bare link to list of media right below it, which should go regardless.
- There's some sections which have excessively clunky prose, such as the litany of "also"s in "In other media".
- Not sure about how defensible the gameplay shots are in development.
- What makes [1] a reliable source? Why is Overclocked Remix a reliable indicator of music popularity?
- In short; less story, more real world content if possible. --Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2009 (UTC)