Talk:Raziel (Legacy of Kain)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Retrolord (talk · contribs) 05:01, 9 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	"he is variously described" Could you make clearer? Not done
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	"broken, ruined" can we rewrite to remove one of those words Done "unproduced, non-Legacy of Kain related" Could we just change it to "unproduced, unrelated" Done "Raziel's typical physical design" What does that mean? Does he appear differently in different games? Typical implies that he appears roughly the same in most games, but in a few he is significantly different, is that true? Done "undamaged, outstretched wings" Rewrite to remove either undamaged or outstretched Done " indirectly official media." not sure what indirectly official means Done " radiant, pupilless" remove radiant Done "cloven, tridactyl claws and feet" what does the word cloven refer to? Done " human, Sarafan incarnation" remove the word human? Done "upon devouring souls" Please remove the word devouring from the article, it isn't suitable for an encyclopedia Done "He evolves batlike wings" Please remove all 'batlike's from the article Done "his tragic nature" Make this more objective please Done In video games appearances section is a combination of the plot of several games, goes into excessive detail regarding these plots, and is confusing to someone such as myself who has not played the game. I would suggest a total rewrite of this section. Not done
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).	"story conforms to that of a tragic hero." I can find no mention of this in the sources listed near this. Could you please reference this? Not done
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	"having originally been used by the necromancer Mortanius to sire Kain." I think this is excessive and confusing. Not done "His likeness appeared extensively in promotional material and televised commercials for the Legacy of Kain series" Unneccessary detail, It is not required to point out a video game character appeared in adverts for the game that character features in. Not done "Darksiders' creative director Joe Madureira, former Capcom artist and game designer Akiman, and Clash of the Titans concept artist Tsvetomir Georgiev have also created fan art interpretations of the character" I don't understand why this is in the reception part of the article. I don't think this should be in the article at all either, as it is not that important. Not done
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Pending

OK? --Niemti (talk) 22:44, 14 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I did a rewrite of the Concept and creation section in an attempt to improve its flow and the quality of references, while shaving down the fluff. Even though I can vouch for them as true, I believe we need to cull references from The Lost Worlds (which is a fansite) as potentially unreliable under WP:SPS, which is why a few of the points sourced to this website are now gone. The particular details about his hair, throat and clan symbol seem to contravene point 3b - a bit on the fancrufty side, very much the kind of trivia that would be more suited to our own LoK wiki and not this one - so I've removed these too. Otherwise I hope this edit addresses most of the issues which have been brought up.

I don't want to adversely affect the stability of the article, so Niemti is fully welcome to revert and/or rework my edit unless he thinks it is OK. If he does, I'd be very grateful if the reviewer could comb through this new version and point out any flaws. If I have a chance, I will try to do something about the rather long-winded and uneven Appearances section too (probably more than half of that material could be cut down and still get the main points across). --LoK Wiki (talk) 23:46, 15 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm cool with everything about it, I didn't even really insert any content outside of Reception to begin with. --Niemti (talk) 00:36, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, that's done, more or less. Appearances is trimmed to the basics, and Reception looks fine to me so no call to rewrite it (unless the reviewer asks). All batlikes and devourings are now gone except those in quotations. Will stick around to help if needed! --LoK Wiki (talk) 20:26, 16 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Regarding point 2b, this is actually sourced in both of the references given (explicitly, look at page 4 of the director's interview, but the first one calls him a "tragic figure" too).

I'm not the nominator, but was the article failed because the review lapsed seven days? I don't wish to quibble as I realise there are still problems, and I am always grateful and pleased to help rework an LoK article based on any and all feedback until the reviewer deems it has reached a good standard, but, with the greatest of respect, this borders on impossibility when a series of new changes is requested less than ten minutes before the final verdict. --LoK Wiki (talk) 13:10, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't fail it because of the 7 days rule, It failed because there were significant issues with the article and it was not compliant with multiple GA criteria. Once these issues are addressed it's fine for either you or niemti to renom the article. Any questions on what i've said here let me know. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 13:17, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

OK, thank you. If, today, I attempt to address the concerns raised last night, will you be able to stay on and let me know if you feel the edits are satisfactory before any re-nom is submitted (if you have the spare time)? --LoK Wiki (talk) 13:31, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

On that point, I've just made an edit which I think deals with every criterion, apart from the more nebulous request for a total rewrite. I have taken a jab at trying to trim away a few superfluous elements in the new revision. It should also be possible to shorten it further, but given the density of the Legacy of Kain series' plot, I am simply not sure how to approach this issue productively without specifics on your part as to what is or isn't excessive or confusing (cf. the GAN for Soul Reaver 2). I think that, for this character in particular, it is difficult to straddle a balance between delivering a concise synopsis and outright failing point 3a by inadequately describing his role in the story. This goal can't truly be furthered on the basis of a one-line remark, so I will be very thankful if you can lend another few comments regarding this subject. --LoK Wiki (talk) 14:24, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sure, i'll post the additional comments tonight. ★★Retro Lord ★★ 20:44, 17 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I'm sorry to press the issue, but it has been a week now. As I said, I'm eager to address the concerns, but if you don't adequately explain your rationales, the feedback is not meaningful and I can't act on it. I'll make a few more improvements and re-nominate when the GAN backlog is a little lighter. --LoK Wiki (talk) 13:45, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry about the delay. The issue I had was that the section wandered all over the place and wasn't concise. If you could trim it down to just a "Raziel appeared in Game X and did X then X", which would be more concise than it is now I think.

Let me know if you still need help★★Retro Lord ★★ 20:54, 24 February 2013 (UTC)[reply]