Talk:Viva Piñata (video game)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Viva Piñata (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Anarchyte (talk · contribs) 10:09, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

I'll do this article. Anarchyte (work | talk) 10:09, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

Section overview

Overall comments/Misc

• Copyvio rating: 54.0% chance of there being a violation of this page. I assume the YouTube description took the content from Wikipedia and if that's the case, the next highest chance of there being a copyright violation is a 12.3% chance with this page. Could you double check the first possibility? The second one is fine and there are no worrys there.
• I don't own this game so I'll either need to take your word for it when it comes to the manual references, or if you have a copy, take a few photos of it.

Lead

• The first instalment of the Viva Piñata series, it was first released for[...]. Could this be reworded in any way? Such as "It is the first instalment in the Viva Piñata series and was released for[...]"?
• What is a Ruffian? Why are they antagonistic?

Gameplay

• You could possibly mention that the land used to be owned by a man named Jardiniero. It's referenced by the 2nd reference. "[...]neglected garden in Piñata Island, which was previously owned by Jardiniero, another gardener.".
• (with inter-species romances possible as well in a few cases). What cases? Could you give an example?
• [...]of that type, but can rather have the piñata eat a specific type of sweets. Change to [...]of that type and can instead have the piñata eat a specific type of sweets, to get the same results.
• See comment in #Lead about Ruffians.
• [...]leaded by "Professor Pester". Change to [...]lead by "Professor Pester".
• "sour piñatas" will occasionally[...]. Capitalise sour.
• [...]or dropping sour sweets which causes resident piñatas to become ill if consumed. According to the 6th reference, it can also result in death. That should be included.
• [...]for any reason, including being eaten by another piñata, being hit with a shovel or by Professor Pester, or after being sick for an extended period of time, after which the witch doctor Dastardos breaks the piñata. This makes no sense. "being hit with a shovel or by Professor Pester"?? Reword this please.

Development

• Rare co-founder Tim Stamper conceptualised a gardening game for the handheld Pocket PC platform in 2002, provisionally titled Your Garden. These statements are not included in the provided reference.

I don't know where "Your Garden" came from—don't think that was me—but the the Pocket PC and Tim Stamper are in what should be the source

• Ref 17 and Ref 20 are the same. Replace the link in Ref 17 with http://mundorare.com/old/especial/pinatoween/interview.html and it'll work, without archiving.
• The Viva Pinata team was[...]. Shouldn't this be The Viva Piñata team was[...]? (bolded the requested change)
• Ref 24 is dead.

Release

• [...]runs on both Windows XP and Windows Vista. Neither of the references say the game runs on XP.
• Is the {{clear}} necessary at the end of it?

Reception

• [...]found that frequent autosaving "hurts" its visuals and occasionally "jolts the player" out of their experience, although he praised the presentation as "nice". Paraphrasing "hurts" and "nice" could be done here. [...]found that the frequency of autosaving hurt the game's visuals and occasionally "jolts the player" out of their experience, although he praised the niceness of the presentantion.
• There's nothing listed in Ref 37.
• Ref 38 is dead.
• Ref 40 is dead.

Legacy

• "Just for Fun" isn't mentioned in the provided source.

Overall review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. 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:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. 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:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: (Passed)

@Jaguar and Czar: I'm going to place this article on hold while the errors above are fixed or explained. Anarchyte (work | talk) 12:00, 3 July 2016 (UTC)

• @Anarchyte, thanks for the review! (And the note—otherwise I wouldn't have known about it.) I think I've addressed everything, if you'll take a look. I haven't checked the sourcing myself—mainly did the development, at least the part that wasn't changed—but it looks like Jaguar sourced what was already there decently well by your mark. I originally wanted to improve this for FAC, but if I do that, I'd likely tear up most of what was here so that it wouldn't use primary sources, etc. Anyway, there's still the question of how it lies for now. Again, appreciate the review, and feel free to take a look at the other Rare Replay noms—hoping to have everything wrapped up in the next month for the compilation's first anniversary! czar 03:09, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
• I have several additional comments. When I was writing the company article, I used this source, which is talking about this article. It may be useful, since it covers information about the game's sales, marketing, and perhaps some more. Another comment is that the lead section seems to be a bit too short. It should be expanded to at least two paragraphs. AdrianGamer (talk) 06:23, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

  The main sections are fine IMO, but as AdrianGamer said, the lead could be expanded, mainly to include more information about the gameplay. There's only one sentence about it in there. Besides that, I'm ready to pass this nomination. Anarchyte (work | talk) 06:30, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Added a little more in Development. I had thought about expanding the lede, but didn't see what facts were missing but necessary to cover. If the article was more thorough, sure, the lede should expand to adequately summarize its contents, but I thought it was proportionate as it stands. Thanks for the sales figures—I'll use the rest in the series article ...eventually. Writing about Viva Piñata is absolutely crushing—like one degree removed from marketing tie-in games. For now, I'd rather write anything else. And with that, my original procrastination has come full circle czar 07:02, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Okay, with that out the way, I'm going to Pass this article. I may take a look at some of the other nominations later, but at the moment I'm working on Monaco: What's Yours Is Mine. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:12, 5 July 2016 (UTC)

Notes section removed

It appeared to be someone posting a review of the game, very offtopic. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 2407:7000:9BB5:AE00:8DB2:7A07:1618:63E7 (talk) 11:18, 24 January 2020 (UTC)