Template:Did you know nominations/Development of Deus Ex
- The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
The result was: promoted by — Crisco 1492 (talk) 14:36, 25 September 2014 (UTC)
| DYK toolbox |
|---|
Development of Deus Ex
[edit].jpg)
... that Deus Ex director Warren Spector (pictured) began to plan the game's development upon connecting his wife's fascination with The X-Files with "real world, millennial weirdness, ... conspiracy stuff"?
- ALT1:
... that the development of 2000 video game Deus Ex began when Warren Spector (pictured) connected his thoughts about conspiracy theories and his wife's fascination with The X-Files? - Reviewed: Harlem Riot of 1943
- ALT1:
Mainspaced by Czar (talk). Self nominated at 13:22, 13 July 2014 (UTC).
- Comment: 193/200 character limit, which tells me you knew you were working with a long hook. The current wording of the hook assumes that everyone knows that Deus Ex is a video game. Instead of waiting 11 words to tell the reader that you're talking about a game, why not tell us in the beginning? You can also shorten it by getting rid of the quote, since you don't need to cite someone to refer to conspiracy theories. Viriditas (talk) 23:01, 3 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Viriditas, it's phrased like that so the bold link could sit properly and it's quoted to signify Spector's own words. Would you like to suggest an ALT1? czar ♔ 02:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- I understand why it is phrased and quoted, but I don't see how that changes my criticism. I could come up with an ALT, but I would prefer that you would as an acknowledgement that the original hook isn't ideal. If you want to wait for another reviewer, that's fine with me. Viriditas (talk) 03:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- It was to say that I did not agree with your criticism. I gave it a tweak—let me know what you think? czar ♔ 03:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- Much improved, but not quite there, IMO. Pretend you've been in suspended animation since 1971 and you've been unfrozen as a test subject for Wikipedia's DYK process. You're presented with this DYK -- do you understand it? That's probably a bit extreme, but I hope you see my point. We need to write for the reader. "Millennial weirdness" is a subset of conspiracy theories, so it's redundant to even mention it. Viriditas (talk) 04:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- It's becoming more insipid as it becomes more clear, but what say you czar ♔ 05:19, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- Yeah, I see what you mean. I've restored your original DYK. Please work off an ALT instead so you don't lose your original. The two sources you're using in the article lend a bit of insight into this. GameSlice says that 1) Spector was bored with science fiction and fantasy, so he 2) found himself obsessing on the "millennial weirdness" of the late 1990s and 3) the conpsiracy "stuff" floating around, at which point he 4) saw that his wife was ignoring him in favor of The X-Files, so 5) in an aha! moment he realized he could make a game from the millennial, conspiracy, and alien themes floating around. Or in his own words on the Gamasutra postmortem, the game "combines the best of The Manchurian Candidate, Robocop and Colossus: The Forbin Project in a world inspired by The X-Files and Men in Black." In the same source he writes that the game "plugs into two popular fantasies -- the millennial madness that's gripping the world, exemplified by The X-Files and Men in Black and a general fascination with conspiracy theories and the desire to play with high-tech espionage toys." Viriditas (talk) 06:39, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- It's becoming more insipid as it becomes more clear, but what say you czar ♔ 05:19, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- Much improved, but not quite there, IMO. Pretend you've been in suspended animation since 1971 and you've been unfrozen as a test subject for Wikipedia's DYK process. You're presented with this DYK -- do you understand it? That's probably a bit extreme, but I hope you see my point. We need to write for the reader. "Millennial weirdness" is a subset of conspiracy theories, so it's redundant to even mention it. Viriditas (talk) 04:04, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- It was to say that I did not agree with your criticism. I gave it a tweak—let me know what you think? czar ♔ 03:54, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- I understand why it is phrased and quoted, but I don't see how that changes my criticism. I could come up with an ALT, but I would prefer that you would as an acknowledgement that the original hook isn't ideal. If you want to wait for another reviewer, that's fine with me. Viriditas (talk) 03:28, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
- @Viriditas, it's phrased like that so the bold link could sit properly and it's quoted to signify Spector's own words. Would you like to suggest an ALT1? czar ♔ 02:08, 4 August 2014 (UTC)
Article is new (moved from user to mainspace) and long enough (23,724). The hook has an inline citation (GameSlice), and the image is freely licensed. It isn't clear if the hook is formatted properly, as I seem to recall the retention of the comma combined with an ellipsis disputed by some, while others find it acceptable style. There's also the linking within the quotation for emphasis, which again, is somewhat disputed. Assuming for the sake of this argument that both follow correct style usage, the hook is long (193) and not very "hooky". The reader doesn't know Deus Ex is a game right away, so potential readers might be confused, and the wording of "began to plan the game's development upon connecting" didn't even make sense to me until I read the source text. I think you've taken on a complex hook so you can use the image of the director. This clearly shows your expertise, but I don't think our readers should have to put that much effort into understanding it. My personal preference is for something shorter and simpler, something more "hooky" and easy to understand. I really don't think the average passing reader is going to have any idea what "upon connecting his wife's fascination with The X-Files with 'real world, millennial weirdness, ... conspiracy stuff'" means. After reading the article and the source text, I understand what it means, but the reader should not have to read the article and the actual citation just to understand the DYK. Your ALT1 is somewhat of an improvement, but it introduces the pub. year (2000), which causes confusion again (2000 video game?) and repeats the same "connected his thoughts about conspiracy theories and his wife's fascination with The X-Files" hook. The question I ask as a reader is, why did the game begin when he connected those things? I had to read the article and the citation to find out. According to the citation, he was "bored with science fiction and fantasy", and he received inspiration to develop the new game from his surroundings (the "millennial weirdness" of the time, conspiracy theories in popular culture, and his wife's appreciation of The X-Files). This is a complex hook whose meaning isn't immediately clear. Viriditas (talk) 06:17, 5 August 2014 (UTC)
- Do you have a recommendation? I don't think it's a big deal that Deus Ex is established as a game later in the hook. As for "why", that's why it's a hook—sends readers to the article. I don't think it's necessary to explain his interest in sci-fi etc. in the hook czar ♔ 22:12, 7 August 2014 (UTC)
- Right, but I find it confusing for readers. You're assuming that people know it's a video game before telling them it's a video game. Fine, I can live with that. But then you tell the reader that the director of the game began to plan it when he connected all of these things together, which doubles the confusion for anyone unfamiliar with the topic. I think it would make a significant difference in comprehension if you were to replace the wording of "upon connecting" in the original or " connected his thoughts" in ALT1. I read hooks as if I don't know anything about the subject (beginner's mind) to put myself in the mind of a random reader. You've written this hook for fans of video games, not the reader. That's why I have a problem with it. I agree that the hook sends readers to the article to find out more, but the link between developing the game and connecting that development with conspiracy theories isn't clear in the hook. I'm sure you can find a fan of video games to pass it, but it makes no sense to me in its current form. Viriditas (talk) 23:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
- Most hooks here do not label the hook topic's media—in fact, most leave it vague because that's how readers are drawn into the hook. The hook is absolutely written for people who know nothing about video games—it doesn't use jargon or assume anything. I can entertain a proposed alternative, if you have one, but if you think the original hook is unacceptable, I'd want to request a second opinion. czar ♔ 03:24, 14 August 2014 (UTC)
- Right, but I find it confusing for readers. You're assuming that people know it's a video game before telling them it's a video game. Fine, I can live with that. But then you tell the reader that the director of the game began to plan it when he connected all of these things together, which doubles the confusion for anyone unfamiliar with the topic. I think it would make a significant difference in comprehension if you were to replace the wording of "upon connecting" in the original or " connected his thoughts" in ALT1. I read hooks as if I don't know anything about the subject (beginner's mind) to put myself in the mind of a random reader. You've written this hook for fans of video games, not the reader. That's why I have a problem with it. I agree that the hook sends readers to the article to find out more, but the link between developing the game and connecting that development with conspiracy theories isn't clear in the hook. I'm sure you can find a fan of video games to pass it, but it makes no sense to me in its current form. Viriditas (talk) 23:41, 8 August 2014 (UTC)
It's been two weeks since the above, and since a new ALT hook has not been proposed, then a new reviewer is needed to give a second opinion on the existing hooks. Thanks. BlueMoonset (talk) 21:45, 28 August 2014 (UTC)- Agree, confusing. Not jargon-y, but in terms of its organization. How's about... "ALT2: ... that Warren Spector (pictured) began planning the development of Deus Ex after connecting his wife's fascination with The X-Files to "real world, millennial weirdness, ... conspiracy stuff"? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:05, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Or ALT3 ... that Warren Spector (pictured) began planning the development of Deus Ex after connecting his wife's fascination with The X-Files to "conspiracy stuff"? — Crisco 1492 (talk) 06:06, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Good suggestions. Fine by me—struck the originals czar ♔ 11:57, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- Great. Needs a review (don't know anymore if the community would consider me too involved or not). — Crisco 1492 (talk) 12:09, 11 September 2014 (UTC)
- :REVIEW COMPLETED - The following has been checked in this review by Esemono
QPQ for Harlem Riot of 1943 by Czar on July 4, 2014- Article created by Czar on July 4, 2014 and has 23769 characters of readable prose
- NPOV
- Hook is interesting, short enough sourced with Ref 2
- Every paragraph sourced
GTG -- Esemono (talk) — Preceding undated comment added 04:37, 23 September 2014 (UTC)
