Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Go Vacation/archive3
- 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 article was archived by Laser brain via FACBot (talk) 21 October 2019 [1].
- Nominator(s): TheAwesomeHwyh 05:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
This is the third time I've nominated this article. The FAC immediately prior to this one failed mostly because of the need for a second copyedit, which the article has now gone through. TheAwesomeHwyh 05:40, 17 September 2019 (UTC)
Comments from Aoba47
[edit]Resolved comments
|
---|
I would see if there is a way that you could more seamlessly incorporate that information into the section. The years in which the Wii and Switch versions were released should also be added, and I would clarify in the prose that the Switch version is a port. Aoba47 (talk) 02:32, 21 September 2019 (UTC)
I have only done a quick read-through of the article, but I have noticed several areas that need improvement. The biggest issue is how the body of the article does not address the game's release at all (either the original Wii release or the Switch port). I am also uncertain about the quality of the prose, but I will provide more commentary on that once the above comments are addressed. Aoba47 (talk) 21:28, 18 September 2019 (UTC)
Thank you for addressing everything. I have collapsed the comments that have been resolved and brought down the one remaining. I will look through the article again sometime in the near future. I have concerns about the quality of the prose, but hopefully, that can be ironed out during this FAC. 04:28, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
That should cover everything up to the "Reception" section. Let me know if you have any questions. Apologies again for all of the comments. Just trying to help as much as possible. Have a great rest of your day and/or night! Aoba47 (talk) 23:31, 26 September 2019 (UTC)
I do no think it is encouraged to have subsections/separate headings for an FAC, but I am not entirely sure tbh. Aoba47 (talk) 18:36, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
I have moved down the comments that have not been addressed yet, and put the ones that have been resolved in the collapsible box to hopefully make this easier to navigate. Apologies for the trouble. Aoba47 (talk) 21:06, 3 October 2019 (UTC)
|
Thank you for addressing my comments. I have a few suggestions, which I will leave below:
- I do not believe this part, "Some reviewers, however, praised the customizable villas", is supported by a citation. The specific mention of multiple reviewers praising the villas does not appear to cited as there is only a single citation (for the Nintendo Life).
- I am uncertain about the use of the Nintendo Life citation in the paragraph about the villas. The following is the quote from the source on the villas: "This, in turn, presents you with cosmetic rewards such as different clothing styles for your Mii, or even keys that can be used to unlock furniture for your own little villa that can be accessorised Animal Crossing-style." I do not believe this type of information belongs in the reception section as the source is not really providing critical commentary on the villas. From my understanding, the citation is providing a comparison to help readers better understand the basic concept of the villas. It may be better to move this Animal Crossing comparison to the villa-focused paragraph in the "Gameplay" section instead.
- It may be helpful to add a topic sentence to the final paragraph of the reception section and the paragraph on the critical response to the soundtrack/music. I am not saying you have to, but it is a point to think about in the future.
- I am uncertain about this part, "Reviewing the Wii version, Chris Watters, a writer for GameSpot, was mostly positive about the minigames, saying that "most are decent", but that some had succumbed to "an awkward camera" or "unresponsive controls". because I do not GameSpot has a "mostly positive" response to the minigames given these quotes from the review being cited: "most of the minigames are too shallow and simplistic to inspire repeat play" and "it becomes clear that it's all very shallow and simplistic because Go Vacation's minigames don't reach the enjoyable heights of their forebears". If anything, I think GameSpot had a mostly negative reaction to the minigames.
- The word "conversely" does not make sense in this part: "Conversely, Nintendo Life's Ryan Craddock felt that they are "an undercooked version of things we've seen countless times before." "Conversely" is typically used to suggestion a juxtaposition of a previous idea, and that does not appear to be the case here.
- I am uncertain about this sentence "Critics were mixed on the game's minigames." because a majority of the reviews cited in the paragraph are more negative than positive from what I can see.
- I would encourage you to revisit the paragraph on the reception to the controls. It kind of jumps around a lot, and I would try seeing if the information could flow more into a cohesive narrative. For instance, it may be helpful to move this part: "Alessandra Borgonovo of IGN Italia praised the controls for the roller skates, saying that they were fun to use." behind the Audrey Drake review as they are both praising the controls for traveling around the resorts.
Unfortunately, I am currently taking a short wikibreak (for at least a month) to focus on some off-Wikipedia work. I am in the process of applying for jobs and debating on going back to school so I will not have the time or energy to adequately complete this review.
I hope that my comments have helped, and apologies for not seeing this through until completion. Good luck with the nomination, and I hope that it attracts more reviewers. It may be helpful to reach out to the WikiProjects or to editors experienced in video game FACs. I would recommend pinging some of the past reviewers from the previous FACs as a start. Apologies again, but if I am unable to put my full attention on the review, then I feel like I would be doing you (and all of the work you have put into this article) a real disservice. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 05:01, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Thank you for everything! Your comments have helped immensely! TheAwesomeHwyh 05:28, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Anytime. I have enjoyed working with you, and I look forward to your future projects on here. Hopefully, we can work together again in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 05:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Pinging everyone who participated in previous GAC's and FAC's: @J Milburn:, @SchroCat:, @JDC808:, @Lee Vilenski:, @Nikkimaria:, and @Namcokid47:. TheAwesomeHwyh 19:38, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
- Anytime. I have enjoyed working with you, and I look forward to your future projects on here. Hopefully, we can work together again in the future. Aoba47 (talk) 05:39, 17 October 2019 (UTC)
Comments from JM
[edit]I'm sorry you've not had much of a response at this (or the previous) FAC. I'll only speak for myself: I wasn't going to comment, as I worry that this is still not really where I'd expect a video game article to be for FA status. I didn't want to turn up and "sink" the nomination. In case you're interested, an excellent FA about a video game, in my view, is Limbo (video game) - a nice example, too, as that's far from a triple-A. Infinity Blade is also good, and perhaps of a more comparable length to this article.
- I'm not convinced that the lead really summarises the article. It doesn't really have enough about the gameplay; I know about resorts, but I only know about minigames (which are basically the whole game, no?) because of a mention of surveys. Meanwhile, there's some relatively unimportant material - the reason for the name, Hawaii as an influence...
- The writing is better, but things perhaps aren't structured as well as they could be. For example: "More than 50 activities are available on the island, including bungee jumping, ice fishing, scuba diving, miniature golf, tennis, off-road racing, and snowman building.[3] Winning some minigames unlocks more challenging modes.[5]" I know the "activities" are the minigames, but it feels like you're telling me about a relatively minor issue (difficulties unlocked by completing minigames) before you've told me what the minigames are, what their role in the game is, how you play them, even what it means to "win" them. Another example: Para 2 of development feels like bullet points... It just doesn't really flow. (And: "At one point in its development, Go Vacation had over 10,000 bugs.[19]" Is this significant?)
- The development section feels very light. It's only really the first two paragraphs that contain (underdeveloped!) production information; the announcement and release details belong in the article (and perhaps the section) but they're not really the same thing. The music discussion, on the other hand, is a little mystifying. The first sentence ("The soundtrack of Go Vacation consists of instrumental and vocal tracks from composers, musicians, and vocal artists, including Taku Inoue, Norihiko Hibino, Aubrey Ashburn, and Jody Whitesides.") is very vague. The rest of it seems to be basically irrelevant. Even if the album contains tracks from Go Vacation (which isn't explictly mentioned) it probably doesn't warrant extensive discussion in this article. Compare it to development sections in other video gaming FAs, like the ones I mentioned above.
- This is my second time writing this response. The first time around, I had a massive wall of text going over why I didn't think I could possibly get any more info out of the existing interviews, but I honestly think I wasn't being optimistic enough. I'm going to try to re-read both interviews within a few days and see what extra information I can find in them. I'll also try to make the music section less vague. TheAwesomeHwyh 04:42, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- There may be more sources to find (there are lots of video game magazines out there...), or it may be that there just isn't much content in the public domain. If the latter, then I worry that this might be an article that it's going to be very difficult to get to FA level. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:16, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
- This is my second time writing this response. The first time around, I had a massive wall of text going over why I didn't think I could possibly get any more info out of the existing interviews, but I honestly think I wasn't being optimistic enough. I'm going to try to re-read both interviews within a few days and see what extra information I can find in them. I'll also try to make the music section less vague. TheAwesomeHwyh 04:42, 20 October 2019 (UTC)
Sorry to be the voice of doom and gloom. This makes a decent GA, but I'm worried that it's going to take a push to get to FA, which may be very tricky. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:18, 19 October 2019 (UTC)
Coordinator comment - This has been open for over a month, and doesn't seem to be heading in the right direction at present. Therefore, I will be archiving it shortly and it may be re-nominated after the customary two-week waiting period. In the mean time, please action feedback as appropriate. --Laser brain (talk) 11:43, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- 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. --Laser brain (talk) 11:43, 21 October 2019 (UTC)
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.