Wikipedia:Peer review/Bully (video game)/archive1

Bully (video game)

I love this game. So I felt might as well see what I could do to the article. This article really is a mess though and I've no idea what to do. Buc 22:44, 27 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Let's see if I can help.

The part about the special release including a dodgeball needs to be referenced. Following it is the statement: "It is unknown", which seems to be unencyclopedic and not included.
The first two paragraphs of "Gameplay" are pure original research and should be reworded. The Gameplay should be sourced, which shouldn't be too hard to find given numerous review sites.
The first sentence of the third paragraph doesn't make any sense.
What does NPC refer to?
Actually, the whole Gameplay section needs referencing as it seems to be original research.
The setting section needs to be referenced. (this would also explain the high prevalence of very wealthy 'Old money' and 'Nouveau Riche') should be omitted. I have no idea what that even means.
Cliques: is this stated in the game or is it original research? Please include a cite.
The paragraph in the "Controversy" section is unreferenced and is original research. So is the next section.
Please do not link to copyrighted materials. Remove the YouTube and the other link.
The "ESRB" section is actually pretty well referenced with the exception of one statement listed already.
The "References to popular culture" section should probably be removed completely. It is full of original research and it includes no sources. I suggest moving the section to the talk page and adding them as you find a source.
The "Reception" section is well sourced, but the sources are not inserted correctly. Please see WP:CITE. References go after a period or comma with no space in-between them. References should not include just the link location. Instead of linking <ref>http://ps2.ign.com/articles/739/739134p1.html</ref>, please do a full cite like <ref>[http://ps2.ign.com/articles/739/739134p1.html Bully Review] from [[IGN]], posted 16 October, 2006.</ref>
External links could use some cleaning. See WP:EL. Articles on the controversy (BBC) should probably be references in the article, rather than in external links. Cheat codes probably shouldn't be linked to. The YouTube link poses copyright issues. Maybe splitting the external links into a separate section entitled "Professional reviews" would help the external links, and format them all the same way. Like *[http:// Bully Review] at IGN

References, references, references should be added. The entire article is original research and should be improved. It shouldn't be too hard to find sources for everything due to the numerous amount of reviews on the game. These are some of my opinions of suggestions, not necessarily what must happen.++aviper2k7++ 01:52, 28 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]