Wikipedia:Peer review/Toys for Bob/archive1

Toys for Bob

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

My goal is to get this to Featured Article status within a month or two. The main things I could use help with are:

Identify any gaps in the coverage, especially in the company's years under Activision.
Identify any key employees other than the founders, to help describe the company's operations.
Identify any phrases that are confusing, so that I can WP:COPYEDIT for clarity and readability.

I did reach out to Cat's Tuxedo and OceanHok, for improving related topics like Skylanders, Crash, and Spyro. I don't mind doing the work, but I could use another pair of eyes to identify gaps and find sources. My hope is there will be two or three reviewers who can see what I missed. Shooterwalker (talk) 18:03, 26 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comments from IceWelder

I couldn't go in-depth yet but here are some issues I noticed on the spot:

The founding year is not sourced, nor does it appear anywhere in the body.
The infobox states Paul Reiche III is the studio CEO. However, he left in 2020. The key persons should be updated to reflect the current leadership. Also, before his departure, Reiche was the president and for a short time co-studio head with Ford, not CEO
The number of employees in the infobox is unsourced and undated.
The infobox should note the prior ownership by Crystal Dynamics and have timespans for both parents.
Use |class=nowrap for the products field UBL or drop the timespans to avoid the awkward "2010–
16" line break.
The legal name of the company contains a comma.[1]
The "Founding and name" section should be integrated into "History" at the correct timeline position. Having it as a separate, two-line section makes it feel out of place.
The "History" section should note how Terry Falls fits into the picture. At least according to the credits, he worked with Toys for Bob only from Pandemonium!, which would make him not a founder.
In the photograph of Ford and Reiche, who is who? Also, consider cropping the image to only show the two relevant persons.
In the awards section, none of the awards were awarded to the studio, but to individual
In the games table, make the year indicators plain row headers per MOS:DTT.
Overlinking in the "Platform(s)" needs to be reduced.
There is no need for MobyGames as an EL if the official website is present per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL.
Please review the reliability of your references. Pixelkin? Charlie Intel? AusGamers? My Nintendo News? Game Rant is officially situational on WP:VG/RS but should be replaced if possible or removed if not necessary.

I will probably deep-dive at FAC if I find the time. Regards, IceWelder [✉] 11:42, 28 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Shooterwalker: to ensure that they saw the above comments. Z1720 (talk) 19:11, 18 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template. Thanks! Z1720 (talk) 16:18, 5 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

I remember the initial review and wanted to see if the other people I tagged would check in first. And then I admittedly just forgot to check back in. And then I got busy. I intend to take a good shot at this over the holidays, but any additional reviewers / sources / suggestions are appreciated. Feel free to tag me one more time if I don't get to it this coming week. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:05, 21 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Done / On hold : I did my best to incorporate all the suggestions. I could use another set of eyes on it all around, including research and comprehensiveness. But I might take my chances with a FA nomination if I can just get review from a copy editor. Shooterwalker (talk) 23:11, 26 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Ill check in with @Cat's Tuxedo: and @OceanHok: one more time. Even just to see if they have noticed any significant gaps, errors, or even new sources. If there's nothing obvious, a quick skim is still appreciated. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:23, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Could you double-check whether all of my comments have been addressed as well? Regards, IceWelder [✉] 17:25, 19 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from a selfish Panini! because he'd appreciate a quid pro quo

But seriously, who is Bob?

Lead

The "Founding and name" section mentions that the name is also there to confuse people, so I think this brief ditty could go from "to stimulate curiosity" to "to stimulate curiosity and confusion"
Although it's a personal taste, I'd replace the parenthesis with emdashes.
Ugh, I'm in a pickle. I love how you write your articles (It reminds me of my style of writing, if I were a good writer), so now I feel guilty recommending that quid pro quo. Who knows, I might find more to complain about.

Origins and Star Control success

The "Founding and name" and "Origins and Star Control success" both contain different details about the company founding, and I think it's too confusing that way. Is there a reason for why these two can't be merged?
I'd link "greatest games of all time"
I'd also link role-playing game
"...inspired by Starflight, created by Greg Johnson. A few years earlier, Reiche had been friends with Johnson." I think this small second sentence breaks up flow a bit: "...inspired by Starflight, created by Greg Johnson, one of Reiche's old friends.
"they recognized they needed help with the writing and art and decided to enlist the help of friends and family" - There's no mention of family in the sentences that follow.
The George Barr portion links fantasy and art as two separate things. Does Fantastic art suffice as a combination of both of them?

Development under Crystal Dynamics

Maybe mention that Legend Entertainment developed the sequel here?
I'd link Sega
"...which led Toys for Bob to secure a publishing agreement with them instead. This led..." - Repeated use of led
Should Computer Gaming World be italicized?
This section kind of glazes over Pandemonium!, when the other video games have some content about their development and reception. In comparison, this game only gets a mention through release and could use more.
Comma after "once again"
"Soon after the release, Crystal Dynamics decided to fire the entire Toys for Bob team" - How come? This seems like good info, but the article only acknowledges that "they did"
This paragraph ends with "it was parting ways with Crystal Dynamics and Eidos Interactive" and the next one begins with "Soon after parting ways with Crystal Dynamics", which feels too repetitive. I'd rework this second sentence so it doesn't feel as such.

Acquisition by Activision

Disney's Extreme Skate Adventure lacks reception info that the other games that are listed have.
Although "toy-game interaction" makes sense within the sentence it's in, I feel "toys to life" should also be mentioned because it's the well known title.
Toys for Bob basically reimagined the toys-to-life genre, right? Isn't it also the reason why things such as Disney Infinity and Lego Dimensions exist? These couple of paragraph only really praise the game although they did a lot more than just sell well, and think it deserves more description on its long-lasting impact.

New leadership under Microsoft

A nice section. Good Job!

I'm a big fan of you work, so pardon if my comments are minimal. In light of my quid pro quo gag, I linked it in my header. I'd appreciate your comments! I also try to follow through with FACs that I peer review as well, so ping me if and when you get there. Panini!^🥪 17:16, 24 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

No need for the apologetics about the quid pro quo. Even if you aren't confident in your writing skills, it's your reading and editorial experience that helps the most here. I appreciate the fresh eyes and it helps me to iron out any other flaws and gaps. I tried to incorporate most of your suggestions. I feel more confident that there aren't any major gaps now, and I'm ready to take this to FA. PS – you can always ask me for input on anything you're working on, as a friendly editor. I can't promise I'll get to it in time, but just an open offer from one colleague to another. Shooterwalker (talk) 19:59, 26 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]