Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Paper Mario

Paper Mario

The article seems to have come a long way and is nearing the criteria for featured status, but before proceeding with the nomination, there are a few things that need to be taken care of. First on my agenda is the article's locations section. As of now, the section is a stub, but I'm not certain if such a section is necessary. If it is, I will be happy to contribute to it, but if it's not, I would prefer not to spend my time and effort on it. The second main thing that I can think of that needs to be done is a general proofread of the article for the purpose of detecting uncited, poorly-worded, or unnecessary pieces of text. I would like to hear feedback this as well as any other ideas for improving the article--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 04:54, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to reiterate a few of the things I said in the last CVG peer review:

Replace the "Nintendo Power" screenshot with a non-watermarked screenshot, and
Find an in-battle screenshot.

That having been said, old problems have been replaced with new problems:

The list of battle elements should be beaten into prose form. The "heart points" and "flower points" items are too detailed and could probably be wholly removed; just because it is easier to explain than Tetra Master doesn't mean you should explain it.
Avoid in-game lingo, like HP, SP, and BP. Also avoid the use of numbers, particularly in an in-game context: It doesn't matter whether you can increase Marios HP by 5 or 50, it is merely sufficient to say "increase Mario's health."
I would not worry about making a full list of locations; Pick a few good examples (bonus points for accompanying screenshots) and resist any temptation to make it longer than a few paragraphs.
The same goes for having a "characters" section; It is generally appropriate to leave a small summary of the subpage on the main page.
(later edit) Bonus points for quoting reviewers in order to make subjective statements about the game.

Hope that helps a bit. Nifboy 19:37, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

HP is a pretty universal term though, I would use that. There's even an article on it on the wikipedia. Toastypk 05:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I wouldn't; I can't think of any situation where HP would be more appropriate than "Health" or a synonym thereof. Nifboy 05:57, 29 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I have uploaded several new screenshots which can be viewed here. Feel free to use them as you wish.--Conrad Devonshire ^Talk 07:22, 12 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]