Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/System Shock 2/archive2
 | This peer review has been closed and is now archived. Please make no efforts to edit its contents. Direct comments to the article's current talk page. |
This article recently passed GA and is very close to FA in my opinion. I need people to look over this article and explain how FA improvements can be made to the article. I have been nurturing this article for over two months and fail to see anything significantly lacking for FA status. It covers all bases content wise, I believe the prose is well composed, all images have fair-use rationales. Here are some sections that might need specific attention:
- reception - does it flow well and neutral POV?
- Legacy - Im not sure that the top 100 games lists should simply be noted in one sentence and not such as "System Shock 2 has appeared in a number of best games of all time lists, composed by publications such as IGN, GameSpot, Edge, etc."
Anyway, thank you for your time. I look forward to being able to make this article better with your help. -- Noj r (talk) 20:44, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
In regards to your comments:
- Reception - it seems to be fairly NPOV, but you might want to tinker with the paragraph/point transitions to improve flow.
- Legacy - a laundry list of "Top games" doesn't suit the article any more than a fleeting mention. A balance should be found.
Some other stuff I found reading:
- Plot - it's fairly long, which isn't a problem except for that it feels like a blow-by-blow account ("first you did this, then you did this and found a shiny star") rather than summary style ("after X,Y, and Z, the player finds the shiny star"). It could probably be condensed.
- Presentation - this feels out of place, and should probably go under Development since we have no idea what they are talking about until we read the plot.
--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (talk) 22:32, 13 April 2008 (UTC)
- I Hope you don't mind me sectioning your review. I have fixed the legacy section and taken care of the presentation section. Feel free to comment back and thanks for taking the time to look over the article. Greatly appreciated. -- Noj r (talk) 06:37, 14 April 2008 (UTC)