Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review/Tremulous
Over a year ago, the Tremulous article was reviewed by someone though I can see no mention of it on the peer review page. I believe that the suggestions made at the time (Talk:Tremulous#CVG Assessment) have been carried out either mostly or completely, and would like others to have a look at the article and give some feedback. Essentially a "where to go from here", if you will. Thanks! Srhuston (talk) 05:33, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
- Hm... I don't have much time, so I'll just write a quick thing.
- There are only four references for the entire article -- if the article is going to get past a start article, it should have at least triple that many (especially for the length of the article). They should also come from reliable sources (if possible) and shouldn't come from fansites. Due to the nature of the article, it could be hard to find...
- The gameplay section needs to be re-written. (WP:GAMEGUIDE -- I'm feeling sad now that I'm remembering these things) Things like, "At Stage 2 the Aliens get the ability to become an Advanced Basilisk, an Advanced Marauder or an Advanced Granger." need to go. The prices of the human guns need to go... and things like the HUD need to be explained for non-gamers. Anything that talks about the game in that much detail needs to be cut (too bad, isn't it?).
- History should be re-named to "Development" to confer with other WikiProject Video Game articles (or not, I guess -- it's not as important as slimming down the Gameplay section drastically -- I can't stress that enough -- for this article to go anywhere, cut the Gameplay section down to size).
- It'll take a lot of work... good luck! Nomader Talk 06:13, 14 February 2008 (UTC)
---
- Some further points, jumping off Nomader- remove the gamecrufty stuff, like maps section, and cut it down. Tremulous isn't going to have an amazingly long article, and that's fine. Polish it up so that it's a nice article rather than bloated with minute details. Also, the History and reception section blur together and need to be refined in scope; one is on the development, the other is on critical reception. David Fuchs (talk) 23:31, 27 February 2008 (UTC)