Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tracer (Overwatch)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2018 [1].

Tracer (Overwatch)

Nominator(s): Soulbust (talk) 08:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the character Tracer, from Overwatch, a 2016 video game developed by Blizzard Entertainment and related Overwatch media. She is arguably the game's most popular character, being featured in the game's animated media, digital comic series, in its marketing, and the game's cover art. I believe the Tracer article has been edited and developed to FA standards; it has gone through a GA review, a peer review, and 2 copy-edits. While Tracer is occasionally referenced in media nowadays, and the possibility of further changes to Overwatch is open, for all intents & purposes, the Tracer article is virtually comprehensive when it comes to relevant material. This is my first attempt at a FAC nomination, so I'd just like to especially thank anyone who helps out (or has helped out) with this process in advance, and I'll definitely receptive to any feedback. Best wishes, Soulbust (talk) 08:00, 14 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Soulbust: This isn't showing up on the main FAC page. I think you forgot to list it there. JOE BRO 64 19:21, 22 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@TheJoebro64: Thanks for the heads up, but I really don't know what else to do though. Like I thought I had followed the 5 steps under "Nomination procedure". I see it listed here. Is it supposed to show up elsewhere? Soulbust (talk) 14:18, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Whoops, I see it now. Guess it missed my eye. JOE BRO 64 19:07, 23 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by TheJoebro64

I'll be posting some comments in a bit. From a glance this article looks pretty clean. JOE BRO 64 21:26, 24 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Round one:

Just a general note: I'd publishers wherever I can. For example, Vox Media publishes Polygon. I don't think this is an absolute requirement for FAC, but I'd do it.
Similarly, some references link to the websites they cite, but others do not. Keep your references consistent.
Her design is based upon an element from Blizzard's canceled project, Titan. How so?

More to come. JOE BRO 64 19:43, 26 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

NB re: noting publishers in {{cite web}}—this is actually incorrect usage. WPVG does it by habit, but the |publisher= field is more for books or as a non-italicized |work= field. Otherwise |work=Polygon should be sufficient. (not watching, please {{ping}}) czar 00:59, 1 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs

Oppose for now. The article is a solid foundation, but it needs a lot of love.

The article suffers from bad sentence construction throughout. Semicolons are used haphazardly, resulting in linked clauses like Geoff Goodman, lead hero designer for Overwatch, was influential in Tracer's design; she was the first hero designed for the game and was used to test the basic gameplay which suggests that Geoff Goodman was the first hero designed, not Tracer. Later on the character biography makes it sound like Tracer is a member of Overwatch but then states that Overwatch was created concurrently with her timey-wimey background. There's unnecessary passive voice that should be reworked.
Tracer belongs to the Overwatch universe but she was first introduced as a playable character in an April 2016 update for Blizzard's crossover multiplayer online battle arena game Heroes of the Storm. First, I'm not sure why I care what universe she "belongs" to, but more importantly, it's really confusing to split hairs about "playable character" and first appearances. Makes far more sense to say that she first appeared in the Overwatch trailer and then was a playable character in Heroes of the Storm. Otherwise on first scan it seems like the infobox and article body are disagreeing.
There's a lot of weird contextual fluff that's unneeded at best and confusing at worst. I'm not sure why it's important that her fictional biography be appended with Outside the game... for instance. The character is fictional, so telling me there was an "in-universe" incident that caused her powers (as opposed to an out-of-universe one?) is irrelevant.
There's an excess of quotes throughout, both in unsourced fragments (this is distracting) and long paragraphs that seem undue in weight (why does every single Kotaku panelist get sentences to talk about the character's sexual orientation?) This was noted as a problem in the PR, but it's still an issue.
Single sentences aren't paragraphs. Non-paragraphs shouldn't have subheadings dedicated to them.
Was Tracer's orientation not controversial or controversial? The article suggests the former but ends the section with another long quote that suggests it was divisive.
Probably most critically, this article is designed around someone who is familiar with Overwatch, not a casual reader, let alone someone who doesn't follow video games. The actual term "Overwatch" isn't explained until after it's already been namedropped, for instance.
- Her Blink ability, which comes with three charges, allows her to teleport a short distance in the direction she is traveling.[34] Using this ability she can "zip behind an enemy in an instant for surprise attacks, or dodge completely out of the line of fire".[43] It has a cooldown period, requiring the player to wait for each Blink to recharge.[45] Her Recall ability allows Tracer to return to her position three seconds prior, resetting her health and reloading her gun; this also has a cooldown period is an example of the article trending into gameplay minutiae that's not relevant for a Wikipedia article, as well as bogging us down with bad sentence construction. Why do we get "this has a cool down" after each mention of the ability? Does her ultimate ability *not* have a cool down, since it's not mentioned? What is a Heroic ability in Heroes of the Storm, and why is this important to spend three sentences on it versus explaining that her moveset is similar to Overwatch?
  - Do not use "nerf". And definitely don't just wiki link it to an article about NERF guns.
- Tracer is depicted with her chronal accelerator removed; the game's Twitter account confirmed the accelerator still works if removed as long as it is charging nearby.[70] Again. Relevance to someone who's a non-fan; no one is asking where that one thing that was mentioned once before is or how it works.
I don't see File:Tracer & Emily kissing comic panel.png or File:Animethon 23 - 2016 (28552553510).jpg having justification for the article. The former is just two people kissing, it's not the subject of critical commentary in and of itself and it's not necessary for visual identification (people know what kissing people look like.) And the cosplay shot is dubiously declared free, when Tracer's costume is elaborate enough it's not clear whether it falls under non-protection as utilitarian clothing.
- Given that the infobox shot is a cropping of a full shot and you later have two full-body shots to illustrate the character's poses, I'm not sure the infobox image is justified for visual identification purposes when there's a better argument for non-free usage later.
I'll do a spot-check for sourcing issues later. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:03, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Just a couple for now, but:

I've tweaked some of the minor things so far (like the semicolon usage in the Geoff Goodman sentence and the Nerf wikilinking).
I've inserted an explict clarification of when something is in-universe as opposed to out-of-universe due to past suggestions that not clarifying when applicable would be detrimental (I believe, as per this)
I'm currently working on some of the other issues you've mentioned.

Soulbust (talk) 18:41, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

some more comments:

I think it's important to clarify in-universe at the beginning of the Story and character section b/c it's under the "Development and design" section, so I think it would be helpful for readers to understand her in-universe story was designed the way it was in the fashion it was (i.e. Tracer's backstory can be found through a fictional biography).
I have tweaked the article a bit more.
I would like some reasoning as to why not to use "nerf" & if there is an alternative phrasing for that concept.
I'll be trying my best to retool the article to be less technical/full of minutiae when it comes to the gameplay mechanics.
I'll have to respectfully disagree on the kissing comic panel's justification. It's not necessary for visual identification on kissing. I assume people know what kissing looks like. It's necessary for visual identification on Tracer's identification as a lesbian, which Blizzard devs seem to have tagged as something that "just felt right to make" as "an aspect of her character." It's a critical visualization of her portrayal in the comic series, as she's not just exclusively featured in the game. And it's hard to argue that this isn't the most notable panel of her in a comic portrayal, or honestly any non-video game portrayal, seeing how in-depth her kissing scene and lesbian identification overall was covered by reliable VG sources.
I'm thinking about tweaking the Appearances section to have 2 subheadings: "Overwatch media" and "Other media", to fix the issue of that one-sentence paragraph. The only problem this causes is it separates her appearance in the HotS game from her appearance in Overwatch. The only other solution I can think of is perhaps combining Merchandising and Films into "Other media" or something like that. I'd like to have some feedback on that.
Thank you for all the suggestions, so far. I'll be working on the article to improve it. Soulbust (talk) 19:59, 27 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]
- The subheadings idea sounds good. The merchandising doesn't really mesh with the film appearance, though. It'd make more sense I think to fold it into an 'other media' heading separate from the merchandise, since that's often considered more "promotion" than an "appearance" (tie-in products versus a work in and of itself.)
- Regarding the image, WP:NFCC criteria is that "Non-free content is used only if its presence would significantly increase readers' understanding of the article topic, and its omission would be detrimental to that understanding" (emphasis mine.) Removing this image doesn't remove the readers' ability to comprehend she's a lesbian. One's sexual orientation is not inherently denoted by one's visual appearance, nor even apparent behavior (one can be bisexual despite never having kissed a member of the opposite sex). Her portrayal in the comics itself is a very small facet of the character, given that they are notable for the video game. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:53, 28 March 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Coord note

I'm afraid that having been open over six weeks this nom has stalled without any consensus to promote developing, so I'll be archiving it shortly and you can if you choose renominate after two weeks have passed and outstanding review comments have been addressed. As a first-time nominator, Soulbust, you would be eligible to participate in the FAC mentoring scheme if you'd like to give it a try. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 23:46, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been archived, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 23:47, 28 April 2018 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.