Wikipedia:Peer review/Advance Wars 2: Black Hole Rising/archive3
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've looked into the original issues brought up and have tried to address them to the best of my ability, modelling a little of Advance Wars: Dual Strike which is currently a GA-article already. Many changes were contributed by other members as well:
- Introductory paragraph -- the issue with the intro that was brought up a few times either involved its wordiness or its containing of content that was not mentioned again in the article. I've addressed the issue by generalizing the content and making it less detailed. Anything addressed in it is mentioned again later on in more detail.
- Citations -- originally pretty weak but I've cleaned up some stuff and in comparison to Advance Wars: Dual Strike, it shouldn't be much weaker. There was a comment about citing the game itself, but I strongly believe it satisfies WP:NOR because all of the statements that use this source feature ideas that can be clearly witnessed in-game. There is no interpretation or subjectivity to the claims. All sources can be attributed to an author now do.
- General language, mostly in regards to copyediting -- I've gone through the article and done it again to try to make the language as friendly and readable as possible for those who are not familiar with the game. As I am familiar with the game, please do let me know if any part of it contains language that a newcomer would not understand (with the exception, of course, to the Plot section which is going to be full of proper nouns and story bits).
- Gameplay section -- I've cut down on some of it and regrouped them to reduce the amount of useless content. To me it looks neater than what AW:DS has, and it should be more concise/tightly-worded.
Now that I really look at it, I don't think AW:DS should be a GA article, but I want to try to make this one more fitting of the rank. An issue I had with adding content for this game is that this is about the extent to which there is verifiable, useful information. It's not as "grand" of a game as some better-known games, and I think this is about the extent to which content can be added. In either case, really looking forward to spending more time with this article and now actually trying to get it to GA status, haha.
Thanks,