Wikipedia:Peer review/Guitar Hero 5/archive1

Guitar Hero 5

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Trying to get a bead on if there's anything drastically missing for this article given as the game is still not released but has a number of features/songs announced.

Thanks, MASEM (t) 15:52, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This has interesting material but presents serious problems for a reader with no background in the series. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

MOS:INTRO says in part, "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." The existing lead says little about "Gameplay" or "Development" and nothing about "Soundtrack".
The main problem here is not the lead, however. It's the lack of a clear explanation of the game that would make it easy for a general reader to understand it. The first sentence of "Gameplay" says, "Gameplay in Guitar Hero 5 will be similar to that from World Tour." Someone who knows nothing about World Tour will be lost. Even though that reader can click on the two gameplay links you provide, it would be helpful to begin the "Gameplay" section with a paragraph or two or even a short subsection that summarizes the basic essentials of the series gameplay.
The second sentence of "Gameplay" illustrates another problem. It says, "However, this version of the game will allow up to four players to any combination of instruments, meaning the game will allow multiples of the same type." This sentence doesn't make sense. Probably "players to" should be "players to choose". Furthermore, it's not clear what "meaning the game will allow multiples of the same type" means. Careful proofreading should catch missing words, typos, and other low-level errors. Re-reading from the point of view of someone who knows nothing about the Guitar Hero series should help you to spot and re-write confusing passages. Another confusing sentence occurs a couple of lines later: "The Band Revival meter will appear when a player fails out of the song... " A newbie won't know what a Band Revival meter is or what is meant by "fail out of a song". For the article to make sense, things like this need to be briefly explained.
The jargon in the article needs to be thoughtfully linked or explained. Examples of jargon or mystery terms include "unlockable content", "note track", "pitch", "whammy bar", "controller", "avatar", "gig", "touch pad", "strum bar", "drum kit", and probably others. Imagine explaining these things to somebody's great-great-grandfather who died in 1920. If you can make this clear to him, you will have solved the clarity problem.
Citation 2 is malformed.
Citation 20 is circular. It links to another Wikipedia article, not a reliable source.

I hope this helps. Finetooth (talk) 16:27, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I've tried to work on these aspects. Because the gameplay is generally the same for these games, I've relied mostly on the general series article to describe elements in depth but I've included a bit more here, and wikilinked terms that - while correct that they are not common - would be expected to be reasonably common knowledge for this topic or inferred from the context but could still have that wikilink just in case. Also the references have been fixed. A quick review would be helpful here. --MASEM (t) 16:03, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]