Wikipedia:Peer review/The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay/archive1

The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because of a recommendation from JimmyBlackwing, the copyeditor of the article. So with some help with fellow editors, I could get Escape from Butcher Bay to FA status. Thanks, GamerPro64 (talk) 00:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs

General
- ~~There are some dabs you need to address.~~

Done. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:55, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- The alt text could use some work; there's spelling errors, issues with tone (contractions) and some very awkward wording (blood spatter over the hands doesn't translate to "blood spatter on walls", for instance.) File:CREBBRiddick.jpg is missing Alt text, however I'm going to suggest that it be removed for better compliance with WP:NFCC. If you're going to justify keeping it, it needs a much better FUR (and probably a better and larger image is necessary; you can barely see what's going on in the image, and you can push the size without going over .1 megapixels.)
I need a second opnion on removing the picture. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I say remove it. A free picture of Vin Diesel could easily be placed in Development; combined with the box shot, I'd say it's good enough to get Riddick's appearance across to readers. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
O.K, I removed the picture. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think I fixed tthe alt text in the pictures. Also, Jimmy, I tried getting a picture of Vin Diesel on the article but I have trouble with having alt text on it. GamerPro64 (talk) 03:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
If you show me which picture you're using (there's two in his article), I can help write the alt text. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well, the one that I like more on the article is File:VinDieselMarch09.jpg. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I added the picture tot the article and added the ALT text Jimmy gave me. GamerPro64 (talk) 22:04, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Prose
- "The designers of Escape from Butcher Bay sought to avoid making the game a "see-the-movie-play-the-movie" experience, in contrast to other film tie-in games." First off, quotes in the lead have to be sourced (WP:LEADCITE); secondly, this quote does jack for my understanding. "Play the movie?" I'm assuming it means it's not a fully interactive game experience, but it's better to explicitly state what they are talking about.
  - I reworded it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - It's fine in the lead now but it's still a tad unclear in the body. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - Now fixed, I think. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I probably sound like a broken record in these video game peer reviews, but... accessibility, accessibility, accessibility! I think wiki-editors have been spoiled by internal linking, so that they don't explain terms in the text. If you don't give at least a one-bit description, readers have to click away from the article... and it's doubtful they may come back. "In Escape from Butcher Bay, the player takes the role of Richard B. Riddick and attempts to escape from a prison called Butcher Bay.[1] " Who is Riddick, besides the protagonist? "Unlike many first-person shooters, the game contains no heads-up display"... what's a heads-up display (especially considering it's really nothing more than a butchering of head-up display, people might be confused.)
- There's a lot of weaselly, passive voice throughout the article, that leads to repetitious and uninteresting prose. "The player may interact with the prison's residents,[9] from whom quests may be received; the player earns information, tools and other rewards by completing quests.[10] Violent conflict often occurs between the player, inmates and prison guards.[1][9] The player may attack with Riddick's bare hands, or with improvised weapons such as shivs and clubs. Punches can be strung together to create combos."
  - Quests are only sometimes received from inmates. Most of the time, it's just idle talk. Also, talking to inmates is usually an option, not a requirement. Rewording it to active voice removes the intended meaning. I'll have to fix the other one; "the player attacks" should be fine. I don't see how any of it is "weaselly", though. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - My concern is that the sentences are all structured the same and sound repetitive. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      - I've been working on the prose for awhile, so I can't tell what you mean; I'm too close to the wording. Could you point out a few more specific examples? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I switched a few sentences, where appropriate, to active voice. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- "With Johns' help, Riddick eludes the guards and tricks them into killing the warden. The two then steal a ship and escape the prison." Wait, what? Why would the bounty hunter help Riddick?
  - This is more of an issue with content than prose. As I remember it: throughout the game, Johns gets screwed over by the prison officials; he eventually gets fed up and helps Riddick escape. It doesn't make sense here because that subplot isn't mentioned. GamerPro: is it possible to add it in? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Though I don't have a reference, I, more or less, added the text to the sentence. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:58, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

More comments when possible. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- "tarbreeze intended the game to feature more role-playing elements, but they were removed due to feedback from Diesel and game testers. Starbreeze senior producer Peter Wanat referred to the game's role-playing elements as "RPG-lite", and said, "We tried to limit the number of really hard or really intricate RPG elements, and that was a choice because we wanted the game to be playable."" Lots of repetition of elements... maybe something like "components" or another synonym to mix it up?
  - I decided that the "RPG-lite" comment was covered by the full quote, so I axed it. And I changed the word's first appearance to "systems". The repetition should be gone, now. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I see that they produced a developer commentary for the directors cut of the game. Methinks that might add to the comprehensiveness of the development section, no?
- Pet peeve for reception sections; it's generally best to list critics, not just publications, ex. "Douglass Perry of IGN" or similar. While they are representing their publication, it's still one critic's view (it also helps avoid confusion if you're reviewing different versions of the same title.) Speaking of which, are there a couple of reviews of the directors' edition that could be included?

Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done with adding names of reviewers. I will now look for quotes from the director's edition. GamerPro64 (talk) 03:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

When I have time I'll check my LexisNexis/Proquest subscriptions to look for more critical commentary and coverage from print publications. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:55, 1 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- I've grabbed a bunch of possible sources that could be used to bolster the reception, at the very least (there might be some other good info as well, I wasn't looking incredibly closely.) Send me an email and I'll reply with a PDF attachment. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:40, 10 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)

You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
- Please spell out abbreviations in the notes. I noted CVG and PALGN but there may be others.
- Newspapers and magazine titles in the references should be in italics. If you're using {{cite news}}, use the work field for the title of the paper, and the publisher field for the name of the actual company that publishes the paper
- What makes the following reliable sources?

Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 16:06, 10 December 2009 (UTC)