Wikipedia:Peer review/Worms Armageddon/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I have listed this article for peer review because the article apparently is mostly complete based on all of the available information on the Internet, but I believe that there are areas that can be improved, and I just need to know what.
Thanks, Gamingforfun365 (talk) 22:54, 5 September 2016 (UTC)
Here is just some brief comments:
- The lead is way too short
- I don't think you should break the gameplay section into so many subsections. It isn't necessary. 1 to 2 subsections are enough.
- The paragraphs are way too short. You should try to expand them/merge them together
- [1] This may be useful.
- Using subsections in a short development section further shows that there isn't much content.
- I don't recommend this style of writing the reception section. It is better to split it up by concept (e.g. graphics was praised, gameplay was criticized etc.)
— AdrianGamer (talk) 13:37, 7 September 2016 (UTC)
- I am having trouble with addressing the last issue. I know how to split up the reception section by concept, but I have added so many reviews for various platforms that it is confusing and makes me wonder what I need to put down. Can you help?
Gamingforfun365 (talk) 02:16, 8 September 2016 (UTC)- I was able to fix some other problems, but not this one, and I have no idea as to what could be added to the article based on the interview; I seem to be focusing on the really important parts of the interview and not the just important parts.
Gamingforfun365 (talk) 02:19, 8 September 2016 (UTC)- @AdrianGamer: Pinging in case he has not read my comments. Anyway, as I have said, the last problem to address is quite confusing in that I have added so many sources of various versions of the game that I do not know which ones to select.
Gamingforfun365 (talk) 05:20, 10 September 2016 (UTC)- I think that I have just found use of the interview.
Gamingforfun365 (talk) 05:30, 10 September 2016 (UTC)- I have just added the source and am now rerating the article as B.
Gamingforfun365 (talk) 05:46, 10 September 2016 (UTC)
- I have just added the source and am now rerating the article as B.
- I think that I have just found use of the interview.
- @AdrianGamer: Pinging in case he has not read my comments. Anyway, as I have said, the last problem to address is quite confusing in that I have added so many sources of various versions of the game that I do not know which ones to select.
- I was able to fix some other problems, but not this one, and I have no idea as to what could be added to the article based on the interview; I seem to be focusing on the really important parts of the interview and not the just important parts.