Talk:Neo-Mitochondrial Creatures

Super MONGO

Incorporate images in the text, rather than as a gallery. Use the thumbnail and caption style for this. Explain much more significantly in the article intro before the history what these games are all about. In the history section, expand on the game developement and then the development of these creatures. Add more citations using ^[1] style or a similar variety of available citations. Find websites of the companies that do this work and development and add them to an external links section. All in all, a general expansion of information is need...making sure everything is explained, especially for folks like me that have no understanding of this subject matter...write the article as if you were going to explain this to people that had never before been exposed to this information or anything similar.--MONGO 09:40, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

I'll get to it. The image formatting seems a somewhat difficult affair. -Zero^Talk 10:46, 30 March 2006 (UTC)

Regarding the images the way they are currently, that might be a problem. The use of fair use galleries is a definite gray area, but there will almost certainly be people like User:Curps who object to this. So if you could integrate the images more with the text that would definitely be easier. jacoplane 12:25, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

Remember...pretend you are writing this for folks that have never been introduced to this subject matter before. Therefore, expand the explanation section 5 fold and provide more details about how this media developed, and what makes it significant.--MONGO 03:38, 5 April 2006 (UTC)

I've recently expanded the opening pharagraph to convey to the reader the purpose of the NMC's in the respective vide games. Any other minor tweaks..? -Zero^Talk 12:04, 7 April 2006 (UTC)

FailedGA

Although there is a lot of good work here, it falls just short of the good article criteria. The biggest problem is that it does not meet the conditions of WP:FICT - it seems to be written almost entirely from within the point of view of a fictional universe.

Some ideas that could help:

• Try to write from a point of view outside the perspective of the fictional universe
• Can you include details about the process of authorship? Which writers or creators developed the ideas behind this character? What did they base it on? How original is the idea? Is it based on something in real life? You ought to be able to verify this using reliable sources.
• What has the influence of the idea been outside this fictional realm? Have any other game designers professed to "adapting" ideas like this for their shows?
• What about critical response to the character? Perhaps you can talk about the gameplay aspects?

To help you along, here are 3 really useful links:

• User:Uncle G/Describe this universe (Gives the right philosophy for writing about fiction in WP: Describe this universe! Keep that at the centre of all your writing on this topic and you'll be fine.)
• Wikipedia:Guide to writing better articles#Check your fiction (pretty much the official guide on what is required of articles about fiction. Helpful but a bit dry!)
• User:BrianSmithson/Writing about fiction (Funny and useful! A must-read for anyone writing about fiction on Wikipedia... I guarantee you will find it helpful.)

The purpose of the websites needs to be established a little better: is PE HQ a fansite or an official site? If the former, it should be used with caution and mainly to establish what fans believe or think rather than as an established fact.

The article as a whole lacks context - I believe that only people familiar with the series will make much sense of it, especially the "history" section (e.g. "Neo Mitochondrial Creatures were first created soon after Melissa Pearce's transformation to Mitochondria Eve." - who? what?). It also lacks reference to the creative process behind the creatures or general gameplay aspects of them. In effect it is basically a selective plot summary - that's not good enough for GA or FA status, and is a sign that this article could do with improvement.

Another problem is the fair use galleries - opinion varies on their use, but I doubt it'll have a snowball's chance of getting through FAC with a fair use gallery.

It's not a horrendous article, and it really shows that a lot of hard work has gone into it. Inline references are nice to see, but remember that inline referencing is only half of referencing - the other key is making sure sources are reliable. To get up to the next level it really needs to get above the simple retelling level - this will help it become more recognisably "encyclopedic" TheGrappler 19:38, 15 April 2006 (UTC)