Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/MediEvil (video game)/archive1

The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 10:18, 31 May 2015 [1].

MediEvil (video game) edit

Nominator(s): JAGUAR 21:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

It's your general over-rated, under-appreciated "hack n' slash" video game that came out in 1998. I brought this up to GA last month and using all the online sources I could find, I managed to use all the hard to reach information I could find in order to produce this article, in particular the development section. In comparison to most other VG FAs, this article is compact and the prose is straight to the point, although I have reached the point where I can't expand it any more without it repeating itself. Since this is a quiet and under-appreciated game, there were few reliable/mainstream reviews I could use, though if need be I'll have to make do with what there is. I look forward to any comments given and will do anything to address them. JAGUAR 21:02, 26 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose - Internet publications did not have the reach and influence in 1998 as they do now. This over-reliance, indeed, sole-reliance on internet sources suggests it fails 1c. Other minor points - consider a "legacy" paragraph at the end of the reception section noting MediEvil 2 and MediEvil: Resurrection, the Mean Machines source is actually a Retro Gamer scan. - hahnch e n 23:14, 29 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comment. I agree that this article could do with more references, although I'm not sure where to start on looking for offline/print sources. The Mean Machines scan was the only one I could find, but I'll keep looking. I'll add a legacy section before I re-nominate as MediEvil's only legacy is its sequel JAGUAR 19:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

To find some printed sources, I would look into visiting a brick and mortar library that would have magazines on file. The article I referenced below has ISBN of the magazines they used. Wikipedia shows where you can find these titles. If there isn't a library near you that carries it ask the reference desk if they have an inter library loan program. In some cases the other library will copy them and mail them to you. Depending on your library, it might even come at no cost. On a side note, I wrote an article that I wanted to be a GA and used printed sources. One of the editors didn't seem to like the sources I got because he couldn't easily verify my claims and wanted them all to be internet sources. I thought that changing my sources to make it a GA because he was lazy was kind of odd. --Pink Fae (talk) 21:23, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose
- I believe this does need more references, especially outside of internet sources. If you look at the article Legacy of Kain: Soul Reaver, which is a featured article of a game that came out a year after this title, there are references from printed sources such as magazines and books.
- The fair use of the image File:MediEvil team.jpg is questionable. The images File:Medievil cover.jpg and File:MediEvil gameplay 001.jpg are also both being used as fair use (WP:FU) with the same rational as the development team. I think the image of the team should be removed the article is chiefly about the game and not the team that created.
- There needs to be a section in the article about marketing. The infobox shows that the game was released eight months later in Japan and then re-released in 2006-2007 for the PlayStation Network. This needs to be explained and elaborated on in the article itself. Is there any differences in these releases?
  - Pink Fae (talk) 00:25, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the helpful points. I'll ask for some offline sources and will search for more scans online if I can. About the MediEvil team image, I think it's relevant as the Development section sort of centres around the Cambridge studio team who made it, and most of the section is from Chris Sorrell's interview, but if necessary I will remove it if people think it's best. I'm in the middle of writing a new 'Release' and 'Marketing' section now, and as a matter of fact, there were a lot of changes made to the Japanese release! I was going to mention that before I nominated this for FA but I didn't see it necessary as I didn't think a Release section would be broad enough. Anyway, I'll write up a draft and will implement it before I re-nominate JAGUAR 19:14, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I can see your point of view about the photo. It isn't something that is making me oppose this article as an FA. If you add more sources and talk about the other releases, I would change this to a support. The article is very well written! --Pink Fae (talk) 21:15, 30 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator note - Jaguar, I note that you said "before I re-nominate" above. I take it this means you are open to archiving this nomination? --Laser brain (talk) 01:12, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Tks Andy -- since I'm walking through the list now I think we might take it as such... Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 10:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Closing note: This candidate has been withdrawn, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 10:18, 31 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.