Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Super Mario 64/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates‎ | Super Mario 64
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 promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 26 March 2022 [1].

Super Mario 64

edit
Nominator(s): Coolperson177

This article is about the platformer that changed 3D gaming forever (according to every video game journalist, anyway). I originally came to this article to fix a cite error, but then I saw the talk page and all the opportunities for improvement. Since then, I and many others have been working on the article to fix its prose, complete citations, and expand this article's coverage. Now, I think it's ready. Let's work to get back its star. Again. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 15:29, 20 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

edit

Comments from Panini!

edit

It was disappointing to see this delisted, so it's great to see you step up and return it to its former glory! I will review this sometime in the future. See, instead of reviewing this, a commercially and critically groundbreaking video game that reshaped both platforming and paved the future of 3D gaming and established the genre as we know it, I'm working on Color Splash. No need to thank me. Panini! • 🥪 15:53, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! It's people like you that inspired me to do this. Great job on all the article improvement you've already done! — Coolperson177 (t|c) 16:58, 24 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Alright; review time!

Infobox
Lead
  • "feature 3D gameplay, it features" - "feature" is used twice in quick succession.
  • "it features traditional Mario gameplay" - Are you still referring to the Super Mario series or the franchise here? If the former, some better clarification could be used, if the latter, I'd link it.
  • "—designed to include more details than previous games—" - This is a general statement made by every developer one way or another, which boils down to "we wanted to make this game better than the last one". It doesn't necessarily need to be there.
  • Overall, this lead section seems a bit on the short side, and I'd suggest expanding it into four paragraphs instead of three. Paragraph one can be kept intact, although the last sentence could expand on the plot a bit more. I'd move the Power Stars detail to the second paragraph, which could be used to describe gameplay. The third could be used for development and release info, as it currently only really lists names and could benefit from more detail, and the fourth for reception and legacy.
Gameplay

Seeing "Mario can do so many, like crawl, climb, and kick!" is a weird sight, but considering the gap between this and its 2D counterpart, there isn't too much that can be done about it.

  • The majority of the sentences in the first paragraph begin with "The player"; see if you can find ways to switch it up!
  • "Mario's abilities in Super Mario 64" - Considering how the game's title was mentioned in full prior to this, I don't see it necessary to do so a second time.
  • "—operated by a friendly Lakitu—" - "friendly" is unnecessary. How about instead you mention here that the Lakitu is acting as a cameraman that's broadcasting Mario, which could serve more purpose to what the Lakitu is doing?
  • "Underwater, Mario's health represents how" - Add an "instead" after health to help distinguish that it's still the same health bar.
  • When linking Princess Peach's Castle, I'd instead link to Mushroom Kingdom#Locations rather than the series page.
  • I'd mention and link overworld somewhere in the second paragraph, where you mention that the levels are open-ended.
    Fair enough; I wasn't aware "hub" was a redirect. Panini! • 🥪 17:39, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • Also link Bowser where it first appears here.
  • I've always been curious about it (and never looked it up), so I can offer a good reader perspective. What's the context behind the 'endless staircase'? What is it blocking? As in, does it block the player from entering until they've collected 70 power stars, to which it then opens up? If so, some clarification is needed.
    • Is it clear now? The text now says: "With seventy Power Stars, the player can access the final level of the game, blocked by "endless stairs", as described in the game". — Coolperson177 (t|c) 19:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think the "as described in the game" is oddly placed, but this may be because I didn't describe what I meant properly. Here's a suggested phrase: "The final level of the game is hindered by an 'endless staircase', and Mario can only bypass them by collecting seventy power stars." Am I interpreting these stairs correctly? Panini! • 🥪 17:48, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  • The Plot section is a fun read. Good Job! However, this does explain my query about the endless staircase, so my above statement applies. It's also considered a proper noun here; is it some fancy thing Bowser set up that should be capitalized, or just an endless staircase?
Development
  • I would also mention that Shigeru Miyamoto is Mario's creator to better help signify his importance.
  • "Nintendo's booth demonstrated a 3D polygon animation of Mario's head." Is this the same head as the one in the beginning menu of 64?
  • "most of the time" and "approximately" are synonyms. It was also confusing to read, so one of them can be cut for clarity.
  • Side note; I used this source when I rewrote the Appearances section for the Mario article, which documents Mario's animation and Yoshiaki Koizumi's thought process while designing. See if you can find a use for it!
  • There's a source needed for the ending sentence of the third paragraph. The info came from somewhere!
  • "Information about Super Mario 64 was leaked in November 1995" - How?
  • The majority of the sixth paragraph deals with the game's release and the struggle that came with it. Some of this info is repeated in the actual Release section below, so I would move this info down there. The first sentence about puzzles should be moved elsewhere, too.
  • Do we know just exactly how many sound effects there were for the game? That could be a good detail to know, especially if it's compared to the Zelda games in some way.
  • The Sales section should be moved down as a subheader for Reception; it's common practice for video game articles.
Reception
  • Your call: I feel this second paragraph applies more towards the demo and the game's anticipation, so one possibility is to move it under Release. Alternatively, since the next paragraph jumps immediately into post-release, some emphasis is needed to explain that.
  • If "The Whizz" is a pseudonym, you don't necessarily need to mention it; you can just cite the magazine (GamePro)
  • The organization of these paragraphs seems a bit robotic at some points. While I have no problem with the way the information is presented, some readers might get bored if every sentence is similar to one another. Here's what I mean:
    • Paul Davies of Computer and Video Games
    • Doug Perry of IGN
    • Jonti Davies of AllGame
  • There are others not listed here. Note how these all follow an "A of B" format. You can shake things up a bit by using "B's A", "A, writing for B", "Writing for B, A", and "B reviewer A".
Awards
  • You're about to become a professional programmer: there are too many awards and reviewer recognition, in my opinion, to adequately be displayed in the reviewer table. Do you know what that means? Table time! It can be put under the paragraph that's already under Awards. If you know how to put a table together, great! If not, Pssh, good luck let me know and I'll help you out.
Legacy
  • "Some fans believed that the Wario head remained in some copies of the game, which was part of another theory that "every copy of Super Mario 64 is personalized" - I'd say these two theories are too distinct from each other, and if you separate them into two different sentences you can describe more details of what they are.
  • "including a coin that had not been collected until eighteen years after release" - Could you specify that the coin wasn't supposed to be collected?
  • Beyond that, I don't see any other issues with this entire section. Again, Good Job!

Overall, that's all from me. Any questions you have I will follow up with, and if you oppose any of my comments, as long as there's a reason to justify doing so I won't fight you on it. If you have the time, I also have a video game FAC that I would appreciate comments for. It's only a quarter the size of this article. Panini! • 🥪 17:45, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Panini!: Pinging, I've addressed all your comments. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 21:33, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Everything appears to be addressed, and although I had one more comment, I'm not going to let it impede a Support. Excellent work! This amazing project will look great under your belt, and I look forward to seeing more content improvement from you in the future. It's been almost two decades now since this article appeared on the front page, and since this article received the overhaul treatment, I highly recommend you nominate this for WP:TFA. Panini! • 🥪 18:03, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Ajpolino

edit

Alright, I'm not particularly knowledgeable on video games, but I did own this game back in the day, so perhaps I can serve a "layperson"'s view of the article. I'm mostly reviewing on prose quality, since that's about all I'm qualified for here. Comments/suggestions below:

Lead
Gameplay
  • "diverse than those of previous" > "diverse than in previous"
  • "wall jumping" > "wall jump" (to fit with the rest of the list)
  • "The player can replenish... a value of five." Not to be dense, but does the blue coin replenish five health, or none? If it's five, maybe you could shorten the sentence to "The player can replenish Mario's health by collecting three types of coins: yellow, with a value of one; red, with a value of two; and blue, with a value of five."?
  • "The player can also heal by walking through a spinning heart" - are spinning hearts found throughout the levels? Only in Peach's castle? At the beginning of each level? The current source doesn't specify, but maybe you have another source that does?
  • "depleted or if he falls" > "depleted or he falls"
  • "comes back up to the surface" > "surfaces"
  • Second paragraph - maybe you could mention earlier in this paragraph that the stars unlock parts of the castle? Currently the stars are introduced several sentences before their purpose.
  • "Once the player gets at least seventy Power Stars, they can access..." > "With seventy Power Stars, the player can access..."
Plot
  • Maybe there's a well-established order you're following, but I feel the Gameplay section would have been more clear if I'd read the Plot section first. Consider flipping the order?
  • "...the castle for these portals to enter the worlds and..." > "... the castle to enter these worlds and..."
Development
  • "According to engineer Dylan ... but the codename of the Super FX chip." Could this go as a note after the sentence two above (" Miyamoto considered... miniature trains'".)? It reads like a "sources disagree" type of statement. If that's not the intention, maybe you could clarify? If that is the intention, it's odd to have it separated from its partner point.
  • "Development of Super Mario 64 began on September 7, 1994, and concluded on May 20, 1996,[27] with one year spent on the design concept and approximately two on production" Confusing to read since the period between those dates is less than 2 years. Is Sept '94 - May '96 the "two on production"?
  • "most of the time there were approximately fifteen to twenty people working on the game" > "... most of the time approximately fifteen to twenty people worked on the game".
  • Third paragraph - The order of sentences here is a bit jarring. Maybe "Super Mario 64 is one of the first games... of by outsourcing." could go earlier (maybe even first?) and "The game was first run... not the hardware" could go later where you're discussing test runs and game physics?
  • I'm not against quote boxes generally, but I don't think this quote ("When we were stuck... I'm serious") adds much to the article.
  • "Super Mario 64... who wrote the English text." makes it sound like Princess Peach wrote the English text. Rephrase for clarity?
Release
Reception
Legacy
  • "wide variety of launch games were necessary for" > "wide variety of launch games was necessary for"
  • The sentence "Though not the first... called the medium's true evolutionary leap." kind of drags. I'd suggest trimming it to just the part about camera control being a huge leap, and possibly moving it down into the influence subsection below.
  • "...now a staple of the 3D platform genre" - should this be "platformer"?
  • "... the 3D platform genre.[107] As the 3D platformer genre..." jarring to read "3D platformer genre" twice in a row. Maybe the second one could be shortened to "As the genre evolved..."?
  • Medical literature - This is the topic I normally edit in, so I'm probably stingier on this than most, but I'll go ahead and say that I think this subsection is unhelpful trivia and WP:UNDUE coverage of these studies (unless other sources on Super Mario 64 discuss the studies?). I'd suggest removing the whole subsection. If it must stay, at least change the last bullet point. The study was published in NeuroImage (it was conducted by an academic lab in Germany).
    • Fixed the error for now, but do we need consensus for removing the entire section? — Coolperson177 (t|c) 18:07, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    • Okay, so I found this source that mentions Super Mario 64: [3]. Is this high-quality enough? I'm asking because WP:RSP says Quartz might be a source to be "treated with caution" for science. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 18:40, 28 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]
      • As I said, I may be an extremist on this, but I think the fact that it has been used as a video game condition in a few studies is way over-covered here. WP:PROPORTION suggests articles cover aspects of the subject proportional to their treatment in reliable sources. Right now you have more text on medical studies than on the game's awards or sales figures. I just think it's undue, even with the Quartz article. Ajpolino (talk) 04:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
        • Okay, so I've cut down on the medical text, but I've still kept some and moved it to the beginning of the legacy section. Does it still violate WP:UNDUE? Because, I'm going to be honest, I really still want some of it in the article because of a did you know I did for this article in the past. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 13:18, 3 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Will take another look once you get through those. Thanks for the interesting read! Ajpolino (talk) 06:16, 27 February 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Ok great, just a few more suggestions from a second readthrough, then I'm happy:
  • Gameplay - "far more diverse than in previous Mario games."
  • Gameplay - "The life system from previous Mario games is kept, and Mario loses a life when..." > "As in previous Mario games, Mario loses a life when..."
  • Gameplay - "There are fifteen courses... There are fifteen Power Stars ..." It's weird to read "There are fifteen" twice in a row. Rephrase? Even something as simple as "Each of the fifteen courses has seven Power Stars. An additional fifteen Power Stars are hidden..." would be more interesting to the eye.
  • Plot - "he recovers more Power Stars, and once he gets..." > "he recovers more Power Stars. Once he gets..."
  • Development - I guess I'm not sure what you're trying to get across with "he and the level designers then took notes on the key elements of each level."
  • Development - "the rabbit was included in the final game" it's been a while and I can't recall how the rabbit was included. May be worth adding a few words?
  • Development - "...but the number was reduced to fifteen" any idea why? Time constraints?
  • Release - "At the 1999 Milia... the previous year." Is this a significant award? Feels a bit random as currently worded.
  • Reception - "... and the fact that its replayability reveals new areas and challenges" the wording doesn't seem quite right. I assume they praised its replayability, and that replaying the game reveals new areas and challenges? If I'm understanding correctly, a wording tweak is probably in order.
  • Reception - "but suggesting to players to 'skip...'"
  • Reception - "Game Informer stated that... broken'" It's not clear to the reader what the "present day" is here.
  • Reception - You introduce Paul Davies' publication several times. After the first time you can probably just say "Paul Davies".
  • Reception - I haven't looked through all the references, just happened to notice the author's name is misspelled in reference 69 (Jonti Davies)
  • Legacy - "generally only allow the" should be "allowed".

Ok I think that'll be it for me! Thanks again. Ajpolino (talk) 04:22, 2 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Great, thanks for your responses. I'm happy to support this FAC on prose. A last few thoughts pulled out of the above for you to consider (though I won't be watching, so no pressure from me!): (1) I still think the medical paragraph is undue, but if it must stay I'd suggest moving it back to the bottom where it was before. The new location feels abrupt, and distracts from SM64's actual legacy discussed in the rest of the section. (2) I'm not sure I understand the revised version of the replayability sentence. I figured I'm probably becoming annoying at this point, so I read the cited review. I'd suggest something closer to your first version; maybe "Maximum found its strongest points were the sense of freedom and the fact that replaying a level reveals new areas and challenges." Not the most exciting prose of all time, but I think it better conveys what the Maximum reviewers were getting at. (3) One more "Name of Publication..." that can be shortened is Nebojsa Radakovic of GameRevolution.
Otherwise, thanks again for an interesting read! I hope all is well. Ajpolino (talk) 22:36, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, thanks for the review! I got your last comments, and for the second one I made a mention of the switches in Super Mario 64 in the Gameplay section. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 02:44, 7 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hurricanehink

edit

It's a-me! Hurricanehink. And yea I gotta review this!

All in all, it's a pretty good article on one of the most important video game articles, so I was extra picky. Hopefully none of these comments are too difficult to address. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 21:59, 6 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't see this before, but could you get a source for it appearing on iQue Player? ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 00:30, 8 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jibreel23

edit

I will review the article more tommorow, but as of right now I think a table or infobox should be added in the awards section similar to Super Mario Odyssey's award section. Jibreel23 (talk) 00:51, 10 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I reviewed it a bit more, and in the lead of the article it says "Bowser, one of the main antagonists for the Mario franchise" should be changed to "Bowser, one of the main antagonists in the Mario franchise" or "Bowser, one of the main antagonists of the Mario franchise". Also, I think there is some good additions that should be added such as adding a little more to the Super Mario 64 DS section, and possibly or even merge it with the "other re-releases" section and make it just "Re-releases". Although I personally think you should just expand the Super Mario 64 DS section. You can also add quote box to the development section with a quote from Giles Goddard interview similar to the Paper Mario: The Origami King article and Mario Odyssey.

@Coolperson177: Nothing else at the moment, but I will review it more and let you know.Jibreel23 (talk) 23:17, 14 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review - pass

edit

Spot-checks not included.

  • Source 4 - what makes ChuApp a high-quality reliable source?
    There's one by The A.V. Club but it only says that iQue debuted in November 2003 and Mario 64 with it. FrB.TG (talk) 20:26, 15 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    @FrB.TG: After some more looking, I found this from the EE Times. Unfortunately, there's no link to a profile of the author (Yoshiko Hara), however, the magazine is owned by Aspencore, which describe themselves on their about us page as "the voice of record for the electronics industry". What do you think? — Coolperson177 (t|c) 16:02, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    This seems to be a better source but it only discusses the then-upcoming launch of iQue. Nowhere does it say that it was released in November that year or that Super Mario 64 was part of it. The link I suggested above at least provides the info that it was in 2003. FrB.TG (talk) 17:05, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
    Right, in that case, I'm removing the iQue Player from the release date section in the infobox. The sources that claim they know the dates conflict anyways (November 16th? 17th? 21st?). I'm just going to limit it to the release section. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 17:36, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@FrB.TG: I'm so sorry for bothering you, but the iQue release date has recently been added back, sourced by iQue's website. I've let the change stand, but I just wanted to check if the source meets WP:PRIMARY. — Coolperson177 (t|c) 14:26, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, yes. If anything, it's much better than any other source you could possibly find on the information. What better source than the one straight from the horse's mouth? FrB.TG (talk) 15:46, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Alright then, thanks for the review! — Coolperson177 (t|c) 15:53, 22 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Source review passes based on formatting and reliability. My concerns have been properly addressed and I found no sign of copyvio or close-paraphrasing. FrB.TG (talk) 18:10, 16 March 2022 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Super_Mario_64/archive2&oldid=1079473345"