Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article review/Nintendo Entertainment System/archive1

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

The article was removed by YellowAssessmentMonkey 02:09, 3 August 2010 [1].

Nintendo Entertainment System edit

Review commentary edit

Nintendo Entertainment System (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Toolbox
Notified: WikiProject Video games, Nintendo task force

This article would clearly not meet today's standard for featured articles. The article has numerous glaring issues:

  • WP:LEAD – For an article its size (about 32KB of prose), the lead needs to be larger and more comprehensive.
  • WP:V – There are loads of completely unsourced content throughout the article, including the following places (fails 1c):
  • Lack of comprehensiveness – More specifically, the Reception section has absolutely nothing in it except {{expand}} tags, and there should be stuff out there outlining the system's reception during its lifespan and lasting impact on the video gaming industry and pop culture in general. This fails 1b.
  • Prose – (I'll take a closer look later and may add to this section) Some of the sections, such as the Video and Oringal chassis/casing subsections are sorely lacking in any structure, and paragraphs are choppy at best and thrown-in at a whim seemingly. But in general, the entire prose needs a good copyedit. Here are some of the more glaring problems with the prose I have seen:
    • The final games released for the system were as follows: in Japan, Takahashi Meijin no Bōken Jima IV (the last game in the Adventure Island series for the system) and, in North America, among unlicensed titles, Sunday Funday was the last, whereas Wario's Woods was the last licensed game (also the only one with an ESRB rating) → seems wordy at best
    • Nintendo's own Super Mario Bros., The Legend of Zelda and Metroid franchises debuted on the NES, as did Capcom's Mega Man franchise, Konami's Castlevania franchise and Square Soft's Final Fantasy and Enix's Dragon Quest (now Square Enix's) franchises. → Seems sorely out-of-place in the context in the "History" section
    • The last paragraph in the "History" section is only one sentence.

–MuZemike 19:41, 13 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I will also add that the "Unlicensed games" subsection can also be expanded, as the first 8 or so issues of Electronic Gaming Monthly well-documented the battles between Nintendo and Tengen, especially with relation to Tetris: The Soviet Mind Game, which is not mentioned in here at all. –MuZemike 23:28, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Verifiability

Source problems:

  • [2] - No proof that this is reliable.
    • Replaced with more reliable sources. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • [3] Dead link
  • [4] Likely unreliable source. I cannot even access it.
    • Fixed. I do not know about its reliability though.陣内Jinnai 00:08, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • [5] Unreliable source. Anyone with an Giant Bomb account can edit that entry. Lack of fact-checking present. The source also claims Super Mario Bros. as one of the launch titles to be released October 18, 1985, which it was not.
  • [6] (note I did change the URL from [7], as it looked like the webmaster moved all of its files on the site into a different folder) - unreliable and no proof thereof.
  • [8] - basically an NES fansite with no reliability shown
  • [9] - same website from #17, likewise unreliable
  • [10] - basic video game fanblog, unreliable
  • [11] - same website as #10, likewise unreliable and unnaccessible
    • Fixed. I do not know about its reliability though.陣内Jinnai 00:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • [12] - basically a fansite/fanblog and not reliable
  • [13] - same website from #17 and #18 and likewise unreliable
  • [14] - dead link
    • Fixed. I do not know about its reliability though.陣内Jinnai 00:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC) [reply]
      • Without any proof of fact-checking or anything, this is nothing more than one's unverified original research into the lockout chip. It's not reliable. –MuZemike 00:59, 1 July 2010 (UTC) [reply]
  • [15] - nowhere close to reliable
  • [16] - A how-to guide on NES repairs doesn't go far enough to verify the problems of placing a Game Genie into an NES.
  • [17] - same website from #17, #18, and #27 and likewise unreliable
  • [18] - This does not look like the official Pegasus website, but rather a fansite, which would make this unreliable as far as verifiying its relevant claims are concerned.
  • [19] - Looks like a basic fansite about various NES hardware with no reliability or fact-checking behind it.

Unverified claims/original research:

  • In most of Asia, including Japan (where it was first launched in 1983), China, Vietnam, Singapore and Hong Kong, ... - verification needed that it was released in China, Vietnam, Singapore and Hong Kong
  • Similarly in India, clones were popular by the names of Little Master and Wiz Kid. ([20]) - not in citation given
  • ... and set the standard for subsequent consoles in everything from game design ... (footnote "f" with [21] as source) - not in citation given. It says Super Mario Bros., not the NES, helped set standards for gameplay and "aesthetical elements" (not necessarily "everything" as claimed)
  • To speed production for the holiday season, ... so they would play on North American consoles. ([22]) - not in citation given
    Reworded to make it clear that citation just refers to the adapters. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The last part of that sentence (to speed production for the holiday season) still needs a reliable source to back up that claim. –MuZemike 20:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Deleted that part, since I doubt NoA would ever acknowledge that. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In Europe and Australia, the system was released to two separate marketing regions ... Nintendo's newly created European branch take over distribution throughout Europe. ([23]) not only is the source unreliable (see above, but also none of the content is in the citation given.
    Found a citation and added it. Esm8m (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In 1990, a Sports Set bundle was released, ... four game controllers and a multicart featuring Super Spike V'Ball and Nintendo World Cup. ([24]) - not in citation given
    Found a citation that refers to everything but the games, and added it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Good except for the "multicart" part, which still needs verification. That part could also be alternatively removed. –MuZemike 20:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Removed it. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • NES consoles sold in different regions had different lockout chips, ... whether the game is compatible with UK/Italian/Australian consoles (A), or the rest of Europe (B). ([25]) - not in citation given
  • The Nintendo Entertainment System was not available in Eastern Bloc countries such as East Germany, the Soviet Union and Yugoslavia. - unsourced
    Found a source for it not being in the Soviet Union and added it. Removed the mention of other places. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • As the 1990s dawned, however, renewed competition ... to address many of the design flaws in the original console hardware. ([26]) - original research. Not only is the source unreliable, but also the source claimed that the 16-bit market was the reason for the NES-toploader's failure; the article has it the other way around, saying that the user base for the NES waned, and that Nintendo released the toploader to boost popularity, which is not what the source says.
  • In the wake of ever decreasing sales and the lack of new software titles, Nintendo of America officially discontinued the NES by 1995. (http://www.gamespot.com/news/6029220.html) - not in citation given
    Added a source about when it was discontinued, though it doesn't talk much about the cause. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Even as developers ceased production for the NES, a number of high-profile video game franchises ... and Square Soft's Final Fantasy and Enix's Dragon Quest (now Square Enix's) franchises. - unsourced
    Added references for each of the franchises - hopefully it's not over referenced now. Not sure what to do about the first sentence. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    In addition, I've moved around the sentences to other places in the article, since they were somewhat awkwardly placed. Esm8m (talk) 22:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The second half looks fine, but the first part (Even as developers ceased production for the NES, a number of high-profile video game franchises ...) still need to be verified. –MuZemike 20:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I'm not sure how to do that, since adding a citation for each of the series mentioned as important would look strange. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Famicom MODEM is a modem that allowed connection to a Nintendo server which provided content such as jokes, news (mainly about Nintendo), game tips and weather reports for Japan; it also allowed a small number of programs to be downloaded. ([27]) - not in citation given
    Found a reference for 'financial services' offered through the Famicom Modem, added it, and edited the sentence accordingly. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Looks good (and hence struck out above), but I think you could expand just a bit more with those sources given. –MuZemike 20:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The original Famicom featured an RF modulator plug for audio/video output, ... and the top-loading NES 2 featured only RF modulator output. ([28]) - not in citation given. The source only describes the various hookups with the NES and not what type of hookups each system has.
    Reworded to make the NES reference not deal with the Famicom parts, and added a citation for the original Famicom. I haven't found a source for the redesigned Famicom, but I'll look more. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Update: Found a source for the redesigned Famicom and added it. Esm8m (talk) 21:41, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • (indicated during the course of the game via dungeon hints) ([29]) - not in citation given
    Offending parenthesis deleted, since it doesn't seem to add much. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • A number of special controllers designed for use with specific games were released for the system, ... the LaserScope, the Vaus and the Power Glove. ([30]) - not in citation given, though I think that was completely unsourced to begin with, and then someone added the last sentence with source much later.
    I have citations for all the controllers' existence but the LaserScope and Vaus - would adding them cause over referencing, and should those two be deleted? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I personally don't think that would clutter stuff do much for another citation. I'd include it. –MuZemike 20:45, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Added citations. Esm8m (talk) 21:14, 23 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ... the slot connector that the cartridge was actually inserted into was highly prone to corrosion. ([31]) - borderline original research. The source says that users, upon dissecting their NES, will likely see corrosion in the connectors; it does not mention that the connectors are likely prone to corrosion (though I think it is, but a source is needed to verify that claim, as correlation does not equate to causation).
  • Nearly all of the first paragraph in the "Hardware clones" section is not in the citation given ([32]), not to mention the source is also likely not reliable.
  • A similar licensing deal ... through licensing to a third-party (non-Japanese) distributor (see also Japan–Korea disputes). ([33]) - not in citation given. There is absolutely no mention of Hyundai or Comboy anywhere in the source.
  • Nearly the entire "Redesigned model" subsection is not in the citation given ([34])

Overall, the referencing and reference quality are absolutely terrible. Finally, is there a reason why half the lead is cited, while the other half is not? –MuZemike 23:34, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Not that I know of. Should the first half have citations? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) The problem is that it is very inconsistent to only have half the lead cited. Ideally, since the lead should be basically repeating the same information found in the article's body, citations should not be used (this also eliminates clutter in the lead, which help readers) except for verifying direct quotes from people. However, the issue is that much of the information in the lead is not mentioned elsewhere in the article. –MuZemike 18:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Still has great potential, but for now this article is just losing it FA-wise. For the past few days, I've been actually thinking of putting it up for FAR(C) myself. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 06:06, 15 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After a brief look, I do have to agree that the article lacks sourcing. This is not a minor topic, so it shouldn't be given any leeway on unsourced material. There is also too many images inline, many of these can be placed in gallery. Also, the article has no critical aclaim/reception which must provide a notable contribution. Finally, prose contains much technical information, often with little to no further explanation. I believe article must live up to 2010 FA standards now, having been promoted 5 years ago. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 20:00, 30 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Could you be more specific on the images and the technical information? The technical specifications sub-section is very technical, but it does seem to be well-linked. In addition, I'll work on the reception/legacy section, but want to get the worst of the citations out of the way first. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Esm8m (talk • contribs) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Other than File:Squarebuttonfamicom.jpg, File:Nesnesnes.jpg (which duplicates the image in the infobox) and some of the closeups of the microchips the images do add something and the latter wouldn't serve in a gallery nearly as well as they do where they are now.陣内Jinnai 18:00, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
(edit conflict) I'm kind of iffy on the number of images myself, unless it's clear the images are causing layout problems (such as "sandwiching text" between two images), and if they're free (i.e. CC-BY-SA tagged) images, then I don't see a terribly glaring issue with that regard.
That being said, the article does lack anything critical reception/legacy about the NES' impact. (I mean, just go into any "retro" store or hippie head shop and look at all the Nintendo/NES-related accessories and apparel that is out there.) Without the much-needed expansion in this area as well as, arguably, the "History" section, there seems to be quite a bit of undue weight placed on the technical specs of the NES. –MuZemike 18:05, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No one was suggesting we remove any of the images, merely placing some at the bottom of the page in an image gallery. Other articles that use free images do this.陣内Jinnai 18:09, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I added a legacy section. It's far from complete, but it hits on some of the major points. Esm8m (talk) 22:33, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I was mostly referring to sandwiching, I think if all images are needed to illustrate particular points, then they should be placed along the right side, instead of left and right. In fact, they can be placed in a single row below the relevant section, such as placing the three controller images at the end of Game controllers section. Regarding technical material — it is in no way bad, and very readable for users with some technical background. But some sentences, like "Additionally, cartridges may contain 8 KB of SRAM and 8,168 bytes (nearly 8 KB) of address space reserved as "Expansion Area."" are hardly explained at all and not wikilinked. Even through wikilinking, they will require the user to check the relevant articles before fully understanding the meaning. But this is not a major issue, I'm just trying to think of the general reader. —  HELLKNOWZ  ▎TALK 14:37, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Removed all the unreliable sources and replaced with {{cn}}. No reason to keep them in.陣内Jinnai 00:39, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm a new editor, won't have internet access for two weeks starting Friday, and am still waiting on a good source, Game Over, but I'd hate to see this article go without anyone trying to save it. It's unlikely that I'll save it, admittedly, but I'll try. I'm sorry if I've made mistakes or if I have an excessive amount of questions. I've sub-bulleted the fixes I can make underneath the corresponding problem. For all the other problems, I'll continue to research and see if I can find anything. Esm8m (talk) 04:56, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your work in improving the article is appreciated. However, I'm not going to beat around the bush in that I think this article has a long way to go to meeting the current standards for featured articles. Back then, there were much lower standards for featured articles (as well as all articles on Wikipedia in general), but as the quality of new featured articles have increased, so have the standards, and I believe the NES article has not been able to catch up adequately, hence why we're here.
I (or perhaps someone else if they're willing) can look over the changes and see if any of the issues above have been addressed. –MuZemike 07:20, 1 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and struck through all the non-reliable sources listed above that were removed. However, the above strikes do not take into account those unreliable sources that were replaced by {{fact}} tags; as long as fact-tags are present, there are still significant verifiability problems. –MuZemike 19:29, 22 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FARC commentary edit

Featured article criterion of concern are quality of prose, citations and comprehensiveness YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 04:41, 28 June 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hold Esm8m does not have Internet access for the next couple weeks and is waiting for a book to help with sourcing and comprehensiveness. --mav (reviews needed) 14:08, 4 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist: criterion three issues are numerous:
    • File:Famicom.jpg - Needs a verifiable source per WP:IUP. Who took this photograph? Gleam? Shizhao?
    • File:Famicom Family logo.svg - Fails NFCC#1. Claims "only purpose it to aid in the identification of the Famicom, and for no other purpose." How does the free image of the Famicom itself (!) not accomplish that?
      • As far as I can tell, its actual purpose is the same as that of the NES's logo that accompanies it. Exactly how to word it, I'm not sure. Esm8m (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • How does that reconcile with NFCC#3A: "Multiple items of non-free content are not used if one item can convey equivalent significant information"? Эlcobbola talk 22:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • It doesn't appear to. The only uses I think it serves are to prevent confusion in thinking that the Famicom it accompanies is a Nintendo Entertainment System, as having just that logo would imply, and to focus on the Famicom brand, not system. If neither of those are sufficient (which wouldn't surprise me), then I'll be happy to take it out. Esm8m (talk) 03:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Squarebuttonfamicom.jpg - Is Kris Vanderweit (claimed author) the same as Zorahk (uploader)? Source link is direct to the image itself and doesn't allow license to be evaluated. Statement of "This picture is permitted by the copyright holder to be used on wikipedia..." is troublesome, as image must be usable everywhere (not just Wikipedia) to be free.
      • I've gone ahead and deleted it, since it was mentioned as being unnecessary further up and tracking down the source seems extremely difficult. (Zorahk has been inactive for two years, and the website the image was originally on belongs to a clothing brand.) Esm8m (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Nes zapper.jpg - Unclear sourcing; are Sic! and Larf the same person? How can we confirm Sic!'s permission?
      • If it would help, I can take a picture of a Zapper and upload it. Esm8m (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Sorry, the source is clear (Sic! uploaded it to FileShack per the linked discussion and Larf then uploaded it to the Commons); we just need confirmation that Sic! agrees to the license. If we can't get that, use of an alternative image would indeed resolve the issue. Эlcobbola talk 22:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Looks like he's been active as recently as last month. I'll try to find someone who knows German to ask about it. Esm8m (talk) 03:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Nintendo Official Seal.svg - Fails NFCC#1 with purpose of "identify the organization Nintendo Entertainment System"; this seems to be accomplished by File:NES logo.svg and/or File:Nes-transparent-improved.png, et al.
      • Edited to be more specific to its purpose in the article, though I'm not sure it adds all that much, and wouldn't be opposed to having it deleted. Esm8m (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I think that it should be removed; I don't see any significant contribution to reader understanding (NFCC#8). Эlcobbola talk 22:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Bible adventures.jpg - Rationale appears to be utter laziness - copied from Bible Adventures ("To identify and illustrate the game or program in its own article or a closely related article.") This is not the game's own article. What is the purpose of this image? (NFCC#8)?
      • Edited to clarify. Esm8m (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • How does this image "show the differences between licensed and non-licensed games"? What are the differences? Эlcobbola talk 22:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:PSOne Style Famicom Clone adjusted.jpg - Derivative work.
      • Out of curiosity, which part? Esm8m (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • File:Consola NES 2.jpg - Needs a verifiable source.
    • File:Jeux NES 2.jpg - No license information at the source provided. Эlcobbola talk 20:00, 13 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • If it would help, I can take a picture of a couple of NES games and upload it. Esm8m (talk) 18:39, 19 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • That may work, but be cautious to keep the labels essentially indistinguishable (de minimis) as they are in this image, lest your image be a derivative work. Эlcobbola talk 22:41, 20 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • I'll be sure to do that. Thank you so much for looking at the images - it has been truly helpful. Esm8m (talk) 03:48, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • I've taken two pictures. I left the seal of quality visible in the first to show that the games are licensed. Whichever one is acceptable (if either one is) is the one I'll use. Esm8m (talk) 17:14, 21 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist: I agree, this article should be delisted because its needs fixing and cleanup. Jj98 (talk) 22:50, 18 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

How's this going? Esm8m has disappeared for a week and there are unsourced paragraphs and expansion tags everywhere YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 01:49, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comment I've checked on Esm8m's user contributions on the article, the last edit was 23 July 2010. JJ98 (talk) 04:20, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I suppose I should explain - I was traveling for a few days, and I've kind of hit a wall on what to do on this article. I'm willing to keep working, but a lot of what is left may not have any kind of documentation, and the school year is approaching, cutting out a large part of my free time. I'll do what I can, but I think the amount of work needed to get this article back up to standard is beyond the scope of this process. But that's just my opinion. Thank you for the input and patience with me! Esm8m (talk) 22:42, 30 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well that's a month away YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 05:40, 31 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The thing seems to have stalled, so I'm delisting it per Esm's comment of apparently being unavailable or not being feasible YellowMonkey (vote in the Southern Stars and White Ferns supermodel photo poll) 02:08, 3 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Delist: This article has numerous issues:
  • This section "NES Test station" does not have any citations or references.
  • This section "Reception" needs expansion.
  • This section "Legacy" appears to be written like a magazine article and it needs a cleanup. JJ98 (talk) 06:54, 31 July 2010 (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_review/Nintendo_Entertainment_System/archive1&oldid=1088203547"