Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates/Fallout (video game)/archive2
Latest comment: 1 year ago by CactiStaccingCrane in topic Spot-checking by CactiStaccingCrane
Spot-checking by CactiStaccingCrane edit
Spot-check placed here for FAC page brevity, reviewing this revision. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 06:40, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- 108 – red flag, as the source says Parappa the Rapper is the winner in this category. I suggest remove the source as 107 is sufficient.
- 124 – broken, both archive and original
- Comment: Really? In the revision you reviewed, Reference 124 links to a book on the Internet Archive that I can still access. Lazman321 (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Weird... Now I can assessed it. Source is ok CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 01:55, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- 37 – AGF as it is in-game storyline
- 77 – Ok primary source, next to it is source 46 that does not verify the information. I would prefer a text source though, for the sake of skimming and archiving. For those that prefer to read, Cain said "... So we kind of adopted Fall Out Boy, our mascot, he's always smiling, he was always cheerful even when he was in his hands were being blown off by his guns backfiring or he was happy and smiley [when] taking a bath to get all the radiation off of him. But in reality that's not what was gonna be. We loved making social commentary and [in] Fallout it's riddled with it a big part."
- 168 – Ok. Source next to it, however, is more concerning. "The last-minute jigsaw puzzle assembly and lack of necessary QA had left bugs. Lots of bugs." isn't a positive review.
- Comment: The "source next to it" says "Critics scored Fallout 2 well...", which verifies "Fallout 2...was released...to positive reviews." Lazman321 (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- It's still worth mentioning that the game initially released with bugs, but most player don't really care about it. I think mention it before "Version 1.1 was released on November 13, 1997, patching many bugs in..." is the best. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 01:59, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- 180 – Ok, though please change "was announced July 2020" to "was announced in July 2020"
- 11 – Ok as it is gameplay
- 136 – In this case, it is either a primary or a tertiary source, as it implies synthesis of multiple sources in "Released in 1997 and 1998 respectively, Fallout and Fallout 2 from Interplay and Black Isle Studios are still considered two of the best RPGs ever to grace a computer screen. Even almost 30 years later, they both hold up well." I would suggest to remove the source, considering that the other sources has done the verifiability justice.
- 128 – Seems to be as original synthesis from a primary source. The turn-based combat system and real-time movement is not explicitly credited as an invention by Fallout, it just that the game (Geneforge) has a system similar to Fallout. In other words, Geneforge may not be inspired by Fallout, it could be the case that Geneforge's game system happens to be similar to Fallout and the developer cite Fallout as an example. Do check other sources for this as well, it's an important distinction.
- 50 – Ok for date, I would prefer move the citation closer to "October 1, 1997" for preciseness.
- 25 – Page number is wrong, cannot find source
- Comment: Please clarify what's wrong. Reference 25 links to the official manual, which formats their pages as (section)-(section page). Lazman321 (talk) 15:36, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- The page number is "5–9", which is not in a format that you've described. Also, I couldn't find any information about melee weapons if you consider 5–9 as normal page number either. CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 01:56, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- 139 – Ok, though the metaphor "aged poorly" should be written explicitly in plain English
- 177 – Ok, but "Compilations of his research were issued throughout 2002" is super redundant
- 86 – Not a strong source, see 85. I highly recommend removing it.
- 85 – Ok. This source explicitly covers about the discount event, and source 86 merely mentioned it briefly seemingly as an afterthought.
- 155 – The source is from Computer and Video Games, not PC Gamer, but otherwise it is ok. Also, please mark the source as dead
- 12 – Overall, not ok. 1st citation: ok; 2nd citation: suggest removal as it says nothing about the isometric view, length of NPC, or 3D model of characters; 3rd citation: no mention of info at all in source; 4th citation: no mention of A- rating; 5th citation: no mention of the game being innovative
- 112 – Another synthesis case. This one aims to cite a specific game (Baldur's Gate) to imply causation ("decline in the popularity of role-playing video games as a result of stale settings and ideas").
- Comment: No it doesn't; Baldur's Gate was released after Fallout. The source actually says, "During the now-infamous mid-nineties CRPG lull, the toughest dungeons were the bottomless pits of failed designs, and the fiercest beasts the deadly-dull CRPG releases. But Baldur's Gate (among other RPGs) changed all of that." Nonetheless, I will remove the source as this sentence is quite vague and doesn't directly attribute the decline to stale settings. Lazman321 (talk) 20:04, 5 July 2022 (UTC)
- Sorry, I think I've missed that. Thanks for pointing it out! CactiStaccingCrane (talk) 01:53, 6 July 2022 (UTC)
- 89 – Ok
- 91 – First cite: ok; Second cite: seems ok
- 52 – Ok
- 17 – First cite: the source don't explicitly say that it is the first quest ("With only 150 days left before the remaining water runs out..."); Second cite: 90%, not 90/100; Third cite: ok, but do try to paraphrase; Fourth cite: ok ("This sequel to an all-time classic is one of the standoutt RPGs for the 1990s.")