Talk:Oxenfree/GA1

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 13:16, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   Lead

   "in January 2016; the game was later" - I think this would read better without the semicolon, perhaps as "in January 2016, with the game later being ...", but up to you. Also I think you should mention that it wasn't released onto PlayStation 4 and Linux until 2016 and iOS until 2017, as the time between releases is significant.

   Is Edwards Island a fictional place? Specify if so.

   What is a "magnetophone" and why is it piped to "phonograph"? Is this a fictional device resembling a phonograph? Or should this link to Magnetophon?

   I'd wikilink scntfc instead of his real name since scntfc is the title of his article.

   "Writer Robert Kirkman is planning to help adapt Oxenfree" - when did he start making these plans? Is there any update on the situation?

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   You have bare urls. These need to be formatted to the same standard as the other references.

   Some of your reference titles need to be modified to address MOS:ALLCAPS.

   Several references are dead, such as ref 15, 20 and 24. Go through and update or link to an archived version, or replace if neither of those options are possible.

   Inconsistent parameter formatting. I.e website=/work= should feature either the name of the website or the base url, not a combination of the two, so change "www.skybound.com" to "Skybound" as this is the commonly used format. Incidentally half the references have the website= parameter and the other half have work=; this should be made consistent. Furthermore some references appear to use publisher= when they should be using website/work=, such as ref 15 and 28.

   Missing ref parameters. For example, ref 45 is missing the date. Go through and make sure each reference lists the date and author if this information is available. Also make sure website=/work= parameter is filled unless the website is almost identical to the publisher.

   What makes "telkomgaming.co.za" a realiable source? Also it's missing the date parameter.

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   The last sentence in 'Promotion and release' is unsourced.

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   Voice actors are wikilinked in the plot section, then never mentioned again. They accordingly appear to be un-referenced. Can you expand the 'Development' section to include references for voice actors, and any information about them? Like how they were chosen and what are their thoughts on the game/experience of voicing the characters?

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Placing this one on hold. The reference section needs a thorough overhaul. Also copyright vio check finds one match at 54% [1]; this needs to be reduced to below 30%. Freikorp (talk) 14:03, 26 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   Hi David Fuchs. Its been five days since the review was completed and while there have been a few sporadic improvements, most of the issues remain unresolved. Just giving you some warning that if all the issues aren't addressed by the standard seven days I'll close the nomination. If you have any queries regarding my concerns or if you make considerably more progress and then just think you need an extra day or two to finish everything by all means let me know. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 14:39, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   I am currently addressing the concerns. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:33, 31 August 2017 (UTC)[reply]

   It's been just over seven days now. While some good improvements have been made, there are outstanding issues. I don't like failing GANs and I don't think much more work needs to be done so I'll give you another two days to either finish addressing them or comment on any point that isn't struck if you need clarification, disagree with the request, or are unable to address the concern due to a lack of available sources or any other reason. If issues remain unaddressed AND specific replies are not made I'll close the nomination in two days. Freikorp (talk) 16:20, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've gone through the article and rejiggered the references to make them more consistent. I've also tweaked the lead bit about platforms. Regarding your queries: there's not been any further news as of yet regarding Kirkman's planned adaptation. Telkom Gaming (now VS gaming) is the esports imprint of the South African ISP. As to the voice actors, there's a small amount of material on the actors in one of the development documentaries, but I didn't include it as it mostly fell into the trivial side of things ("I liked playing this character!"-type stuff.) The voice actor credits are easily attributable to something like IMDB, if you want I can explicitly cite them. Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:55, 2 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Everything is looking good/makes sense. You've still got the issue of the 54% copyright violation though. Freikorp (talk) 00:10, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not seeing how that's an issue. It's properly attributed to the source, it's in quotes, and it's three sentences excerpted from a 1000+ word article. As far as I'm aware, there's no absolute number threshold stipulated in copyvio guidelines or the GA criteria regarding usage of Earwig's tool. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 18:06, 3 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Reducing copyvio to under 30% is something I've been told to do multiple times at GAN, though to be honest I never really considered if it was actually a requirement, even though I'm inclined to think it's a good idea. I'm happy enough for this article to pass now as it is. Freikorp (talk) 02:12, 4 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]