The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Apologies @
Dcdiehardfan: and @
The Night Watch: I was not aware this was handed to me, although I note the nominator
reached out, did ask and I replied, perhaps too ambiguously. I do not have the capacity to complete a GAN of an article of this complexity and re-read and re-evaluate the sourcing. However, I don't want to hold it up further. If you are comfortable with the proposed approach that I complete the review on the basis that TTWO has performed a review, and provided significant comments, I'm happy to pass provided the comments have largely been actioned and addressed. On a very cursory look I would say the only additional conspicuous fix is that the review template could be condensed to ten items as is the norm, particularly omitting those reviews that are not mentioned in the article. Let me know if this is a fair direction to close the GAN in a timely manner.
VRXCES (
talk)
08:08, 5 April 2024 (UTC)reply
Thanks @
Vrxces. I think TTWO has provided a good amount of comments and I think it would be fair to close the review since most of them have been actioned. I have made the changes to the review template that you requested. If you notice anything else you can post about it here, though I'm taking a self-mandated break from enwiki, and I probably won't be readily around to address anything else. Dcdiehardfan might be able to action any further comments you have if he is not busy.
The Night Watch(talk)19:33, 5 April 2024 (UTC)reply
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with
the layout style guideline.
No bare URLs spotted. Reference section easy to spot.
2b.
reliable sources are
cited inline. All content that
could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
The article uses some sources considered to be situational per
WP:VG/S. However, they are rarely ever used. There are way more reliable sources than situational sources.
According to the Earwig report, the top result is a Discord page. Most of the pages, if not all, are reported as a false positive; game names are highlighted in red.
The gameplay screenshot gives a clear visual on what a crucial part of the gameplay looks like. Obviously, the cover art is relevant for a video game article, but I have mixed feeling about using the Aonuma image in the development section.
Y No outstanding issues in previous GA review (because I had no time to come back to it).
Y No cleanup tags or lots of citation needed tags.
Y Skimmed over the article: nearly all sources are reliable, and no unreliable sources were used at all! Article is most certainly broad and neutral.
Lead
...and features a sky...
Done
access to various devices
Done
Remove comma between "exploration" and "and"
Done
"Runes"? - It's been a while since I've played BotW (and I have legit no clue what to do after I get off the plateau)
Took that part out of the lead, the gameplay section goes into better detail I think. I also reworded the "Rune" part to be more in line with how the BOTW article refers to the powers as those of the Sheikah Slate, not as runes.
Remove comma between "experimentation" and "and"
Done
Why'd they struggle? Or how?
The source says that they struggled but didn't really go into detail on how, just that they struggled at differentiating the two games while they were developing TOTK.
"for release" "to release"
Done
Remove comma between "2022" and "but"
Done
could further refine it
Done
Tears of the Kingdom received acclaim, with reviewers considering it to be of similar quality to Breath of the Wild and some calling it a superior game. -> "'Tears of the Kingdom was acclaimed to be of similar or superior quality to Breath of the Wild."
I'm glad to! There was some stuff that I feel I couldn't address but it should be easy for the OP to do so I think. This is actually a game I really like, so I'm honored to have contributed to the GAR.
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
04:32, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Gameplay
Shouldn't it be "the player" instead of "players"?
The game retains many of the characters and locales from Breath of the Wild - Kind of repeating the same sentence of the first paragraph. Change to "Characters and locales from its predecessor were kept and modified to fit the new storyline."
I don't get why mentioning that Link can ride horses is important.
It was mentioned in the previous game as a core aspect of gameplay, so I decided to mention it again to reiterate how it is similar to its predecessor.
I was confused about the word "environ" - maybe try something like "climate"?
Changed to "Region"
Usually when I hear the word "boss" I expect something powerful (cut "powerful" in "powerful boss enemies")
until the player removes this effect by returning to the surface of Hyrule - Returning to the surface implies the cure (change sentence to "Inside the Depth is a harmful substance called gloom, which reduce Link's maximum hearts until the player returns to the surface of Hyrule.").
for various purposes such as combat and exploration, or for solving puzzles -> "for combat, exploration, or solving puzzles"
Not sure why there's a "Game name (year of release)" thing
Comment: I've seen it as a convention across Wiki articles for media projects in general, and I practice it too. I removed it to remain consistency. -
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
02:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
said that he was inspired by Wii Sports Resort (2009) to use the same world but add new mechanics. -> ...said that he took Wii Sports Resort and added new mechanics. - IDK but this sentence sounds really unclear to me
Partly done I changed the syntax to more closely align with the suggestion, but omitted the "same world" part as I'm not sure what that meant -
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
02:25, 6 March 2024 (UTC)reply
due to the limitations of the hardware for that game, the developers were not able to achieve a seamless descent from the sky to the surface -> ...commenting that its hardware limitations hindered a seamless descent from the sky to the surface.
Aonuma said that the development team was trying to create something new but also something similar to the previous game and realised that some aspects "were already as they should be". -> "Aonuma said that the development team was trying to create something new while retaining the (another word for "concept" or "vibe" here) but realized that some aspects were "already as they should be".
there were occasions where they struggled to differentiate between the two games -> "they would occasionally struggle to differentiate between the games"
to make them unique to their respective environments "just like traditional The Legend of Zelda games" - Readers (like my dad or sister) might not understand Zelda games as well as I do.
Reworded some. Does this work?
The dungeons were primarily created to showcase the range of Link's powers and gadgets as a way to maximize the gameplay. -> "The dungeons were primarily created to maximize the gameplay by showcasing the range of Link's powers and gadgets."
to be accessed seamlessly rather than being closed off - Three things here. One: first part ("to be accessed seemlessly") sounds kind of awkward. Two: Closed off how? Three: What's being accessed?
"dive from the sky straight down into the dungeon" -> "descend from the sky into the dungeon"
allowing the player to be creative and maintaining limitations to ensure players were not able to break gameplay. -> "the player's creativity and limits to prevent the player from breaking (or cheating?) the game."
Its implementation posed other challenges, such as ensuring that the player would not ascend into an empty space due to data loading problems. -> Its implementation posed other challenges, such as ensuring that a player would not land on an empty space due to loading issues.
Any information on sales? I'd recommend moving the sales section below the release paragraph.
Comment: By release para, are you referring to the last para in Development? If so, I personally like where Sales is at, as that information does tend to be in the Reception section of articles. On this tangent, I also did some edits to better section the Reception section. -
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
21:37, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Plot
Note: It has been a while since I've played any Zelda games (or video games in general D:). Expect me to get nothing.
Tears of the Kingdom takes place a number of years after...
passing down the artifacts, secret stones, which they once wielded. - What
Comment: I believed it's implying the sages once owned secret stones as a power artifacts in the past, and they are now giving it to Link. Leaving unchanged as I'm unsure and deferring it to OP. -
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
03:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
Afterwards, after -> "After..." - After after after after aft-
transported through time to the distant past -> "sent backwards in time"
Done I think the diction is a bit awkward but is acceptable for now, I also wikilinked to
time travel in fiction.
There, she meets Rauru, revealed to be Hyrule's first king, and Sonia, Hyrule's first queen. - He's... in the past now? Did he time travel or something?
Comment: I believe that's what's implied in the prose, that Zelda time travelled into the past and met Rauru and Sonia,. not sure who's "he" referring to. I'll clean up the prose a bit here to further clarify these events occured in Zelda's timeframe. -
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
03:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
In the past, Ganondorf kills Sonia, - Is Link flashbacking, or is he in the past? If it's the first one, change to past tense.
@
The Night Watch I've went ahead and already addressed most of the simple prose stuff above, marked as above. Anything that is marked Comment: or blank is what I deferred to you, as I'm not as familiar with the plot and trust you to clarify those things. I think the big issues is with the clarity regarding the time travel part and other plot elements. -
Dcdiehardfan (
talk)
03:43, 9 March 2024 (UTC)reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.