Talk:Barbarian: The Ultimate Warrior/GA1

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.

---

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC) Overall, a very good article. I do have some minor things that I would like to see cleared up before passing, however:

• I'm concerned about over-generalization of critical consensus in the reception section. Rather than, for example, "Equally pleasing to reviewers was the simplicity of the game; they found that almost anyone could quickly familiarise themselves with the game mechanics, making the two-player mode a fun and quick pastime", sourced to two reviews, having the two critics explicitly mentioned. Also, I appended "Reviewers such as Richard Eddy and Robin Candy of Crash" to the sentence used, but I'm not sure if the quotes are theirs or not; any quoted material should be specifically cited, especially there where it is difficult to determine from which source the quotes came from.
  • Clarified the quoters, are there any more quotes that are of concern? Jappalang (talk) 18:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
    • The statement I feel needs some disclaimers are "Equally pleasing to reviewers was the simplicity of the game; they found that almost anyone could quickly familiarise themselves with the game mechanics, making the two-player mode a fun and quick pastime". Also, "Reviewers such as Computer and Video Games's Paul Boughton and Crash's Richard Eddy wrote that it was the little touches like the "hypnotically gruesome" aftermath of a decapitation that "[makes] the game worthwhile."—who said "hypnotically gruesome" and "the game worthwhile"? It's still not clear. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:01, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
      • Righto, and  Done Jappalang (talk) 00:37, 28 March 2010 (UTC)
• Does the single-player story mode need a subheader, considering its only 3-4 lines long?
  • It proved rather cumbersome to plop it in the middle or simply without a header at the end of the Gameplay section. The header helps to delineate a sub-section that is too small to qualify for a section (Plot) found in most other game articles, but quite notable (its where Whittaker, one of the two remembered characteristics of the game, is evoked ito memory) part of the game. Jappalang (talk) 18:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
• I performed some proofreading and copyediting changes, and reorganized the lead to (what I think) is a more simplified and logical progression. You should check the diff to make sure I didn't introduce dastardly AmEng spelling or any factual errors :)
  •  Done Jappalang (talk) 18:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
• There appear to be some redirect issues according to dispenser. Links check out and no dabs were found.
  • I have no idea what is with the redirect tool since none of the Guitar Hero Rock Band talk pages have any links that redirect to any Barbarian-related page. I suspect it is a bug. Of the other three redirects, they are perfectly correct. Jappalang (talk) 18:23, 27 March 2010 (UTC)
• Images non-free, but are low-resolution and have complete and reasonable rationales. References look good, there's alt text, and there appear to be no obvious neutrality/layout issues. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 17:06, 27 March 2010 (UTC)

• Ok, with the updates, the article looks good. I'm passing it as GA. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 15:45, 28 March 2010 (UTC)

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.