Talk:MediEvil

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:MediEvil (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: AdrianGamer (talk · contribs) 13:09, 25 April 2015 (UTC)

Comments

Infobox and lead

• action-adventure game, hack and slash - Requires capitalization

• Done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• SCE Cambridge Studio and published by Sony for the PlayStation - Should be Sony Computer Entertainment, not just Sony

• Done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• PlayStation Network was not listed as a one of the platforms in the infobox.

• Both done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:48, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• as he makes an attempt to stop Zarok's invasion of the kingdom whilst simultaneously redeeming himself. - May need some expansion on who Zarok is

• I re-worded to "antagonist" to make it simple ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• Development began in 1995 at a Cambridge studio - Not specific enough. It should be Millennium Interactive.

• Thought so, done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• The game's visuals are heavily influenced from Tim Burton's The Nightmare Before Christmas. - Should be influenced "by" instead of "from"

• Re-worded ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• Sony's purchase of SCE Cambridge Studio evolved the game into a major PlayStation title - I don't think the world "major" is necessary

• I agree, removed ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• Dan can equip a shield to defend against attacks, though they can only take so much damage before breaking. - Does here mean weapon degrading? So much mean how much?

• I've re-worded this sentence so hopefully it's clearer ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• green ones offer Dan information and blue merchant gargoyles where Dan can buy services or ammunition using treasure he finds. - Personal opinion, not compulsory, but I would rephrase it into: green ones offer Dan information while blue ones allow Dan to buy services or ammunition bu using the treasures he finds.

• Thanks, done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:52, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• (it will deplete completely if Dan drowns or falls from a great height) - The bracket is not really necessary. I will suggest to make it a standalone sentence

• Re-worded ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• Plot is very concise and focused. Well done!
• Capcom's Ghost'n Goblins - Ghost'n Goblins need to be italicized

• Oops, done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• The game received positive reviews upon release and was also commercially successful - Any actual sales figures?

• Unfortunately information (along with every other 90s GA I have under my belt) is scarce and I couldn't find any specific sales figures for this game. This is by all means not approved of by WP:VG/RS but according to this website it sold 830,000 copies worldwide, though I'm sceptical on using that as a reference... ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• Is "Gaming ExpoReception" even something reliable or notable?

• I had thoughts on removing this as I found it wasn't notable enough whilst looking for sources. I could not find any decent information that this game won any awards (I'm sure it did), although its sequel, MediEvil II won a couple of awards. I've removed this entirely ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:58, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• When I removed it I noticed it made the opening paragraph very short, so I merged it with the main one, if you don't mind? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• GameRevolution similary praised the humour but criticised the game for being too straightforward and "easy to master" Game Revolution, it has a space in between

• Fixed ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• original look and unique number of puzzles - The number of puzzles is unique?

• Ah, re-worded ☠ Jaguar ☠ 11:59, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• I mentioned that Paul Darrow did the voice of Zarok, but it was removed, even though Paul Darrow's page says he did the voice. Sorry if I did wrong? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Justintuijl (talk • contribs) 16:29, 26 December 2019 (UTC)

References

• No dead links
• Source 3 is a primary source

• That's a vital piece of information and I'm about to use it for other future GANs, what should happen to it? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:04, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• What is Source 7?

• Some IP added that in, I was careless not to remove it! I've replaced it with a far better ref ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:04, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• I actually think that there is not enough sources for the gameplay section. The last sentence in the music section as well as the second sentence in the reception section also need a source

• Added some for the music section and also I've used an overview by IGN for some parts of the gameplay. I also found another detailed review. Hope this is OK ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:04, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Images

• I would recommend you to change the current template of File:Medievil cover.jpg to Template:Non-free use rationale video game cover

• Updated ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:14, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• File:MediEvil gameplay 001.jpg needs the image has rationale tag

• Added ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:14, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

• The template of File:Medievil cover.jpg stated that it is being used in the page MediEvil instead of MediEvil (video game)

• Done ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:14, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Overall

It is a very well-written articles. Very precise and focused, lead can is engaging enough and summarize everything, and that the development section is very comprehensive. The only issues I notice is that the articles don't have enough sources. If that is fixed, the article is good to go.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and y:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   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:

I will leave it on hold for a week. if the source problems is fixed, I will promote it to GA. Good luck!

@AdrianGamer: thanks for the review! I think I've addressed all of the above, want to take a look? As for the sales figures, I couldn't find anything reliable or supported by WP:VG/RS but it's up to you if I should include it anyway. Thanks again ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:15, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

The first 2 problem I mentioned, and the template of File:Medievil cover.jpg (MediEvil (video game), not MediEvil) still need to be addressed. The last sentence in the music section about the album and the second section of the reception section about the Halloween-influenced atmosphere (Halloween is not spell correctly in that sentence) still need reference. For the sales, if it is not supported by reliable sources then it shouldn't be included. However, if it is not included, the game being "commercially successful" should not be mentioned. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:27, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I think I've fixed the template problem of the cover image and also I've found the entry for being able to buy the album through the artist's online store (ref added). Fixed the typo and also added references where you mentioned. I removed the commercial part as I'm not too sure on using that reference, though I'll have a look through VG:RS to see if I can use anything else in the mean time. What do you think now, AdrianGamer? ☠ Jaguar ☠ 12:35, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

I think that the article looks great now. MediEvil (video game) promoted to . Congratulations! AdrianGamer (talk) 12:47, 26 April 2015 (UTC)

Requested move 24 May 2015

The following is a closed discussion of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on the talk page. Editors desiring to contest the closing decision should consider a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

The result of the move request was: not moved. Number 57 15:19, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

---

• MediEvil (video game) → MediEvil
• MediEvil → MediEvil (series)

– I propose that the current MediEvil article should be renamed to MediEvil (series) and the actual game should be renamed to "MediEvil" to avoid confusion. I don't think it is much of a series as it consists of two games and a remake, and nobody would confuse the first game with anything else. – JAGUAR  13:24, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

This is a contested technical request (permalink). EdJohnston (talk) 14:36, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• Oppose. I'm not seeing a claim that the first video game in the series is more notable than the series as a whole, and from what I am seeing, it's not. Steel1943 (talk) 14:57, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• Perhaps I worded it wrong, it's VG convention to usually put the first games in a series as its title, and the name of the series as 'x (series)' for example JAGUAR  18:02, 24 May 2015 (UTC)

• @Jaguar: As an editor who has looked at and tweaked WP:NCVG, I can tell you that is not the case. The part of the page which you are referring is there to give editors advice on how to name the article in the event that the article that needs renaming has to be at a title other than the ambiguous title (which, in this case, world be "MediEvil".) The move request you are asking to do is actually requesting that a different article be deemed the primary topic. (You may or may not be aware of this, so I'm assuming your stance based on your previous comment. So, if I am wrong, I apologize.) Steel1943 (talk) 20:59, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• You're right, though I think that the series that consists of two games isn't notable enough to have its own page, there are other games such as Wipeout that has the first instalment as the original name, and Wipeout (series) respectively. I'm neutral on renaming this, although it would be nicer for this to be called MediEvil. Anyway, I've just nominated this at FAC, so I think it would be best to close this request now JAGUAR  21:08, 26 May 2015 (UTC)

• oppose multiple games in the series are called "MediEvil" something, the series itself is referred to as MediEvil -- 65.94.43.89 (talk) 04:26, 25 May 2015 (UTC)

---

The above discussion is preserved as an archive of a requested move. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made in a new section on this talk page or in a move review. No further edits should be made to this section.

Move discussion in progress

There is a move discussion in progress on Talk:MediEvil which affects this page. Please participate on that page and not in this talk page section. Thank you. —RMCD bot 19:15, 8 March 2016 (UTC)

HD remaster of MediEvil in Skyrim engine.

Could someone maybe mention in the article that a high-quality HD remaster of the first 4 levels of this game has been made as a free mod for Skyrim. And by the way, I have played this remaster, and its excellent! here is a link to the remaster: http://www.nexusmods.com/skyrim/mods/71021/? Olivier Doorenbos (talk) 13:10, 20 August 2017 (UTC)