Talk:Tails' Skypatrol/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Shooterwalker (talk · contribs) 20:35, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Have a little more experience under my belt with the GA process and good to review this. Stand by for further comments and the usual types of edits. Shooterwalker (talk) 20:35, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing, was wondering when somebody would snatch this up (it's Sonic, after all). Red Phoenix did a lot of the work too, so please give him credit as well. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 20:52, 23 October 2020 (UTC)

Illustrations

• Good use of images with good fair use. No copyright issues.

Neutrality

• Nothing controversial here. Good job.

Broadness

• This one looks a little short, but sometimes that's all it takes. Is there anything else to be said about its development or reception?
• The development is heavily sourced to a single source, with only a few refs to describe token release info.
• I know you have no control over what sources are out there, so let me know if this has been really difficult.

Lead

• This is well written by my standards.
• It summarizes the contents of the article well, and those sections are generally well-sourced. (see below.)
• I have a comment about the development section that might require a brief update to the lead too. (see below.)

Gameplay

• References
  • These all check out. (Had to go to a primary Japanese source for the two tails? Must have had fun with that one.)
  • I think you meant to cite [1] one or two more times, in the first paragraph. ([3] is good to cite the part about using the ring to grab items.)
  • If I were more true to the references, I see "Metal Island" instead of "Mechanical Fortress".
• Writing
  • Looks very clear and readable. Great job!

Development

• References
  • It's not clear from the refs that this game was included with the "Sonic Adventure DX Director's Cut".(This ref might help.)
  • It's also not clear that this was removed from the later XBLA version.
  • (Sonic Gems Collection is fine.)
• Writing
  • I recommend making it clearer up front that the development started for a completely different game. It gets buried in the middle of the paragraph, IMO. This would make for a clearer development story. (Worth mentioning in the lead too.)
  • I'm guessing this is the first game featuring tails? That's worth making clearer too, in addition to the existing point about it being one of two games ever featuring Tails. This is an interesting point that's worth expanding on (and is mentioned in Retro Gamer).
  • This otherwise flows very well.

Reception

• References
  • Having trouble finding the Sega Saturn Magazine ref. I trust you, but just curious.
• Writing
  • This section is generally well written.
  • The US Gamer and Hardcore Gamer sources could probably be broken into multiple short sentences, instead of one sentence with many commas.

Overall

• You and Red Phoenix have done an excellent job with the writing. The research feels a little thin, and that just might be the way it is with such a niche and rare game. I'll be honest that other editors might give you a hard time about this, but I'd very much like to promote this if you've done the work. IMO, completeness is a question of whether there's anything else to write, and you might have covered it. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:27, 23 October 2020 (UTC)
  • @Shooterwalker: Thanks for reviewing; let me answer a couple of points here.
    • Sources have been extremely light for this subject - that it was exclusively Japanese until 2004 and not developed by Sega is probably a big part of why that is. The goal was to at least cover the bases enough to meet the broadness criterion. It wouldn't make FA on what it has, but should be broad enough for GA.
    • On citing ref 1 one or two more times: I'll leave that to Namcokid47 to decide - I'm personally opposed to this as I think it creates clutter, and in a well-referenced article one should assume the footnote is the source for everything up to the citation before it. That being said, it is an area Namcokid and I differ on, and since this is more his nomination than mine, I'll defer to his preference.
    • I can link the Sega Saturn Magazine ref if you need, but not in the article. The reason I haven't is that I'm 99.9% positive it's a copyright violation where it is (copies of it are usually stored on RetroCDN and linked to SegaRetro), and that's how many of us who edit in the area see the material.
    • It's not a total truth that this is the first game featuring Tails, and that's why I removed that. It depends on how you count it, but I'm sure some would consider 1994's Sega Pico title Tails and the Music Maker the first.
  • I'll see what I can get back to help do - I'm out of time tonight and have been chronically short on time lately. Red Phoenix ^talk 03:05, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Thanks for the reply! Check back in when you can. For clarification, if I assume the footnote is the source for everything up to the citation before it, then it looks like those facts are cited to [3], and a couple of those facts aren't in there. (But are in [1] -- so I guess you'd only need to add one more cite.) Overall this is well-written and only needs a few tweaks on that front. An ideal article would have a few more sources to expand it, but I'd understand if you've truly exhausted your options. Shooterwalker (talk) 15:14, 29 October 2020 (UTC)
  • I'll toss in my thoughts into this as well:
    • Basically, what's here is here. I've spent a rather considerable amount of time looking through the Internet Archive and Google to see what I can find, and this is all that turned up. Considering it's an obscure spin-off released exclusively in Japan for a dying platform, I don't find that surprising. It's at least enough to pass WP:N.
    • While I'd agree with Red Phoenix on only citing it at the end of the paragraph, since that first paragraph in Development also cites the Retro Gamer article I didn't want to make readers think the dev info also comes from that. So I cited the HG101 article throughout and added the Retro Gamer article at that last sentence.
    • I also chose not to link the RetroCDN/Sega Retro scan for SSM since I'm very sure they didn't get permission to host it there in the first place, and you're likely aware of how serious Wikipedia takes copyright violations. I can at least link it to you if you want to read it yourself.
    • Tails and the Music Maker (1994) on the Sega Pico was the first Sonic game to feature Tails as the main character, so the thing about Skypatrol being the first is incorrect.
  • This article actually started as a draft that I never got around to finishing; once it was deleted after the six month expiration date, I enlisted the help of Red Phoenix to fix this up and get it up to snuff with the other articles on Sonic Game Gear games. Hopefully this clears some stuff up. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 02:18, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

@Shooterwalker and Namcokid47: I went back and hit the XBLA/PS issue (I don't think it's really relevant anyway if that release wasn't advertised as the DX: Director's Cut anyway) as well as highlighting that Skypatrol didn't start as a Sonic game and broke up a couple of the longer sentences in the reception. I think this ought to be good, unless there are still outstanding concerns. Red Phoenix ^talk 18:00, 31 October 2020 (UTC)

• It should be fairly easy to wrap this up. A few minor grammatical and sourcing issues.
  • "The player controls the titular character in his quest to stop the evil with Witchcart" -- did you mean evil witch?
    • Yup.
  • Just based on the way it reads, Super Game Power doesn't verify "is always moving forward, and can be manuvered up and down to avoid obstacles and left and right to slow down or speed up. If Tails is hit by an enemy, the player has a chance to recover as he is falling to the ground. His weapon is a gold ring that can be thrown to defeat enemies, bypass traps, and retrieve items." (Also, "manuvered" should be "maneuvered".)
    • That first part verifies to the Hardcore Gaming source, so it's missing a [1]. Fixed.
  • "Collecting mint candies replenishes Tails' constantly-depleting health meter." -- The source says Tails is replenishing their flight meter. Since the source gets into it, I also think this might be a better context to bring up the idea that Tails gets hit by enemies and falls towards the ground. It makes the game mechanics more clear, and also establishes it as more interesting than a traditional health mechanic.
    • Fixed and clarified
  • The source says metal island instead of mechanical fortress.
    • Struck. "Metal Island" is the level name, but doesn't really describe what it is so I think that was the idea. I just removed it; it's not necessary.
  • "JSH initially developed the game not as part of the Sonic the Hedgehog franchise, as a launch title for an unreleased handheld console, which used original characters and had a more educational focus." This phrase runs on a bit and is awkwardly arranged, particularly the first part. Maybe try: "JSH initially developed the game with original characters, rather than Tails. It was intended to be a launch title for an unreleased handheld console, and had a more educational focus."
    • Split apart.
  • Even though I think the word "mediocre" is a fine summary of the reviews, it might have too much color compared to, say, "unfavorable". I don't feel strongly but wanted to raise it for your consideration.
    • Done.
  • Add the words "Upon release," before the Sega Saturn review, just to help establish the timeline ahead of the later retrospective reviews.
    • Done.
  • "In reviewing the game's inclusion in Sonic Gems Collection, Louis Bedigian stated that among the included Game Gear games, Tails' Skypatrol is 'the most interesting of these, as it’s entirely airborne with Tails collecting rings and solving simple puzzles,' while 1Up.com's Jeremy Parish called the game and Tails Adventure 'garbage that I wouldn't even want to play on Game Gear, let alone on GameCube.'" This sentence kind of runs on, and the "among the included Game Gear games" part is awkwardly phrased. Maybe split the sentences, and just say "GameZone reviewed the game as part of the Sonic Gems Collection, calling it the most interesting title from the Game Gear releases for its airborne puzzle-solving gameplay. On the other hand, 1Up.com ..."
    • Split and reworded with brackets.
• It's a little short but I agree this is at least broad, if not a nearly exhaustive research effort. Looking forward to seeing this one cross the finish line. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:27, 1 November 2020 (UTC)
• Giving this discussion a nudge. There's no harm in keeping this review open a little while longer. Just let me know if you intend to work on it. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:12, 12 November 2020 (UTC)
  • Sorry, I’ve still been dealing with my schedule and some irl issues that have severely limited my Wikipedia time. @Namcokid47: Might you have the time to finish this out? Red Phoenix ^talk 12:27, 13 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Shooterwalker and Namcokid47: I found time to wrap this up. Please review. Red Phoenix ^talk 15:42, 14 November 2020 (UTC)
  • @Shooterwalker: I don't think there's anything else wrong with the page. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 14:55, 17 November 2020 (UTC)
    • Was busy with some IRL stuff and just getting back into it. All the issues look to be resolved and the article reads very well. Thanks for your patience and great job to both of you. Shooterwalker (talk) 17:02, 17 November 2020 (UTC)