LEAD - When Odin is first mentioned it should be wikilinked - the word "overall" probably not needed. - a sentence of the games legacy should be in the lead.
There is no WP article about the computer Oden. Odin is about the Norse god that Oden was named after. Expanded upon the legacy summary a little bit.
GAMEPLAY - perhaps say "in the Smaland region of Sweden" otherwise people won't know whether it's a town, or city, or something else. - Shouldnt the reference in the first sentence go at the end, not in the middle? - probably should be a comma after lake
Fixed the Småland thing and added the comma. The reference is for that part of the sentence, with the rest of it (and everything up to the next reference) being sourced by the next reference.
DEVELOPMENT - It's a good read, but I'm not clear on what the spelling thing is about, is it a joke, or just a stylistic choice by the creators?
Gonna split this comment into smaller segments to be able to respond to it more easily. The spelling thing is about non-standard stylistic choices, so I'll make that more apparent. Let me know if it's good enough
as they by then is awkwardly phrased
Is this better?
"told them that they", perhaps "told them they"?
Done
"the thing they found the most challenging with the game", too wordy, perhaps "the most challenging aspect of designing the game"?
Done
perhaps link "command interpreter" to a wiki article for those unfamiliar
Done, I think. We don't have an article on the exact concept of an interpreter in text adventures, but we one on the similar concept of parsing text.
"As they realized", how about "acknowledging that" instead
Done
"play tested the game", it seems too vague there despite the context
I linked to the article on the concept - is it still too vague? I want to fix it, but I'm unsure what you want me to do here.
"all commands attempted" right? Since they were testing and they wanted to see what people would try to do... - "and what it should not" is probably not needed
Done
"they also logged" who? Probably should say "developers"
Done
"improve the interpreter, as well as change certain actions outcomes based on this" suggested rephrasing and fixes missing comma and tense problems
Done, I think
"At one point" needs comma - Question - do we know what needed to be done to finish the game? Did they get stuck, do we know why they stopped?
Done I haven't found anything about it. They were just doing it in their spare time, so maybe they just got bored with it, but that would be speculation.
"did not do much further work" awkward phrasing
Tried to rephrase it, but I'm unsure about this. Further feedback would be appreciated.
"they had thought about it, they" too many "they"s, and there's another one later in the sentence - PC should be wikilinked here - "The Eriksson brothers and Johansson" is repeated twice in two back to back sentences
Done
"compiling it for the PC" right?
Done
"material" should be plural
Done
RECEPTION - The sentence needs to be moved around to something like "following the PC release of the game, the title was included..." And so on
Sorry, I'm unsure what you're referring to here.
"An eight week"
Done
Question - did the brothers ever make another game? And did anyone ever review it it?
I have looked in Swedish computer magazines from the time, but have been unable to find any reviews. As far as I can tell, they have not made any other games - this was just a hobby project they worked on as kids.
Could probably have a three paragraph lead, it is big enough text block and article. Otherwise it seems well categorized and there are no reference failures of any kind, and as a bonus they are all archived!
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
All the references in the list are standardized and in proper format.
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).
Who is Upp&Ner and 99mac.se ? How do we know these references are reliable?
The Upp&Ner magazine is mentioned by the developers in the other sources, so there is no doubt that it is genuine; additionally, Fichtelius is an experienced journalist, having written for the newspaper Upsala Nya Tidning and having won Stora Journalistpriset twice. The magazine is distributed by an airline company, which (yes, quite a surprise for me too) was created by the publishers of daily newspapers Dagens Nyheter and Stockholms-Tidningen. On the other hand, 99mac doesn't seem to have any signs pointing to it being reliable - unsure how or why I added it in the first place. I have replaced it with Gamasutra and Polygon refs, as well as a primary source (the Stugan camp's website) for the name origin.
Many sentences seem to end with no citation; are we to assume they are connected to the citations that surround them?
Everything is sourced. All information from the beginning of a paragraph to the first reference is supported by the first reference, and all information between the first reference and the second is supported by the second. Basically, if three sentences in a row all are sourced to a single reference, that reference is only added once, at the end of the third sentence.
Fair use rationale on the games packaging is well justified, and the "gameplay" image is the best we can probably get of the "gameplay". Is there any way to see the text of the game plot on a screen?
Well, I did take a screenshot from the PC release: link. I was unsure, though, since it's just Swedish text (I can't find the English release anywhere; guess it didn't sell particularly well outside Scandinavia) and would need to be pretty high-res for it to even be possible to read. I guess it is still useful for communicating what the game looked like though, as it's very different from modern adventure games, so I'm adding it in.
Images are smartly captioned and relevant to the article.
7. Overall assessment.
Very good job @IDV:! A bunch of prose fixes and a few questions to clear up, but it looks very much like a GA to me! I will put it on hold for seven days. Let me know if you need more time or have any questions about my notes. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 05:04, 13 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
@IDV: All the points I raised have been resolved to my satisfaction, and the article is really excellent! Future featured status may hinge on finding just a bit more info on the games impact or reception, along with a few more prose tweaks. Now I always give FA advice, but this time I am particularly interested because I really see this article as doing very well at FA with a bit more prose massaging. And again thank you for your patience; at GA review, there has been much criticism recently that reviewers are not being as thorough as they should be, and I wanted the article to have a high quality review. I'm also in the Magic Kingdom at the moment and have to go say hi to Mickey Mouse at Cinderella's Castle. Great job once again! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 13:28, 13 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
@Judgesurreal777: Thanks! If I find more reception material I might consider going for FA, but it's hard to find reviews from Swedish computer magazines from the 80s. And wow, you're editing Wikipedia while at Disney World? I would just have taken a break and had fun if I went. But yeah, hope you have a good time there!--IDVtalk13:39, 13 June 2016 (UTC)Reply
