Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Anarchy Online/archive2

< Wikipedia:Featured article candidates
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was not promoted by Karanacs 17:13, 30 March 2010 [1].

Anarchy Online

edit

Anarchy Online (edit | talk | history | protect | delete | links | watch | logs | views)

Nominator(s): Sebquantic (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article because I think the concerns from its failed FAN last fall have been addressed. Some might still have issues with the prose, but I feel like it is close enough that those issues could be easily tweaked. Anarchy Online is one of the oldest MMO video games still online, and I think an important part of that genre's history. Probably best known for its infamous launch problems, it's becoming increasingly notable for its longevity. Sebquantic (talk) 19:29, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Replaced dead link with link to the page at archive.org. Sebquantic (talk) 21:11, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Ucucha 21:16, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Updated the rationale for File:Ao free play billboard.jpg to hopefully make a better case for its importance. About the other two, would a screenshot of an actual "dynamic mission" be more relevant? Sebquantic (talk) 22:34, 11 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've found two free-use images that may be suitable replacements for File:Anarchy Online dynamic missions actual.jpg and File:Anarchy online dynamic mission concept.jpg. One depicts the interior of a "dynamic mission", the other a combat scene at a "land control area" between several players; both of these topics are covered in the Gameplay, History, and Reception sections of the article. Both images are licensed under CC-Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 2.0 Generic. I'll wait to see what you or other editors think about using one of (not both) of these:
[3]
[4]
Sebquantic (talk) 02:43, 13 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Unless they were the developers uploading the images, they're copyright violations that some fool uploaded under Creative Commons, so you can't use them. As for the image rationales... you still need more. This is a film screenshot, but the principle is the same: File:S03-The Search for Spock-Bird of Prey decloaks.png. See the difference in the information? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 20:24, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Updated fair-use rational of billboard image to match the standard of that example. Removed mission_concept.jpg and mission_actual.jpg. I would have like to keep them, but you are right about them being redundant in places and questionably necessary, and you're not the first person to raise those concerns. I emailed the copyright holder asking permission for equivalent images to be released under CC-SA-3, but for now they're gone. Sebquantic (talk) 00:17, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Luckily, the game's copyright holder Funcom agreed to release three images ([5][6][7]) under CC-BY-SA. I think they serve a very similar purpose to the non-free images used right now, but are there any objections/comments from anybody about this? They might not get verified by OTRS before this nomination concludes either way. Sebquantic (talk) 09:49, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I would strip out the ones that are going to be replaced. I have OTRS access, so I can append the tickets to the image pages, but the problem I see viewing them is that they assert that they don't explicitly state they are the copyright holders and that they release the images under CC-by-SA (no license is given in the email.) So frankly these tickets aren't any help. You need to get back to them and have them reply with something along the lines of "I/We <<assertion of owning copyright to subject>> release these images <<commons urls>> under <<License>>. <<Statement to the effect that they know what this entails>>." Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 12:37, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
←The images linked above have confirmed OTRS tickets appended to the description pages. Can you let me know when the images in the article have been finalized so I can sweep it again? Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 15:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The three images have been added along with updated descriptions and alt text. Sebquantic (talk) 15:36, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You might want to make the alt text a little more concise. I think the "A video game screenshot" parts can go; it should be clear that that is what they are. Consider getting rid of some more unnecessary details. Ucucha 17:53, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, I trimmed those down a little. Sebquantic (talk) 21:01, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Looking good; thanks. Ucucha 21:04, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Source comments:
    • Sources used appear reliable as required by WP:FA?, however I'm concerned about statements that are apparently unreferenced:
      • " The worlds are occupied by human players, and computer-controlled characters, both friendly and hostile. Players are not able to interact with one another across servers"
      • First paragraph of "Skill system"
      • "Killing other players also rewards characters with "PvP titles", permanently shown beside the player's name, which represent how many other human players they have killed."
      • "Byrom said a number of technologies, such as the game's dynamic weather creation system, further help immerse players in the world."
      • First paragraph of "Present"
      • "The dynamic mission system was met with mixed reviews. PC Gamer called it a "brilliant" solution to camping—the practice of waiting for a computer-controlled character in the outdoor game world to appear so it can be killed and items looted. Computer Gaming Magazine said that while the missions were a good idea in theory, they are "too simple and similar", claiming that this caused players to become bored and camp for items outside anyway. Visually, they called the missions "cramped, boxy, and generally unappealing," compared to the rest of the game."
    • On a unrelated note, paragraphs by definition have at least three sentences. That means all the one- or two-sentence groupings throughout the article need to be merged, expanded, or cut.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 23:52, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe the statements listed above were sourced, but citation placement might not have made that clear. Moved a bunch of those around to be more explicit about where the info is coming from. Let me know if you still have concerns about them. Also merged all the one- and two-sentence groups. Sebquantic (talk) 04:31, 16 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I made this stealth edit earlier this month which will be used to change the wording of that paragraph when they shut down the German server. I don't think any mention beyond that is appropriate, as it doesn't significantly affect the gameplay or history, and hasn't been mentioned by any reliable sources. The same is true for "failing playerbase", none of the many sources I've read over the last few years while working on this article made significant mention of the amount of people playing the game. Subscription information is in the "Sales and subscriptions" section. Sebquantic (talk) 21:29, 15 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the heads-up. I added an anchor for the old section header. Sebquantic (talk) 01:00, 18 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose per prose/accessibility concerns. Having read through the article, I'm concerned that the article is geared too much to the fan or game player; it's rather inscrutable for those who are casual players and who may not know what an MMORPG is to begin with. A selection of issues:
    • The lead jumps into talking about the game's launch, then returns to plot and gameplay, and then returns to the game's impact; this is disjointed and confusing, considering there's little explanation about, for example, what free trials and dynamic quests are.
    • The plot spends a lot of time on backstory that could be trimmed. The section on "Interactive story" awkwardly jumps from in-universe details to out-of-universe discussions.
    • "heads-up display" → "head-up display"
    • The gameplay section seems overly long, considering the length of other sections. Sixteen paragraphs is long, even for a role-playing game.
    • I'm also concerned about sourcing. For example, [8] is used to source "Events are organized either by players, or officially by Funcom staff." There's discussion on the page in question about Funcom organizing official events, but it's unclear that these volunteer departments are player-run. [9] is used to source "Like most role playing games, Anarchy Online provides structure for role-playing events. Most major cities include night clubs and other venues specifically for this.", but there's no mention of night clubs and other venues specifically used for role-playing events. [10] is used to source "Among the most distinct gameplay elements of Anarchy Online are dynamic missions.", but "dynamic missions" are never mentioned by name and GameSpy makes no claim that they are "distinctive" to Anarchy. This block of text:

The game's dynamic missions are created by what Funcom calls the "Auto Content Generator", also used in their later titles. When a player requests a mission, the game uses building blocks—a set of hallways and rooms—to generate an indoor area composed of a random assortment of those blocks. It then fills the indoor area with specific types of computer-controlled enemies. Each mission is based on a visual template related to its location, such as a subway or alien mothership. The alien mothership template, for instance, consists of hallways and rooms decorated as the interior of the mothership; the area is then filled with alien enemies.

is sourced to [11], but all that source supports is that ACG was used in Conan and came from Anarchy; using it to cite elements from the previous game, given that the "refinements" mentioned are not fully explained, is a bad idea. The last bit about "alien motherships" does not appear at all.

In short, while the prose isn't poor, the article needs some tightening throughout and a complete audit of all sources. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 21:35, 27 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Anarchy_Online/archive2&oldid=1044080613"