Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Expedition to the Barrier Peaks/archive1

< 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 promoted by SandyGeorgia 05:25, 12 August 2009 [1].

Expedition to the Barrier Peaks

edit
Nominator(s): Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 06:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Toolbox

I am nominating this for featured article because I think it meets the FA criteria. Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 06:31, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

  • Sorry, my remark wasn't right and I've changed the "three" back to "two". Like all images, the icosahedron either needs alt text, or it needs to be marked with "|link=" (it's OK to do both). But after I looked at it more carefully I noticed that it is purely decorative. So it should be marked with "|link=". It can keep the alt text if you like. Eubulides (talk) 16:27, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Comments -
  • Current ref 5 (Schick...) lacks a page number. As it's 448 pages, we need something a bit more specific to satisfy WP:V
  • Current ref 8 (D&D Alumni..) Current ref 9 (Design..) and 10 (Spotlight..) need last access dates. Also, can we format these like the other website refs? (remove the "from"?)
Otherwise, sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 13:15, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I made some adjustments. I've asked at the wikiproject if someone know the page for the Schick book. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:06, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I found the page # using Amazon.com's book search. It may be 1 or 2 off because of how that tool is setup, but that's probably the best that can be done (the user who added the link hasn't been around for quite awhile, IIRC, and I don't think that any of the remaining project members have a copy of the book). Is that good enough? –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:49, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Make it a page range to be safe and we're good. (example if you think it's page 13, put in pp. 11-15) Ealdgyth - Talk 19:58, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Can do. Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:04, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Done. –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 20:05, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support—It appears to meet the FA criteria. Thank you for your work on this article. Comment—Reading the text left some issues unresolved in my mind, so I'm not fully convinced it is comprehensive. Thus:
    1. What would the characters be doing up in the Barrier Peaks in the first place? How does the plot draw them to that location?
    2. The text describes this mission as the character's job. Are they hired to resolve this situation?
    3. Why would it matter that a stream of monsters have been appearing from a cave in the mountains? Are there settlements nearby that are being impacted?
    4. What are the secrets that are revealed by the cover illustration? (Note that the image is reduced in size, so some of the details are fuzzy.)
Could these questions be answered by the article? Thank you. :-) —RJH (talk) 17:43, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will try to get to these questions tonight if no one beats me to it. :) BOZ (talk) 22:22, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think this answers the first three questions. I can add more detail if you feel it's needed. I've been trying to keep the Plot part short, since the whole article isn't that large.
The last question is a bit harder. Here's the source sentence: "An A4 book of 32 pages describes the environment in detail, with a cover that reveals the secret of the creatures." I think the "A4" part is a typo, or introduced by a bad scan. The main cover, File:S3ModuleCover.jpg, shows a party of three adventurers fighting a plant/octopus creature. One of the main creatures in the module is the "cute little bunnyoid on the stump" which turns into a multi-armed creature, although the interior illustration of it is by a different artist and looks quite different. Not sure what to do exactly. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 22:44, 24 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The secrets part has been removed. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 14:13, 26 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Well I didn't think it was necessary to remove it; I just wondered whether that could be clarified. I would have no heartburn about leaving that quote in place.
I suspect that at least one of the secrets being revealed by the cover is the use of the plasma beam weapon, in contrast to the usual D&D weaponry.—RJH (talk) 17:33, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I think you're right, but I don't want to commit WP:OR if I can help it. I figured out that the A4 thing is a reference to paper size, thank goodness. Now, the secret of the module is that the creatures coming from the mountains are coming out of a downed spaceship. The review says the module has a "cover that reveals the secret of the creatures." I also believe it's based on the blaster gun and the high tech gas mask that one of the party members is waring (here's a bigger image of the cover). I'll think about how to best word it, or if someone has an idea, I'm all ears. Thanks. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 19:50, 28 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Here's what I came up with. I tried to sidestep the OR issue by putting the relevant info in, and people can put two and two together if they wish. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 21:16, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Looks good :) bring on the froghemoth and vegepygmies ;) Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:38, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Support (moral or otherwise as sometime D&D contributor) I have read this a couple of times over, and nothing jumps out as neding improving. The prose is clear, succinct and flows well, and it is about as comprehensive as I can think of. The secret revealed on the front cover is the use of a space gun/pistol by one of the adventurers. I remember this as being a talking point. I remember when I bought it in 1980 or 1981 I had no idea about the space concept until I opened it. Thing is, players playing a module spend alot of time staring at the cover (itching to open it :))) ), hence the allusion to picking up clues looking at it. Not sure where this is going, but I would think working the secret back in is good if it can be done. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:48, 27 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments – Most of the writing looks quite reasonable. I went through it and found only a handful of picky things to complain about.

  • "It included a seperate booklet of illustrations, both color and black and white." Should it be "in both color and black and white", or is my proposal just wordy?
  • Watch for overlinking. I doubt many of our readers need a further explanation for virus or robot, and they have little to do with the topic.
  • Publication history: It could be made clearer that the "What could be more logical" quote was from Gygax (assuming that it was).
  • Reception: I assume that reference 11 is citing all these quotes from judges? Not a problem per se, but be careful if someone adds content in the middle of this paragraph; some of the early quotes could be left uncited.
  • I would like to see a comma after "on both sides of the same sheet."
  • "(This a visual barrier...)". Missing word. Giants2008 (17–14) 14:37, 29 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well-enough written. But needs an over-referencing audit.

  • Deceptive piped link, first line: "Adventure" goes to somewhere quite different. Can you work out how to change the piping or relocate the link so readers will know what they're going to? No one will click on "adventure" in that context.
  • "Stream of monsters" ... "succession"?
  • Ref. number formatting: "[6]:29" etc. Is this within the guidelines? I've not seen it before. It's a logical formatting, if we can get people used to it.
  • Over-referencing: BUT, I see [6]:2 EIGHT TIMES in a row; please remove the first four and have one at para's end, and one after "game"—two should be enough, unless there's something contentious that needs marking. Then six 13s in a row. Please audit throughout. Tony (talk) 05:31, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    • I'm still thinking about the deceptive dab.
    • "succession" done.
    • I don't know if they're allowed. I've asked at the FAC talk page.
    • I thought the latest trend was a ref for every sentence, but I guess not. ;-) I've cut down on the duplicated refs. I left the ones after quotes, and when the text switches from one ref to another, then back again. I can remove more if needed.
    • "(a visual barrier that allows dice rolls and other activities to be conducted without the players knowing the outcome)" and "(Wizards of the Coast periodically alters the rules of Dungeons & Dragons and releases a new version)" are not associated with any reference, I just added them in as explanations. I can add refs for them, or I can remove the ref right before them. Whatever people think is best. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 15:20, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
      • The "[6]:29" format is a good way to use citations to specific pages if a source contains content from multiple pages and there are only a few such sources (between, say, one and five, since then using Harvard refs would look weird for such a small number of different sources). –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 19:51, 1 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  • Image review: Everything looks good. File:Gary Gygax Gen Con 2007.JPG is verifiably free, and File:S3ModuleCover.jpg is well within normal application of the WP:NFCC. Steve Smith (talk) (formerly Sarcasticidealist) 19:48, 11 August 2009 (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/Expedition_to_the_Barrier_Peaks/archive1&oldid=1138459999"