Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Knight Lore/archive1
- 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 Ian Rose via FACBot (talk) 14:32, 30 April 2016 [1].
Contents
- Nominator(s): czar 17:03, 2 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
The story of Knight Lore's legacy is one of anecdote after vivid anecdote of what it was like to experience the game for the first time. Retro Gamer described many future developers' first experiences with Knight Lore as "unforgettable", on par with playing Space Harrier (1985), Wolfenstein 3D (1992), and Super Mario 64 (1996) for the first time (if that helps with perspective, as it did for me). Knight Lore is a real curio for those unfamiliar with its impact—its (now old in video game terms) release was more or less confined to the ZX Spectrum console community in the UK—but the game's footprint remains indelible. Knight Lore popularized isomorphic 3D graphics, which eventually made their way abroad, and changed the face of the Speccy, though one could argue that its developer was doing that already. It is sufficient to say that Knight Lore changed many lives, future developers and regular consumers alike. Indeed, the developers later stated that they predicted this and held the game's release back for many months in anticipation of how its release would affect the market—which is itself a wild declaration.
This nomination is part of the Rare WikiProject's Rare Replay series, improving the articles for the 31 titles included in Rare's 2015 retrospective compilation. I rewrote Knight Lore from scratch using the best sources available on the subject, with special emphasis on the retrospective secondary sources. It went through a rigorous good article nomination (@Ritchie333) and peer review (@J Milburn) and I believe it meets all of the featured article criteria. (If you have thoughts on the Pac-Man masking illustration, please first see the bottom of the peer review and note that I would be totally open to a replacement if one were commissioned, though it should be okay as is.) My work on this article is dedicated to Domhnall O'Huigin, whose friendship introduced me to the Speccy during my active years at Quora (predating my time at Wikipedia). I think he would find this series of well-written ZX Spectrum articles to be a worthy memorial as they too attempt to do justice to great, unknown topics without losing their author's mien. czar 17:03, 2 March 2016 (UTC) [reply]
Extended content
|
---|
|
- @Czar:I took the liberty of making one other change of my own, and I am now basically satisfied. I am still slightly uncomfortable with the Retro Gamer statement that it popularized isometric graphics (I mean, it unquestionably did, of course, but only in Europe), but with your other changes, the reader can see that the early copycats were all British and that U.S. games did not adopt the approach until much later. That essentially solves my objection, so I think we can call it good. I will endeavor to undertake a full review in the near future, and I have no doubt that I will be able to throw my support behind the article before too long. Indrian (talk) 20:42, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - Retro Gamer usually have bylines embedded within the subhead, so you may have missed them. Rare Gamer looks like an unprofessional fansite, the line that it's quoting isn't that important to the game, so consider removing it. - hahnchen 09:44, 5 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Hahnchen, I don't recall there being any—I can send scans if you'd like. I removed the Rare Gamer interview. czar 19:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I've got Retro Gamer 73, the author of the article referenced is Stuart Hunt, he's named in the subhead. - hahnchen 19:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Hahnchen, nice catch—I didn't make the connection that the unfamiliar name was the writer. Another RG feature had the author in the subhead too. Fixed. Have time for a full review? czar 00:05, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I've got Retro Gamer 73, the author of the article referenced is Stuart Hunt, he's named in the subhead. - hahnchen 19:52, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Hahnchen, I don't recall there being any—I can send scans if you'd like. I removed the Rare Gamer interview. czar 19:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment: I've just seen, while reviewing Hetty Reckless, that {{sfn}} supports italics; this means that for consistency's sake and for MOS reasons you should probably italicise the magazine names in the footnotes. Josh Milburn (talk) 17:57, 7 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @J Milburn, I've never done this before, personally, but it looks like it's the right thing to do, so done ✓ czar 19:45, 8 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Jaguar
editExtended content
| ||
---|---|---|
I'm going to have an initial read-through now. I'll list some minor points first:
That's all for now. I haven't gone through the sources yet, but when I do I'll post back some more comments. I feel that the gameplay section could be expanded somewhat, as it doesn't mention what type of enemies there are, what functions the items serve etc. I'll do some more checking when I get the time. I'm sorry if I went too deep, I'll offer whatever I can as this is a subject I have an interest in. JAGUAR 22:38, 9 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
|
- I'm satisfied that everything has been addressed, so I'll lend my support. JAGUAR 18:14, 3 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by David Fuchs
editSome openers:
- File:Sprite rendering by binary image mask.png—do we have any indication that the graphics of Pacman presented are actually from a copyright-free version of the game? No information is presented on such matters.
- Refs look good; I am unable to access many of the sources, but from a spot-check of current refs 3, 18, 24, and 26 I saw no issues.
--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 18:30, 11 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Fuchs, the image was discussed at the bottom of File:Sprite rendering by binary image mask.png. I had contacted the author earlier but hadn't heard back. Seems that no one feels strongly about it. I'd prefer a fresh image, but my req went unanswered in the illustration lab. Would you want to take a go? (Also I'd be happy to provide any scans you need for verification.) czar 16:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- If you could chuck me a few I'd appreciate it, just so I can do a more thorough look. And I'll see about fulfilling the image request. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 12:16, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Fuchs—sent the Retro Gamer articles. The rest are linked and openly accessible. Let me know what you think? czar 20:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Took a look through and cross-ref'd to the sources and didn't see any referencing issues on a second spot-check, so I'm satisfied there are unlikely to be problems in that retrospect. I'll see about starting on making a replacement image for the sprite masking tonight. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:00, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Fuchs, how's it looking? czar 15:33, 3 April 2016 (UTC) @David Fuchs czar 02:50, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Took a look through and cross-ref'd to the sources and didn't see any referencing issues on a second spot-check, so I'm satisfied there are unlikely to be problems in that retrospect. I'll see about starting on making a replacement image for the sprite masking tonight. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:00, 23 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Fuchs—sent the Retro Gamer articles. The rest are linked and openly accessible. Let me know what you think? czar 20:36, 20 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- If you could chuck me a few I'd appreciate it, just so I can do a more thorough look. And I'll see about fulfilling the image request. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 12:16, 14 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- I think the images meet criteria; apologies that I haven't had time to draft up a replacement image but I don't think through my searching there's been any indication that it incorporates copyrighted materials, so I don't think it needs to hold up this FAC. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 20:34, 25 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @David Fuchs, the image was discussed at the bottom of File:Sprite rendering by binary image mask.png. I had contacted the author earlier but hadn't heard back. Seems that no one feels strongly about it. I'd prefer a fresh image, but my req went unanswered in the illustration lab. Would you want to take a go? (Also I'd be happy to provide any scans you need for verification.) czar 16:44, 13 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Moisejp
editExtended content
|
---|
Reception:
Legacy:
More comments to follow. Moisejp (talk) 04:54, 22 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'll try to finish off this review in the next few days if possible. More comments:
Development:
Reception:
Legacy:
I think that is all of my comments. Moisejp (talk) 06:36, 27 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Czar, I don't really understand how you can say "lesser quality" is a fact rather than opinion. Couldn't there conceivably be some people out there who liked Ultimate's last two games best of all? Moisejp (talk) 02:31, 28 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]
I'm very close to supporting, just noting a few other little things in my re-read-through just now.
Legacy:
Since David Fuchs has already done a check of the sources, these are all of my comments. Thanks. Moisejp (talk) 05:33, 5 April 2016 (UTC)[reply] Hi @Czar: I finished my comments a while back but didn't ping you at the time. I wasn't sure if you were waiting for my ping and didn't see these. In any case, they are done whenever you have time to look at them. :-) Cheers, Moisejp (talk) 22:30, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
|
- @Czar: OK, all of my concerns are addressed, and I support. One very minor thing, for the Atari wiki-link, I was expecting a link to a specific model of Atari, like Atari 2600 (if that's the correct model)—just like Commodore 64 is a specific model of Commodore. Moisejp (talk) 23:11, 10 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Fixed! Thanks! czar 02:40, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Comments From Indrian
editExtended content
|
---|
Sorry it took me so long to come back to this. The article is well-written, and I anticipate supporting in short order. Just a few comments:
That's it; these should be fairly straight forward to address. Indrian (talk) 21:06, 11 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
|
- @Czar:I appreciate you looking. I would certainly not hold up the entire article on such a minor point. You have done excellent work here, and I am pleased to offer my Support. Indrian (talk) 01:10, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
Next steps
editHey @FAC coordinators: Anything else needed for this nom? czar 01:15, 17 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Sorry for not responding earlier, I think I saw this notification my mobile and I prefer not to edit on that unless I have to, so it slipped through the cracks... It looks like we still need a signoff on all images; I know you pinged David Fuchs a couple of times so we may need to get someone else, perhaps via a request at the top of WT:FAC. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 14:36, 23 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- @Ian Rose, image review done above czar 00:09, 26 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- Closing note: This candidate has been promoted, but there may be a delay in bot processing of the close. Please see WP:FAC/ar, and leave the {{featured article candidates}} template in place on the talk page until the bot goes through. Ian Rose (talk) 14:32, 30 April 2016 (UTC)[reply]
- The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.