Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri/archive2

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 Steve 21:24, 28 June 2009 [1].

Sid Meier's Alpha Centauri

Nominator(s): MacMed^talk _stalk 22:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This is a great article about a classic game. After reviewing the first nomination, I found that the majority of opposes were based solely on the major lack of references. I have found numerous references for the article, and I strongly believe that this should be a featured article. MacMed^talk _stalk 22:43, 26 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

These are just some issues I noticed with a quick glance:

File:SMACx-DiploScreenshot1.jpg and File:AlphaCentauriGameCD.jpg both need fair use rationales for why they should be included in the article. Also, both need to be reduced in size (see the tags on the images' pages).
The lead needs to be expanded to better summarize the article. Try to touch on all sections in the article; see WP:LEAD for guidelines.
The "Influence", "Technology", and "Availability" sections are unreferenced.
There are a few single sentences throughout the article. To improve the flow of the article, either expand on their content or incorporate them into another paragraph.
The citations need to include more parameters then just the title and access date. Also include the author, date, publisher, etc. Consider using the citation templates at WP:CITET to help you out.
For FA, it seems that there should be a larger variety of sources for improving the content of the article. Consider using the resources department of WikiProject Video Games to find additional sources.

The article has other issues, but just wanted to point out the main ones first. --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 04:35, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Likewise, citations need to come directly after punctuation, without a space. Like so.^[1] A lot of yours are like this ^[2]. Easy to fix and makes the whole thing look a lot more professional. Seegoon (talk) 20:01, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Counter-comment – this is absolutely not true and I wish people would stop claiming that it is; we have no policy as to whether footnotes come before or after punctuation, as long as the style is consistent in the article. Look at Wikipedia:Footnotes#Ref tags and punctuation and see for yourself. – iride scent 22:02, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Actually, there is a discussion about this in the most recent section on the talk page (see the footnote of the alternate method which contradicts the guideline). --Happy editing! Nehrams2020 (talk • contrib) 22:21, 27 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't know that; sorry for spreading disinformation. But, it has to be noted that consensus, project-wide, seems to be for references to come directly following punctuation. It's very rare to get an article appearing at FAC which does anything but. I can't argue with guidelines, but I presume that these citations were inserted when the article was first drafted, four and a half years back. Things have just evolved and changed since then. Seegoon (talk) 17:49, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Not sure if you noticed this, MacMed, but the first FAC was from 2004- 4 and a half years ago. --Pres N 00:20, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And I am very willing to do the work necessary to build it up until the community thinks it is ready for featured status. Unfortunately, I have a commitment IRL tomorrow, but I will begin work on Monday. Thanks, MacMed^talk _stalk 02:51, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Oppose. This article has numerous issues preventing it from being featured quality. The gameplay section is much too large and rather than give a general overview as a good encyclopedia article should devolves into pratically an instructional guide on how to play the game. Furthermore, there is no development history of the game and very little on the reception of the game, making most of the content "in universe" and unable to provide a comprehensive overview of the subject in a real world context. Too make matters worse, the inspiration and reception sections are almost entirely unsourced and contain several pieces of trivia not befitting an enclyclopedia article. There are quite a few video game FAs, and I would suggest looking at a few to bring it more in line with these. Indrian (talk) 07:45, 28 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Withdraw I am going to withdraw this nomination for now, and renominate it after dealing with the issues laid out here. Thanks, MacMed^talk _stalk 15:17, 28 June 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.