Wikipedia:Peer review/Golf Club: Wasteland/archive1

Golf Club: Wasteland

I've listed this article for peer review because I improved it to GA status a few months ago, and am wondering if it could become a FA in the future. I have never done a FAC before, and am generally unfamiliar with the process. I understand the way I write is often not very clear so would appreciate comments about the prose, though all comments would be greatly helpful.

Thanks, eviolite (talk) 14:36, 10 January 2022 (UTC)

STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template.

On an unrelated note, I suggest that you continue to review FACs: this will build goodwill amongst editors and help you understand the FAC process. I would also seek the help of a mentor who can suggest improvements to your article. Z1720 (talk) 20:12, 16 January 2022 (UTC)

Comments from Panini!

It's frustrating when a peer review gets little attention, so I'll get to this for you. However, I just did an article overhaul and reviewed another today and I'm currently Wiki-pooped. I'll do this tomorrow or in the days following, and if it seems like I forgot, please ping me. See ya then! Panini!^🥪 17:05, 20 January 2022 (UTC)

Allllllrighty! Time for some comments.

Lead

• "It was initially launched on June 20, 2018 on iOS and released on Android on December 24 of that year." - "It launched" and "it released" are too similar, so the sentence sounds repetitive as a result. Maybe, "It released on June 20, 2018 for iOS and later for Android in late December."
• These two paragraphs could use some organization; the "Primarily developed by...have on the world" can be moved to the begginning of the second paragraph to pair with critical reception, and "The game's narrative...life on Earth" should be moved up to the end of the first, since it has more to do with plot and gameplay.
• "(depicting deserted scenes from a long-abandoned Earth)" - Since this is already mentioned elsewhere, it can be combined with the sentence it's paired with: "The game has been praised for its soundtrack, narrative, and the depiction of an abandoned Earth"

Gameplay

• I'd link two-dimensional
• Oooh, "derelict"! That's a fun word.
• I think the "The controls and user interface have been described as simple and minimalistic" sentence is too farfetched for the gameplay section. It's more of a reception thing, and since it's already mentioned down there, I would cut it.
• I see you linked Tesla, but it's linked to Tesla Inc.; was this on purpose? Like, is the car brand explicitly in the game/references the brand, or is it just the name of the city?
• "The art of the game's stages features demolished and empty buildings dotted with neon signs" - This is relatively similar to a sentence at the beginning of this section, the "environments including derelict buildings and overgrown forests" one. I'd combine the two, or cut one of them.

Development

• I see that this section used the word "satirizing" to describe the Children's Play video game they made. Satire makes it sound like the game is a comedic one, and it parodies child labor in some way, which goes against the "aiming to provide dark commentary on social issues" line just above it. Is this game a lighthearted, comedic game, or is it a deep and dark one? Just checking to make sure.
• I'd move "The team initially...an editorial cartoonist" to the second sentence in this paragraph. It helps give more insight on the "why" they formed, and then it'll transition into the "what" they did after doing so.
• Since there's nothing here, you might as well add an image to show an example of what brutalist architecture buildings look like. Visuals, baby!
• But, overall, a nice section. Good Job!

Reception

• "the mobile version did not receive a score" - This is because there's a lack of data to make a consensus, right? If so, I feel this isn't necessary to mention.
• "...neon signs to be "needlessly childish" or inappropriate and that the signs..." - "signs" is repeated twice, can be changed to "they"
• General note, I think this section has a bit too many direct quotations. Quotes such as "elegantly simple", "gorgeous art style", "thought-provoking story" sound like they're deep insights from critics, although they aren't much more than a generic statement with a fancy adjective tacked on. Instances like these could be paraphrased to make a readthrough more smooth for the viewer.
• I also made this personal guide about writing reception sections if you'd like to take some inspiration from it. It's a little old at this point (I might update it), but I still find it helpful. I recommend this because I feel that some parts of this section feel too "A said B"-like, and could benefit from some more general statements.

That's all from me! Let me know if you have any questions by pinging me back here. Panini!^🥪 14:26, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments! I'll take a look at them when I have time. eviolite (talk) 14:48, 21 January 2022 (UTC)

User:Eviolite Still planning to respond? Or should the PR be archived? (t · c) buidhe 01:12, 2 March 2022 (UTC)

Hi Buidhe, thanks for the checkup. I resolved the comments except for the reception section some days ago and am planning to do the Reception section soon (as I noted in an edit summary then), but I got a bit sidetracked. I'm okay with the PR being archived, though, as I don't think it'll gather any more comments; I will probably personally follow up with Panini! afterwards to see if they are satisfied with the changes/feel like it is ready for FAC. eviolite (talk) 01:28, 2 March 2022 (UTC)