Wikipedia:Peer review/M.U.G.E.N/archive1

I'm submitting this article because I believe it contains potentially POV sections namely the "warehousing" section, I have debated with the main contributer of the article and so far haven't came to a resolution, so I would like to have unbiased opinions about the article.Sonic Hog

Okay, here goes:
  • WP:LAUNDRY lists: It is very unnecessary to have things like "Exit - Closes the program"; these are indicative of a list that shouldn't be a list. The entire "gameplay modes" list is unnecessary because these options are all described in prose further down.
  • I've taken the liberty of removing the "reserved keys" and "Switching order in Turns mode" sections. WP:NOT a how-to.
  • Cite sources. Do research. Any major gaming sites/magazines/etc done features on Mugen? This applies to all sections.
  • The basic problem with that is outside of the mugen community itself, even in magazine such as EGM, Mugen has been touted as nothing more than some overglorified game/dream match gone wild. It's a bit difficult when the sources of the actual information tend to be the people working with the engine or the engine's own documentation.--Kung Fu Man 23:11, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • Rather than cite generic copyright FAQs, try to find sources relating directly to Mugen, rather than attempt to synthesize an argument (WP:OR).
I think there's a good article trying to get out of the current one, it just needs some coaxing. Nifboy 16:55, 26 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
Which is why I'm glad it's (finally) getting peer reviewed! Messatsu 05:15, 27 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Despite some controversies - modifications made on the actual engine are sometimes seen as an analogue to those made on the creations developed for it, and this is a recurrent topic of discussion among M.U.G.E.N fans (see Fork (software development))."