Wikipedia:Peer review/The Last of Us/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to take it to featured article status, and would greatly appreciate any comments that could help. I'd like to ensure that the article has broad coverage, organised content and engaging prose, as well as appropriate usage of non-free media.
Thanks, -- Rhain1999 (talk to me) 11:14, 19 June 2015 (UTC)
Comments from Jo-Jo Eumerus
- Disclaimer: I am not familiar enough with video games to gauge the quality of the sources, but two things I can see: a) The article appears to be reasonably comprehensive and b) where is the "Plot" section sourced to? Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:50, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment, Jo-Jo Eumerus. In the "Plot" section of many other articles (such as The Last of Us: Left Behind and Grand Theft Auto IV) the actual game itself is used as a reference (which is perfectly acceptable, per WP:FICTIONPLOT). Do you think this should be added to the article? If so, do you think it would be necessary to reference the precise part of the game (for example, "Prologue", "Pittsburgh"), or simply the entire game itself at the end of the section? – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 13:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Some other videogame FAs I've checked use {{Cite video game}} for citing the game itself in the plot sections. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Yeah, that's what I was referring to. I just went and added a reference to the section. Let me know if you see any more problems with the article. – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 14:03, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Some other videogame FAs I've checked use {{Cite video game}} for citing the game itself in the plot sections. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 13:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for the comment, Jo-Jo Eumerus. In the "Plot" section of many other articles (such as The Last of Us: Left Behind and Grand Theft Auto IV) the actual game itself is used as a reference (which is perfectly acceptable, per WP:FICTIONPLOT). Do you think this should be added to the article? If so, do you think it would be necessary to reference the precise part of the game (for example, "Prologue", "Pittsburgh"), or simply the entire game itself at the end of the section? – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 13:40, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
Comments from James26
"For most of the game, players control Joel; Ellie and other companions are controlled by the artificial intelligence. Players also control Ellie and Sarah throughout the game's winter segment and prologue, respectively."
- I think it would be nice to provide an earlier explanation of who Joel, Ellie and Sarah are. I know that Joel and Ellie are mentioned in the lead, but the lead is supposed to be separate from the rest of the article, as it's mainly a summary of the article below.
"The game features an artificial intelligence system that makes hostile human enemies to react to any combat situation they are placed in. If enemies discover the player, they may take cover or call for assistance, and can take advantage of [the] players' when they are distracted, out of ammunition, or in the midst of a fight."
- There's no need for "to" in the first sentence, and the second should read "the player."
"The game's online multiplayer allows up to eight players to engage in competitive gameplay in recreations of multiple single-player settings."
- I was a little confused by this. How are the settings "recreated?" If there's something different that's worth mentioning, I would specify what. Otherwise, I'd leave "recreations" out.
"In 2013, Joel (Troy Baker). . ."
- I'd suggest writing "voiced by Troy Baker" for this opening credit, just to avoid potential confusion, then leaving "voiced by" out of the following ones.
"The character of Tess, portrayed by Annie Wersching, was originally intended [to be] the main antagonist. . ."
- Another case of an incomplete sentence. I corrected it, but I'd suggest checking for others. -- James26 (talk) 22:14, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Thanks for your feedback, James26! I fixed most of your outlined concerns. However, I wanted to let you know that the reason the "Gameplay" section refrained from using the phrase "the player" was for consistency; I've read some other discussions about this, where editors opted to use either "players" or "the player" throughout the whole article, and stick with one of them, instead of alternating between the two. I'd be happy to change all instances of "players" to "the player", though, if it works better that way. Feel free to let me know if you have any remaining concerns with the article. Thanks! – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 23:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Great job.
- Thanks for your feedback, James26! I fixed most of your outlined concerns. However, I wanted to let you know that the reason the "Gameplay" section refrained from using the phrase "the player" was for consistency; I've read some other discussions about this, where editors opted to use either "players" or "the player" throughout the whole article, and stick with one of them, instead of alternating between the two. I'd be happy to change all instances of "players" to "the player", though, if it works better that way. Feel free to let me know if you have any remaining concerns with the article. Thanks! – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 23:20, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- ". . .and can take advantage of players' when they are distracted. . ."
- You still don't need an apostrophe after the word "players" in this case. Unless I'm missing something, you're just referring to people who play the game, and not anything in their possession. -- James26 (talk) 23:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)
- Ahh, good catch! You're completely right; I've removed it. – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 08:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)
- You still don't need an apostrophe after the word "players" in this case. Unless I'm missing something, you're just referring to people who play the game, and not anything in their possession. -- James26 (talk) 23:42, 11 July 2015 (UTC)