GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Bridies ( talk · contribs) 06:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Commencing review, comments shall follow within the next day or two. bridies ( talk) 06:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Preliminary comments
Article appears to need a bit of copy editing. I'm happy to take care of this and might get it done later today, or it may be a few days; meanwhile, some other preliminary thoughts:
It's not an RTS. -- Niemti ( talk) 11:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Its legacy is discussed in the series article. English PC reviews from 1994 are extremely hard to obtain; Amiga reviews are plenty and easy to access (AMR) but not representative. -- Niemti ( talk) 11:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
My magazines (Top Secret, Secret Service, Gambler) will be absolutely nothing for anyone not from Poland at that time (like, Secret Service is not even in the disambiguation page, and it was the country's best-selling magazine in the 1990s, and supposedly even in all of Europe [1]). Amiga conversion reviews (including for re-releases): [2] -- Niemti ( talk) 13:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Review
So that's significant issues against every criteria, including two serious problems; as a result of which I'm failing the nomination. As I said in my initial at-first-glance comments, I'm still happy to help out with copy editing and sourcing content. But having gone through the article more thoroughly, these issues are far too extensive to be done as part of GAN polish up. bridies ( talk) 09:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't have access to most of paper sources added by other editors which made adding names and pages impossible. So I just one standard used one for all of them (an issue).
I thought the reception was actually the strongest part of it. It's a 1994 (or even 1993, according to many so-called reliable sources) game so it's pretty natural the reception will be more recent than that. And I myself added these "lower aggregators" to precisely show how the scores were (relatively) pretty low on the Amiga (as compared to the PC/PSX scores at GameRankings). I don't have this access to many old PC magazines in English and I don't want to add any Polish ones, because they don't even have Wikipedia articles (I think it would just looks non-notable, possibly imaginary).
The two images are to represent the both Geoscape and the Battlescape, something that so many sources emphasize of being so different (you've got "the world" indeed, and then you've got this extreme closup on a Laser Squad type tactical mission with all-different gameplay too).
I'll look into the other stuff. -- Niemti ( talk) 10:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
And there are PlayStation reviews. -- Niemti ( talk) 10:47, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Bridies ( talk · contribs) 06:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Commencing review, comments shall follow within the next day or two. bridies ( talk) 06:27, 11 August 2012 (UTC)
Preliminary comments
Article appears to need a bit of copy editing. I'm happy to take care of this and might get it done later today, or it may be a few days; meanwhile, some other preliminary thoughts:
It's not an RTS. -- Niemti ( talk) 11:10, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Its legacy is discussed in the series article. English PC reviews from 1994 are extremely hard to obtain; Amiga reviews are plenty and easy to access (AMR) but not representative. -- Niemti ( talk) 11:22, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
My magazines (Top Secret, Secret Service, Gambler) will be absolutely nothing for anyone not from Poland at that time (like, Secret Service is not even in the disambiguation page, and it was the country's best-selling magazine in the 1990s, and supposedly even in all of Europe [1]). Amiga conversion reviews (including for re-releases): [2] -- Niemti ( talk) 13:19, 13 August 2012 (UTC)
Review
So that's significant issues against every criteria, including two serious problems; as a result of which I'm failing the nomination. As I said in my initial at-first-glance comments, I'm still happy to help out with copy editing and sourcing content. But having gone through the article more thoroughly, these issues are far too extensive to be done as part of GAN polish up. bridies ( talk) 09:52, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
I don't have access to most of paper sources added by other editors which made adding names and pages impossible. So I just one standard used one for all of them (an issue).
I thought the reception was actually the strongest part of it. It's a 1994 (or even 1993, according to many so-called reliable sources) game so it's pretty natural the reception will be more recent than that. And I myself added these "lower aggregators" to precisely show how the scores were (relatively) pretty low on the Amiga (as compared to the PC/PSX scores at GameRankings). I don't have this access to many old PC magazines in English and I don't want to add any Polish ones, because they don't even have Wikipedia articles (I think it would just looks non-notable, possibly imaginary).
The two images are to represent the both Geoscape and the Battlescape, something that so many sources emphasize of being so different (you've got "the world" indeed, and then you've got this extreme closup on a Laser Squad type tactical mission with all-different gameplay too).
I'll look into the other stuff. -- Niemti ( talk) 10:16, 15 August 2012 (UTC)
And there are PlayStation reviews. -- Niemti ( talk) 10:47, 15 August 2012 (UTC)