Talk:Compilation of Final Fantasy VII/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Rhain1999 (talk · contribs) 03:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

I'll take this one. Expect a review shortly. -- Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me | current FLC)} 03:25, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Lead

• "Other returning staff include writer Kazushige Nojima, art director Yusuke Naora, composer Nobuo Uematsu." - I'd consider placing "and" before "composer".

Titles

• "this never came to pass" sounds a bit too informal for me. Maybe you could change to sentence to something along the lines of "The game was never released to western markets, despite plans to do so."
• "developers were not pleased with the game as it has been released in Japan" - this could be rephrased to "developers were not pleased with the Japanese version of the game", like in the article about the game itself.

Setting

• "an mercenary" should be "a mercenary".
• There should be a comma after "General Rhapsodos".

Production

• I believe the semicolon should be replaced with a colon in the sixth paragraph of the "Creation" section.
• I'm not sure if "thought up" is the best term; maybe "conceived"?
• Wiki-link PlayStation Portable.
• It might be nice to include a picture in this section (maybe one of Yoshinori Kitase?), but that is simply a personal suggestion, and is entirely your choice; it will not affect the outcome of this review.

Reception

• T:VGR states that GameRankings scores should be limited to two digits of precision; for example, "85%" instead of "84.60%".
• I'm not sure what the guidelines state in terms of quotes, but shouldn't the name of the games be italicised ("Final Fantasy VII", "FF7", etc.)?
• Polygon should be italicised.
• Most of the references following the sentence about Famitsu's review of Dirge of Cerberus should be placed at the end of the previous sentence; only the reference supporting Famitsu's review should be placed after the latter sentence.
• Speaking of which, I'm confused as to what "gave the game a delayed a highly critical review" means; this looks like a typo.
• "...selling 100,000 copies on its first day of release in Japan, Advent Children Complete was cited as a reason..." - either add "and" after "Japan," or separate into two sentences.

References

• Good job on archiving the URLs; I always love to see that.
• I'm not a big fan of this style of date (YYYY-MM-DD), but it's not breaking any guidelines, so I won't hold it against you.
• Polygon should be italicised here, too.
• I'm not sure what the general consensus is, but in my experience, there is generally another publisher to most websites; for example, Polygon is published by Vox Media, IGN by Ziff Davis, GameSpot by CBS Interactive. In most cases, this simply requires changing the |publisher= field to |publisher=GameSpot. CBS Interactive (alternatively, in the case of Polygon, you can incorporate the |work= field: |work=Polygon|publisher=Vox Media).

Overall, this is a really great article. There's only a few minor grammar or punctuation errors holding it up, which shouldn't be very tedious to adjust. I really love the way that the community has worked on articles relating to Final Fantasy; I am constantly impressed to see the high quality work that is tirelessly put into every article, and this one is no exception. Great work.

If you disagree with any of the points that I've made, feel free to contest them below. Thanks! -- Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me | current FLC)} 10:20, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

@Rhain1999: I've addressed the grammar errors and most of what you cited. I asked others about the date/publisher thing on the Video Game WikiProject, and it's a matter of personal preference, so unless it's really something that needs addressing to have the article pass, I would rather leave it as they are. I also found and archived a new dead link. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:52, 16 May 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for addressing my concerns so quickly and professionally. I understand and respect your decision to leave the references as they are; I only really brought them up as I felt that I should mention everything. Besides, they're outside the scope of GA; as long as everything is consistent, which it is. After one final look at the article, I can't find any other problems that are within the scope of GA. This is truly a good article. Here you go: . -- Rhain1999 ^{(talk to me | current FLC)} 11:06, 16 May 2015 (UTC)