Talk:Air (visual novel)

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Good article Air (visual novel) has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can delist it, or ask for a reassessment.
Famicom style controller This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games. For more information, visit the project page, where you can join the project and/or contribute to the discussion.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Low This article is on a subject of Low priority within gaming for inclusion in Wikipedia 1.0.
This article is supported by the Visual novels task force.
VG To-do:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, which aims to improve and expand anime and manga related articles on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit this article or visit the project page.
Good article GA This article has been rated as GA-Class on the assessment scale.
Archive
Archives
1, 2, 3


Contents

[edit] Re: Anime

Any word on if this anime will be in English one day? I think it'd be nice to mention it in the article, too. ;) Vael Victus (talk) 04:26, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

The anime's license is already mentioned in the article, though mainly in the Anime sub-section of the Adaptations section. The anime was licensed and released in English not too long ago.--十八 04:34, 5 February 2008 (UTC)
Yeah, Vael seems to be a bit behind the times. "One day"? Psh, entire series and film are already released in English. Dub isn't half bad either from what I've seen. "GET AWAY FROM MY RAMEN".--SeizureDog (talk) 07:07, 5 February 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GA delisting

I have delisted this article from GA status. There are many unreferenced statements, including almost all of the Setting and themes, Movie, Music, and Gameplay sections. This badly fails criteria 2a and 2b of the Good article criteria regarding verifiability and factual accuracy. There also seems to be an excessive amount of plot (nearly 2 pages in word, and almost 850 words not even counting the character summaries). When the referencing issues are fixed, and the plot sections tightened up, feel free to renominate.Collectonian (talk) 19:23, 25 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] GAN on hold

GA review in accordance with the GA criteria

  1. Well written?: The article is rather informative, but could use a bit of clean up. Reading through, I noticed some redundancies that should be fixed.
    • Specifically, there are bits of information in some sections that seem more appropriate in other sections.
      • Plot details in the "Gameplay" section would be a better fit elsewhere. Much of the second paragraph can be condenseed with such details moved.
      • The mention of summer in the "Story" section seems more appropriate in the "Setting and themes" section.
    • Grammar note: "...into three segments — Dream, Summer, and Air — which..." em dashes should not have spaces on Wikipedia. "...into three segments—Dream, Summer, and Air—which..."
    • I know we've bumped heads on this before, but the character list can be condensed into a nice paragraph. Also some details mentioned seemed like trivia; "When she was young, she believed that baby chicks were young dinosaurs."
    • I would try trimming the "Story" section some. A recent trend with VG articles has been to minimize such sections.
    • There are a few other places where sentence structure can be streamlined, though most are minor and not enough to withhold GA. If you are curious about them let me know.
  2. Factually accurate?: Some sources used do not look to be reliable sources. Other sources need to be properly formatted.
    • Only some content on GameFAQs has been determined to be a reliable sources. Unfortunately, user reviews are not included in that as they are written by non-professional editors with no editorial oversight. All content that uses a GameFAQs review will either need to be removed or cited with another source.
    • Many web sources do not list the publisher of the web page. Author should be included in available.
    • Regarding the links to archive.org, Template:Cite web has two parameters for archived webpages, "archiveurl" and "archivedate". These two should be used in conjunction with the normal parameters, url, title, date, accessdate, puvlisher, and author.
  3. Broad in coverage?: The articles covers the standard subtopics I'd expect to see in a video game article and then some.
  4. Neutral point of view?: The article does not seem biased or to push a specific POV.
  5. Article stability? Article appears stable; no edit wars.
  6. Images?: Though each image has a fair use rationale, the usage of images seems to exceed the desired usage under fair use. Specifically the last four images do not seem to add too much to the article.
    • The images used for the characters is not need because the three characters are featured in the other images. An image of an adaptation can be included, but two covers is a bit excessive. I would pick either the anime or manga cover and include in the caption, "Cover of...".
    • Regarding the image of the original game cover, I would swap that out for the logo at the top. The logo is included in the game and adaptation cover, so it does not need to be a stand alone image.
    • FURs look to be a bit sparse too. I would expand the statements from a few words to actual sentences to strengthen the rationale.
    • The captions can be tweaked to improve the general reader's understanding.
      • The first one: "Example of whatAn average conversation looks like in Air. Here, Yukito isfeaturing the main character talking withto Misuzu."
      • The second: "The town of Air takes place in Kami, Japan."

Overall, the article has made some good steps forward since its GAR. Most of these issues are not too major and I believe they can be addressed in a weeks time. If you have any questions, feel free to ask here as I have the page on my watch list. (Guyinblack25 talk 22:57, 15 May 2008 (UTC))

Okay, so I think I got most of that. My first question is what you mean about the mention of summer in the "Story" section being more appropriate for "Setting and themes", since I am unsure of what sentences you are talking about. Next, I converted the main characters into a small paragraph, and tried to shorten story some, but I don't think I can shorten it anymore than it is now without losing important details or context. I have updated the references, and removed the ones to GameFAQs as you requested. I have also moved the game cover into the infobox, and removed the manga cover image, cleaned up the captions, and added the FUR template to all remaining images. My question here is would it be alright, then, to add in another image of a different cover of the Air game in the Release history section? The image displayed now was the original limited edition release, and the regular edition released nine months later was considerably different (third one down), which I might add was also considerable different from the next two releases shown above that one. Or, if not the second release, how about the fourth (Air Standard Edition) since it's the only one still being produced.--十八 07:56, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
It looks like most of the issues have been addressed.
  • The "Characters" section looks pretty good, though it reads a little like a brief plot summary. I would try switching the focus from the what the characters do to what type of characters they are.
  • Regarding the mention of summer: The first sentence of the "Story" section - "Set in the middle of summer, ..." Since you already have a section for the setting, it makes sense to include the time frame the game is set there.
  • Regarding the extra image, I would say add an image that illustrates something different about the game. Maybe a screen shot of an extra scene.
A few more issues I notice after a re-read.
  • The Freetype.net review looks to be a fan review, like GameFAQs. I understand finding suitable reviews for foreign games is difficult, but some source with some kind of editorial oversight will have to be used.
  • Something to consider if available, the game itself can be used to cite some plot details (see {{cite video game}}, and the game manual can be used from the gameplay section.
  • "Unlock" is more gaming jargon. Try "made accessible"; it's wordier, but is more generic for a non-gamer.
  • The "Music" and "Reception and sales" sections use a lot of quotes, some of which are quite long. I would summarize the content of the quote. For example, "'The soundtrack for...the game has received much praise, high sales and also some controversy since it was originally released,' states the Air information page on the website hentai.co.uk" could simply be "Overall, the soundtracks have been well received and met with high sales."
Aside from finding another source, most of the remaining issues are minor and I believe the article can be cleaned up in 6 days. I did a little copy editing to the article to clean up some prose. Feel free to change some of it back if the original meaning has been lost. Keep up the good work. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:44, 16 May 2008 (UTC))
Okay, I cleaned it up some more. First about the extra image, I honestly don't know what else aside from maybe one of the event CGs featured in the game which appear visibly different and more detailed than the more general sprites, one of which is seen in the image in the gameplay section. I realize the I can use the game as a primary cite, but I have never played through the game, though I do have it installed on my computer. I think that the visual fan book (which has a large portion dedicated to the gameplay) may have plot details and things that I could cite, and maybe aspects of the gameplay; it's the same thing I did for Little Busters! (cite 1 in the references). I have the fan book so it should be easy enough to find the things I need.
Not to mention that only a few days ago I came across an interview of Key on Air, sent directly from God to me and I also found a recent (January 2008) interview of Jun Maeda, the main contributor to Air. I haven't really gone through them yet, but when I do I'm hoping I'll find some very worthwhile information.--十八 22:07, 16 May 2008 (UTC)
Ok, after re-reading the article. There were a few more issues that popped out at me.
  • Some of the new content in the "Gameplay" section would be better suited in the "Development" section.
  • Hate to do this again, but Visual-novels.net (ref 3) looks to be another fan operated website with no editorial oversight. So their review does not constitute a reliable source.
  • The "Characters" and "Story" sections could use some citations, even one extra each would be fine.
  • The first paragraph of "Reception and sales" seems a bit hard to follow, though I'm not sure how to improve it.
If you're looking for game dialog to use as citations (which would be fine for the plot sections), I believe Visual-novels.net has a translation project going at [1]. As far as the reception content, maybe get a fresh set of eyes to do a copy edit. Not a lot would be needed as this is more of a minor issue. The article has really shaped up and is very close to passing. Keep up the good work. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:27, 20 May 2008 (UTC))
I could halfway agree with removing all the other review cites, but (even though I went ahead and did it anyway) I am very much against the removal of visual-novels.net as they appear to be the only active visual novel-centric website out there, and it's already next to impossible to find reliable reviews even in Japanese, especially considering that this game is close to 8 years old, and even more impossible to find reliable English-language reviews.--十八 23:55, 20 May 2008 (UTC)
I understand the frustration, but the website—and the others before it—did not meet Wikipedia's definition of a reliable source. Does that mean they are worthless? Absolutely not, as you've pointed out, they provide content that few others do. But the fact they don't do this professionally with a system to verify and filter the content is why the average reader can not fully rely on their content. A lot of video game articles suffer from the same thing; lack of reliable sources. Some game articles may never move past B-class because of this, but that's how the system is set up.
So sorry for putting the article through the ringer once again, but I doubt it'll have it's GA status removed again. The GA criteria would have to tightened to near FA standards for that to happen. I'll do a final re-read and make my decision. (Though it looks to be of GA quality in my opinion.) Good work on the article. (Guyinblack25 talk 14:30, 21 May 2008 (UTC))

[edit] GA pass

GA review in accordance with the GA criteria

  1. Well written?: Article looks to be well-written and follows Wikipedia's manual of style.
  2. Factually accurate?: Article is well sourced and sources look to satisfy Wikipedia's guidelines for reliable sources
  3. Broad in coverage?: The articles covers the standard subtopics I'd expect to see in a video game article and then some.
  4. Neutral point of view?: The article does not seem biased or to push a specific POV.
  5. Article stability? Article appears stable; no edit wars.
  6. Images?: Image use is not excessive and all images have appropriate FUR

The most pressing issues were addressed. All others are minor details and not enough to withhold GA status. All in all this is a good article and a good model for other visual novel articles. Good job and keep up the good work. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. (Guyinblack25 talk 15:49, 21 May 2008 (UTC))

[edit] Prices in article

FYI- The VG Project article guidelines have been revised, and part of the guidelines (WP:VGSCOPE) pertain to prices in articles. The specific part cites Wikipedia's WP:NOTCATALOG as the rationale behind it. Discussions and questions pertaining to the guideline can be directed to Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games/Article guidelines or Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Video games. (Guyinblack25 talk 23:32, 8 June 2008 (UTC))