GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Vainglory (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:38, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]


It's been a while since I reviewed a good article. Should have this to you within a day or two ☯ Jaguar ☯ 18:38, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:


Initial comments

  • Is the game considered a "technology demonstration"? In comparison to how Jumping Flash! was one for the PlayStation in 1995, by the sound of it Vainglory sounds very similar, showcasing the Metal graphics

References


On hold

Now I know how pings work

I'm happy I reviewed an article like this for a change, it's like a breath of fresh air! The game does look good, personally, kind of makes me want to get an Apple device. I trust you can handle those issues, otherwise this is on hold @Czar: ☯ Jaguar ☯ 22:40, 11 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar, thanks for the review! I prefer the "by" (for brevity) over "developed and published", partly because publishing doesn't quite work the same way on iOS as opposed to the console game model. Not sure what you mean by "wide range" but the game was designed for mobile devices, though it's only on iOS for now. I haven't found sources that call the game a technical demo just to show it off (I'm thinking of Epic Citadel as a better example of that). "Off the path" should be okay to keep the simple metaphor in the lede. I can expand the lede reception summary if it would be useful, but I prefer to keep to broad strokes in the lede and relegate the specifics to the proper part of the prose. The Vain is the objective in the enemy base (clarified). The dash after single is because it's single-lane and triple-lane without repeating "lane" twice. Nope, no awards (at least yet—I'd note that League had no real awards or good ratings in its first year). Found a Guardian mention, though, so good tip. Not sure what you mean about the contradiction since the lede says reviewers did not agree and the Reception says the IGN and Pocket Gamer editors disagreed. As for "how so", it's elaborated in Pocket Gamer's section (last ¶). Kraken's a little like a boss in that it's super powerful, but the previous sentence explains exactly what it is and how it's recruited. "Generally favorable" is a direct quote from the Metacritic site. I prefer to use their language so it's not original research when I summarize. For the lede, it's already quoted in the appropriate section (Reception) so I feel it's okay to describe the Reception as such without mentioning Metacritic's vetting. Anyone interested can scroll down to the right section and that's the purpose of the lede, right? (By the way, for the ping to work, you have to sign with four tildes in the same post, so I didn't get that ping. Yes, it's strange.) czar ⨹ 01:53, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]
@Czar: so that's why it didn't work, thanks for telling me! I also noticed that you didn't get the GAN notification on your talk page, but glad you saw this in time. Regarding the lead, you're right about the most part, but section 1.b of the GA criteria (and WP:LEAD) offers the advice of the lead acting as a "mini article", though some topics vary. It's a guideline I always follow, but seeing as this lead summarises everything adequately, there shouldn't be much of a problem here. If you plan on FACing this, I would expand anything if possible and add more references, but right now this meets the GA criteria. Promoting ☯ Jaguar ☯ 16:05, 12 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

DYK nomination[edit]

((Did you know nominations/Vainglory (video game))) czar ⨹ 16:22, 13 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Reverted edits by Czar on 6/23/15[edit]

I understand why the edit was reverted because as none of it was referenced, it appears to be original research. That said, the referenced WP:VG/S in the revert speaks to the difficulty of finding references for gameplay mechanics without either using the game or any game manual (which rarely exist these days in this world of game tutorials). Would a citation to the developer's website suffice? Because otherwise, no game review would go into detail about how the game works. I also refer to this Wikipedia essay on when to cite, section on "When a source may not be needed."

I would also say that the content that was already there before I edited it was not only also un-referenced, but also inaccurate and rather awkwardly written. Perhaps Czar, you should try to WP:FIXTHEPROBLEM instead of a mass revert? Anyway, no big deal, I was getting pretty tired of editing. Back to another game of VG! Iggyboop (talk) 13:39, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

If it's to a level of detail and jargon that would not be of use or interest to the general reader, it may not be worth including at all. For general press information that hasn't been picked up by the regular secondary sources (unlikely in this industry, but anyway), yes, the developer's site can be used as a self-published source with restrictions. As far as I'm concerned, the problem is fixed. The article is fine without the new additions, which go into an inappropriate level of detail. It was better to delete the whole unsourced mess rather than to try to source something that didn't fit. – czar 14:23, 23 June 2015 (UTC)[reply]

App icon change[edit]

The app icon has changed for quite a while since the update. I'm wondering if anyone can find the new icon? I can't find a good place to get a suitable one. Zamaster4536 (talk) 14:04, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

You can get it from the App Store. However, WP prefers free use images and the older icon is both licensed by the developer as free use and sufficient to identify the game. So we wouldn't remove it to use a fair use image (WP:NFCC). czar 15:48, 29 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Sources[edit]

czar 19:29, 18 August 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Copyright Vainglory images[edit]

I found avatars at https://www.vainglorygame.com/news/vainglory-lore-in-order-so-far/ bit they delete them because they found them in other section of vainglorygame.com. If anyone can help, will be great! PetreBogdan55 (talk) 19:52, 19 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@PetreBogdan55: it's not going to happen. Any art associated with this game is copyrighted, per the website's terms of use, and can't be uploaded to Wikipedia or Wikimedia Commons. clpo13(talk) 16:50, 20 December 2018 (UTC)[reply]
Categories