The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Graham Beards via FACBot (talk) 23:56, 14 November 2015 [1].


Final Fantasy Type-0[edit]

Nominator(s): ProtoDrake (talk) 10:06, 6 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

This article is about... Final Fantasy Type-0, a game in the Final Fantasy series released for the PlayStation Portable (PSP) on October 27, 2011. It was produced and published by Square Enix, and forms part of the Fabula Nova Crystallis Final Fantasy subseries. The original PSP game was not released outside Japan, and relevant information for its localized HD remaster Final Fantasy Type-0 HD has been given its own article. The article was nominated for and passed GA review in September of this year. It has undergone copyedits from multiple editors, all references are as clearly formatted as possible and archived using sites that enable the archived pages to work as best as possible. I feel that this article is ready to be submitted to FA review. ProtoDrake (talk) 10:06, 6 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Mike Christie[edit]

-- I'm done with a first pass. I'd like to do some more copyediting but I'll hold off till some of the above points are addressed. And of course please revert if any of the copyedits I've made so far have screwed anything up. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:37, 25 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mike Christie: I've done my best to address all the issues you raised, and done some copyediting on the first paragraph of the music section. The tracklist thing was done using translations found on VGMdb (which includes localized titles, translated titles, and Japanese). Most of the work was done by another editor, and since VGMdb is not a favored source, I didn't include it. The plot problems I've tried to smooth out as best as I can, but I fear it's an issue with the plot not being very clear in the first place. I've also done some work on the "Legacy" section, trimming out a couple of things and trying to make it flow a little better. I also did some expanding on the fan translation, getting things in order and such. Looking forward to a second runthrough. --ProtoDrake (talk) 19:46, 25 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I'll let the source reviewer comment on VGMdb; for the data on what's on the CDs I think it might be OK, since it's not exactly controversial; for the translations I would guess it's not a reliable source. But let's see what others think. The music paragraph is improved. I'll do another copyedit pass after you're taken care of the odds and ends remaining, but I think it's looking better now. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 23:54, 25 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Mike Christie: I've done what I could. For those points that either need more discussion or have been fixed as best as they could within the restrictions of the sources, I've left comments. One minor thing: I thought I'd fixed the Ultimania thing you mention. I changed it to a guidebook interview without being more specific. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:52, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've struck some more points. Just a couple left, plus the translation question which we'll have to leave to the source reviewer. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:07, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I've done my best with the few points remaining. The fan translation issue is a little messy from the start, and as I didn't want to include speculation, there are some gaps in the information. --ProtoDrake (talk) 11:18, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Looking good. I'll do another copyedit pass, probably this evening. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:10, 26 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

A few more points on a second read through:

  • Did my best with this. Might still need a little work in its present form. I also found that I'd made a massive bobo concerning the multiplayer, so I found an appropriate reference and corrected it. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
    That's a huge improvement. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:53, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

-- Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

@Mike Christie: I've done my best to address everything. I await further comments. Oh, and to a much earlier point about specifying character-to-environment sizes, there are actually RPGs today that use skewered scales. And since this game also used a world map, I thought it needed mentioning. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:24, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
OK, I can understand mentioning it in that case. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:53, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Support. All my concerns have been addressed. Note to the coords: I only looked at a couple of sources, and found one case where the phrasing was a little too close to the original, so a source spot check would be a good idea if this gets close to promotion. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:53, 27 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Kiyoshiendo[edit]

Comment: This article is a bit long, isn't it? I couldn't imagine reading through this all in one sitting, unless I was really into the game. Are there sections we can trim a little bit to make the article more summary? --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 18:32, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

The article was even longer when it included information about Type-0 HD. I admit that it is large, but it would be difficult trimming it down further than it has been without missing out some of the cited development information. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:42, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
You know, I was just thinking about that. Bastion (video game) also has a lot of information, though it's short enough to skim through without being fatigued. It has FA status, and is one of the newer inductees. We can scrutinise the article for necessary information, especially around the plot and character sections. An article like Paper Mario: The Thousand Year Door (GA status) has necessary information without going too into detail. --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 19:17, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I looked at it, and I managed to trim down the plot section considerably. The gameplay section, I feel, is as small as it can sensibly get. I've also done some alteration work to the development section to make it less of a continuous read. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:23, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
It really is shorter now, thank you. It now appears to me the weakest portion is the release section. Is it necessary to create a new article for the fan translation patch? If there's enough meat surrounding it, it would make for a fine new article (another day another story). --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 20:45, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
All that's there is all I could find. And it's odd, you asking for it to be trimmed or something. The reviewer above asked for a bit of elaboration. I've also done some trimming to other parts of the release section. I guess I can have another look when I've finished with the set of comments below to see if it can't be trimmed further. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:52, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
For what it's worth, I think the release section is reasonably sized. If it were expanded, I would suggest to split it and the development section into their own article, but right now it seems fine to me. The synopsis section, however, I do have trouble with. ~Mable (chat) 20:59, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Maplestrip[edit]

Oh my God, this is a long article. *ahem* I didn't actually read any of the above comments, so excuse me if I repeat comments made by other people. Very few of these comments are actually big issues, and a lot are probably more like "I would do it this way instead," so take everything with a grain of salt ^_^ Maplastrip/Mable

This article is definitely Featured class and I would already support it, but seeing as how many small things I have mentioned, I'll wait for most of those to be resolved. Very few of these actually stand in the way, though. Amazing work on this article, it is incredible! ~Mable (chat) 20:36, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've addressed all the issues above, as best as I can. As to the plot section, they're usually that big or bigger in GA and FA Final Fantasy articles. Responding to above comments form Kiyoshiendo, I have already trimmed it down to about two thirds of what it was. I can't really trim it any further without compromising its accuracy in some way. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:43, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I am very fond of how you improved the article. I've just noticed a small grammar mistake in "The soundtrack was released in an standard edition," which I missed earlier, but other than that, I give a very strong support to this becoming a Featured Article! Great work ^_^ ~Mable (chat) 21:57, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I think we're ready to vote for a promotion. Support, based on Protodrake's strong editing and the more pallatable length while still having as much encyclopedic information. --Kiyoshiendo (talk) 21:58, 30 October 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

Comments from Rhain1999 on sources[edit]

I looked at this version. I checked sources 1–8, 10–11, 14–23, 44–50, 56–64, 67–72, 75–77, 79–85, 89, 92–97, 101–102, 104–107, 110, 112–118, 120–121, 123–124, and 126–129.

I only found a few problems:

Everything else I looked at is good. Bonus points for archiving. – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 09:45, 6 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]

I've sorted out the issues you pointed out, I think. The Fan Translation thing was a typo on my part. The Hexa ref was also a mistake on my part, now corrected. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:36, 6 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
I figured this was the case. I just took another look; everything checks out. Support on sources. – Rhain1999 (talk to me) 10:41, 6 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
@Rhain1999: Many thanks. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:16, 6 November 2015 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.