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 User:SandyGeorgia 03:08, 29 September 2008 [1].

---

Nominator(s): Guyinblack25 ^talk

This is one of the VG Project's Top priority articles. Since this year is its 30th anniversary, I figured it deserved a proper article. I'd also like to give special mention to Marty Goldberg (the top contributor), who has helped keep the article on its path by providing some very helpful fact checking.

For those interested, the article has been peer reviewed, and recently passed GA. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 15:01, 23 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Comments - for now to get the show on the road. This article is generally well-written. During my first quick pass, I only found a few glitches. This is an important article and it would be nice to get it featured. The sources don't too bad, but I am no expert on video gaming culture. The second image (playfield.jpg) doesn't provide a source, we might need to fix this. I am very interested in what other reviewers have to say. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:05, 23 September 2008 (UTC) (I'm watching)[reply]

Thank you for the copy edit sweep. I removed the hidden content as it was unsourced and unneeded—it was some of the original content before the quality push. I tried to avoid any source that would be questionable, but am more than willing to discuss the reliability of them. That image, Image:Inv_D_playfield.jpg, was taken two and a half years ago by a user that has not been active since. So I'm not sure how to list the source or than put the uploader's name. Is the source really necessary if it is a free-use image? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:38, 23 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

It probably won't be a problem, but let's see what, if anything, other reviewers have to say. Graham Colm ^Talk 19:20, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'd be happy to put a fair-use rationale on that image, where the source information would just be "photo". The image is not free-use, however, since Taito still owns the rights to the game. Let me know if you want me to take care of that - I've noticed a lot of VG-related images that claim that the person uploading the image owns the rights to that image, and I don't think that's correct when the image is of a copyrighted work, regardless of the method by which the image was obtained. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 20:41, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

(Edit conflict) I went ahead and changed that image's licensing tag to fair-use screenshot and added a rationale. Go ahead and revert if you think this was incorrect at this time. — KieferSkunk (talk) — 22:04, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Looks alright to me, but I'm no image expert. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 00:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

• Support with one nitpick:
• Prose is smooth, but, lack of references surprises me. Wouldn't Space inavaders have more? —Sunday | Speak 22:02, 23 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are more sources out there, but they are either print sources I don't have access to or unreliable internet sources. Given the article's importance, I figured I should error on the side of caution. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 00:53, 24 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
    • Print sources you don't have access to ? Such as ? Have you attempted to have someone provide them? SandyGeorgia (Talk) 01:19, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • There are some video game books that are on my list to pick up. I know that the game is mentioned in them, but I don't know to what extent. Marty was able to provide some content for one of them. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 02:08, 24 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]
        • A Google Books search shows several books with online previews available, if this helps at all. Giggy (talk) 00:10, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]
      • What other things would you have liked to seen referenced? I have a large archive of books, magazines, etc. (because of the E2M), but there wasn't much that wasn't repetitive of what was already included in the references here. I'm not sure why you would think Space Invaders would have a lot more than what's been presented. More fluff references certainly. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 18:57, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:44, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comment - I'm not happy about the article saying "designed in 1978" without saying when it was first produced. It seems like it took him more than one year to come up with it anyway. Don't we know when it first came out in Japan and then the US? Juzhong (talk) 23:47, 24 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've tweaked the lead to be more clear. Unfortunately the only release date I could find was June 1978, which I believe is the Japanese release date. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 00:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Comments by Giggy

• I've nominated Image:Space invaders avignon.jpg for deletion as there's no freedom of panorama in France (details)... I wasn't 100% sure on this one, but just be aware.
• "and had earned Taito US$500 million in revenue by 2007" - um......
• "ranks it the top rated arcade game" - ranks and rated are kinda redundant and sound a bit awkward
• The infobox image would work better in the gameplay section (along with some detail in the caption... which is needed at the moment anyway per NFCC), if you can find another infobox image to replace it.
• "an adaptation of the mechanical game Space Monsters released by Taito in 1972", and later on "The game was originally titled Space Monsters" - was he originally going to give it the same name as another game, or is there some confusion here?
• "After the first few months following its release in Japan, the game became very popular" - pretty redundant to what was said two sentences ago (maybe merge)
• "Retro Gamer stated popular series like Final Fantasy, Gran Turismo, and Tomb Raider would not have been possible without Space Invaders" - How so?
• The second paragraph of the Impact and legacy section gets a bit annoying when it basically becomes of list of quotes about the game... I dunno, can you make the prose more... "appealing"... in any way?
• Uggh... a list of episodes that contain Space Invaders references is not something I'd like to see featured... :S
• MOS:ITALICS, check throughout
• "video game magazine Electronic Gaming Monthly" - I don't see where ref 8 ([2]) cites this (though I do see it here, so you may disregard if you wish)

Giggy (talk) 00:50, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are the issues I've addressed:

• Shame about the Invader image. Would a screen shot of a TV episode or close up of the EGM cover be alright? I'm fine with leaving that section without an image.
• Tweaked the $500 million statement.
• Tweaked the top rated statements
• The screen shot has a more detailed description on the image page. Would it be alright if I just keep it in the info box and direct readers to click on the image for more info? If need be I'll see if I can find a title screen image like in Donkey Kong (video game), or maybe a promotional flyer.
• The confusion has never been discussed in the interviews I've read. I assume that's why his boss renamed it to "Invaders"
• Retro Gamer did not state how so, they simply stated that. I assume as a statement to give the readers a since of impact the game had. But unfortunately I can't say for certain. It didn't really add anything to the article so I removed it.
• I understand the feeling about the episode references, but the game is heavily referenced in other mediums and I don't think that should be ignored. I trimmed the pop culture references down as much as I felt would portray the proper amount of weight in the article. Plus it's only five TV shows, I do not plan to include any more and will remove an excess ones that may get added.
• I did a sweep of the article and found one more magazine that needed italics. If you see any more, let me know.
• The Electronic Gaming Monthly part is listed as EGM under the third paragraph of number 7 on page 2.

I'll try to massage the prose in the "Impact and legacy" section tomorrow. I'm open to some suggestions though. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 01:45, 25 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

• First image: Yeah, probably... usual fair use rationale and descriptive caption stuff applies.
• Infobox image: A Donkey Kong style thing would be ideal. Directing them to the image page should be OK.
• Episodes: Some of the mentions (eg. Donna's Story) seem really trivial. Also My Bad Too is cited but I don't see any mention of the game on that article. Possibly trim out those two? (I see your point in general, though.)

I'll try and do a bit of copyediting too. Giggy (talk) 01:58, 25 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Reply:

• I'll try to address the images tomorrow.
• I believe the '70s Show episode has a side plot with Kelso and Fez and the arcade game. My memory is a bit fuzzy though. The Scrubs episode started with Turk and JD using the interns as human aliens and threw water balloons from the roof. See IGN article, they mention a reference.

Honestly, I'm not attached to any of the first four episode references. I included those because they were high profile TV shows. Some have stronger references than others though. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 02:36, 25 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Giggy- I've done some more editing to the article. I've expanded the caption, tweaked the popularity statement, and have found some alternative infobox images. See KLOV page for the title screen, next to "Scarcity in collections". To be honest, I feel it doesn't add much to the article, aside from displaying some game guide content. ArcadeFlyers.com has a page of SI flyers too. Do you have a preference? (Guyinblack25 ^talk 21:03, 25 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

I'd leave it as is; none of them add much (I agree) and it's looking pretty good at the moment. Let me take one last pass over it before I support. Giggy (talk) 00:15, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Giggy, regarding the Space Monsters question, it was both. There have been many different publicly supported (by both Taito and Tomohiro) origin stories over the years. It was originally named space monsters and changed as reported, but the connection as to why it was named that has several different stories including a childrens song at the time and a connection to Taito's original 1972 electro-mechanical (called EM) coin-op of the same name. Mech design is what he was in from the late 60's on until they created their video games "division" in the early 70's. And then there's the several other stories (not related to the Space Monsters name) as to how Space Invaders came about. So (per the discussion on the SI talk page) we decided its better to present all the stories claimed and referenced rather than trying to pick one specific one. --Marty Goldberg (talk) 18:53, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support per above comments. Giggy (talk) 00:32, 26 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support More comments - There are still a few tiny problems with logic and prose:

• This sentence from the Lead: Media entities have used the pixelated enemy alien as an icon for video games. What are media entities? The same vague expression is used in the body of the article.
• Here who handled the planning, graphic design, and programming - would "was responsible for" be better?
• This Nishikado's most recent descriptions state he was first inspired - how about "Nishikado recently said" ?
• This sentence needs a little attention- During the 1970s, microcomputers in Japan were not powerful enough to create Space Invaders, and Nishikado had to create hardware and development tools for the game. I think the first "create" could be a simple "run" and I'm not sure what is meant by "development tools".
• This sentence; The Observer commented that the popularity of the home console versions led to a large number of home programmers who later became industry leaders.- is illogical, I think it means "According to The Observer, the home console versions were popular and encouraged users to learn programming; many of these programmers later became industry leaders".
• This is bad Space Invaders was the first video game to include some kind of intermission between gameplay - I would replace "some kind of" with a simple "an".
• There is repetition here: Space Invaders has inspired the development of several games, and led to multiple sequels and rereleases. In the next section we have Space Invaders has been rereleased on numerous platforms, and spawned multiple sequels
• Here I suggest you delete the "various": The game and its related games have been included in various video game compilation titles
• Lastly how about changing "multiple" to "many"? There are at least two occurrences. Graham Colm ^Talk 14:37, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've addressed the first four bullets in your list above. Comments? (I'll do more of them later. :)) — KieferSkunk (talk) — 17:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

All your comments have been addressed. However, I think "Nishikado's most recent descriptions" should remain since a year from now, he would not have "recently said". The article is already more than half a year old. (Guyinblack25 ^talk 18:04, 27 September 2008 (UTC))[reply]

It still sounds non-idiomatic, but it's not a big problem. Graham Colm ^Talk 18:28, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Support I have been watching this article evolve since its GAN days. Worthy of FA status, in my opinion. A clearly written, well organized, and interesting article. (I have done some minor copy editing to fix my nitpicks.) —Mattisse (Talk) 20:24, 27 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

• Support. Seems like a very good article to me, describes the game itself, its history, and reception/legacy thoroughly. I wasn't left hungry for more info. Tezkag72 (talk) 02:53, 29 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.