Talk:Turok 2: Seeds of Evil

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	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.	CVG Portal
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 was previously selected for Gaming Collaboration of the week.
CVG To-do: edit  Gaming Collaboration of the week: Baldur's Gate series Expand: New CVG Articles, Normality, Pac-Man World 2, Operation Flashpoint: Elite, Call of Juarez, Galactic Civilizations II: Dark Avatar, Ford Street Racing, Betrayal at Krondor CVG Peer Review: List of F-Zero titles, Kya: Dark Lineage, Wii Remote, Dynasty Warriors 4, The Sims 2, The Legend of Zelda: A Link to the Past, Kirby's Dream Land, Electronic sports, Fire Emblem, Dante (Devil May Cry), The Elder Scrolls IV: Oblivion, Final Fantasy XII, Sonic the Hedgehog (16-bit), Classes in World of Warcraft Cleanup: Age of Mythology, Mario Kart: Double Dash!!, Betrayal at Krondor, List of Nintendo trademarks Merge: Deletions / Essential articles / Magazines Assess and Prioritise articles (Log)

Turok 2: Seeds of Evil has been listed as a good article 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 review.

Contents 1 Good article 2 Slight edit/addition 3 WP:NOT a game guide 4 Magazine review 5 GA

[edit] Good article

I played Turok 2 all the way through, and I'm going to make all that frustration into a good article if it kills me. =^_^= Hrimfaxi 12:18, 17 April 2006 (UTC)

Well, congrats, you have. It's an excellent article, perhaps worthy of featuring. I would nominate it, if I knew how. Ortchel 2:25, 01 June 2006

No, it is nowhere near featured status. It would need to go through Wikipedia:Peer review first. Thunderbrand 18:40, 1 June 2006 (UTC)

Added a little more on the levels and re-written the multiplayer and story sections. Might go on to re-write Turoks 3 and 4 if I can figure out a way to writeup 4 without using the words 'insufferable shit' more than four hundred times.

Also, to Ortchel, see Wikipedia:WikiProject_Computer_and_video_games/Peer_review for details on how to nominate. Hrimfaxi 12:50, 10 July 2006 (UTC)

Um...Where did the 'start' class come from? I don't see it listed in the link. Hrimfaxi 02:47, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

Click on "assessment scale". Thunderbrand 03:00, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

I have, but according to the 'rated' link nobody's rated it. Hrimfaxi 10:36, 14 August 2006 (UTC)

[edit] Slight edit/addition

To be fair and accurate, I added Top Gear OverDrive and NFL Quarterback Club '99 to this sentence:

"It was one of the first N64 games to allow use with the RAM Expansion Pak, along with Star Wars: Rogue Squadron."

In the U.S., those four games were released around the same time and featured N64 Expansion Pak support. -R

[edit] WP:NOT a game guide

I noticed that there is a lot of game-guide like content here (level descriptions, among other things), which, per WP:NOT, is unacceptable. Therefore, I propose that it be removed from the article. Please comment on this - if nobody objects, I will commit the removal myself. (|-- UlTiMuS 04:36, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

Go ahead. This article is in bad shape. Thunderbrand 14:45, 2 September 2006 (UTC)

I noticed that there is a lot of game-guide like content here (level descriptions, among other things)

Level descriptions are fine. When you tell people how to finish the levels, it's not fine, but given almost every Wiki game article includes outline descriptions of the levels within it, I can't see the problem here. It's not a walkthrough or turorial as NOT forbids, since all the objective information is given to the players at the beginning of each level by the game itself anyway and most Wiki game articles have an enemy list [see Quake 2, Doom 3, the Half-Life articles, etc].

This information either belongs here or the precident of level descriptions being ok set by every other detailed Wiki article on videogames is wrong.Hrimfaxi 04:46, 3 September 2006 (UTC)

But in most cases where this occurs, this is usually somehow important/beneficial to the article, and it is done in an encyclopedic manner. See Final Fantasy VII. The story and characters are notable on their own, and so have seperate articles, which are summarized in the main. I can't see the levels of T2, unfortunately, as being notable on their own in the same respect, and the content on them here is lacking in context. Someone who's never played T2 (or video games, for that matter) probably doesn't give a damn about the levels and enemies. I'm being realistic. Here is my proposal, then: Break off the "disputed" content to another article titled "Turok 2: Seeds of Evil Worlds and Enemies", and then nominate the new article on WP:AFD to determine if it should be kept. Let the community decide, I say. (|-- UlTiMuS 01:44, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

Well, aside from that it's just going to get merged again because the community decides it isn't notable beyond this article but belongs in it [which is consensus, judging by every other game article], what would be the point when we could fix it here? I can see it being a valid action for things like Half-Life where enormous volumes of data on the enemies and worlds exist, but not so much here. Each world has about two paragraphs and each enemy about one; the only real issue I see here is they look bad because they're not really broken up by anything. More screenshots to illustrate what's being talked about would probably help matters.

Speaking realistically, there's always someone who doesn't give a damn about something, and you shouldn't write an encyclopedia on the basis of that. Most people don't give a damn about the specifics of exotic mathematics, but they're still in the articles on those principles. I'd admit that this article needs more work, but I really can't see how any policy, NOT included, is being violated here by having outlines of each level. Hrimfaxi 05:13, 4 September 2006 (UTC)

You know, considering the nature of the article, more screenschots could be very useful per "fair use" condition.

[edit] Magazine review

Here's a review of the game from Next Generation Magazine, uploaded by Mitaphane if someone wants to work it into the article. I'll start probably tomorrow. (page1 page2) Thunderbrand 02:49, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

[edit] GA

It appears to meet the criteria for GA, so I'm going to flag it as a GA. Nice work, although you might want to add more variety to the gaming sources (perhaps GameSpot or 1up as well) if you plan on pushing for FA. — Deckiller 00:02, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I agree that the sources are a bit "IGN-centric", but I will continue to work on the article. Thunderbrand 00:06, 28 March 2007 (UTC)