Talk:Blast Wind

Latest comment: 14 days ago by Tarlby in topic GA Review

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Blast Wind/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: KGRAMR (talk · contribs) 18:58, 13 November 2024 (UTC)Reply

Reviewer: Tarlby (talk · contribs) 05:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

  1. Is it well written?
    A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:  
    B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:  
  2. Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
    A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:  
    B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):  
    C. It contains no original research:  
    D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:  
    B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):  
  4. Is it neutral?
    It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:  
  5. Is it stable?
    It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:  
  6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:  
    B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  

Tarlby

edit

I shall get to this soon. Looks like a fun little read. Tarlby (t) (c) 05:58, 29 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Spotchecking and everything is done. At this point, I'll do one final skim through the article for any copyediting that I can fix myself or request. Thank you for being my second ever GA review!

Lead

edit
  Done -- Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Blast Wind was created by new members New members of what?
  • You should explain the significance of the "new members" working on Thunder Force V. As someone who never heard of Thunder Force V, this takes away from the subject without adding much context.
I reworded the sentence from new members to employees staff members, since they gained experience making this and Hyper Duel before moving to TFV. Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • ...with critics praising the frenetic pace, soundtrack, and controls, but others being mixed regarding...--->...with critics praising the frenetic pace, soundtrack, and controls, while others were mixed regarding...
  • The final sentence differs from the last by not using an Oxford comma.
  Done -- Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Gameplay

edit
  • Blast Wind is a vertical-scrolling... Change "vertical-" to "vertically-". Looking at other articles, you should probably link "vertically-scrolling" again.
  Done -- Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • I would link "nuclear holocaust" and "nuclear winter".
  Done -- Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:02, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Development and release

edit
  • t was developed by new members who would... Same thing.
  Done -- I changed the sentence. Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Taisuke Kanasaki only participated... Who? What was his contribution again? Also, their surname is pronounced with an S here while the infobox gives a Z.
MobyGames lists Taisuke Kanasaki with S instead of Z so that was my bad. As for him, i added an interview by Game Watch which briefly touches his time at Technosoft and provides context as to who is him: Kanasaki worked on Another Code: Two Memories, Wish Room: Angel's Memory (Hotel Dusk: Room 215) and Last Window: Mayonaka no Yakusoku ( Last Window: The Secret of Cape West) at Cing after his time at Technosoft. (P.S. - Oh i forgot one detail... Kanasaki did the introductory sequence (the opening movie) of the game) Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:22, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • ...found it difficult to arrange and rewrite the songs because FM and PCM sound sources were the basis. I don't know why these would make it difficult to score.
I added the line based on what was written and translated by Google Translate based on this liner note: (1). Basically the original unreleased Arcade version used FM and PCM for the game's soundscapes which proved difficult for Hyakutaro Tsukumo. Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:19, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Reception

edit
  • Unlink Sega Saturn.
  Done -- Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Remove the "into" in the second sentence. ...that week, and it received a score...---->...that week and received a score...
  Done -- Roberth Martinez (talk) 02:23, 30 January 2025 (UTC)Reply

Spotcheck

edit
  • Gameplay looks good
  • Can't access ref 8 though I'll assume good competence that it verifies
  • I assume "OP" in ref 13 based on Google and Twitter translations supports Kanasaki working for the intro sequence, though I don't know what the "P" would stand for. Is it "opening part"?
Per Wikitionary: "OP ( オープニング ) • (ōpuningu) (entertainment) opening theme, intro sequence; Abbreviation of オープニング". Roberth Martinez (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
  • Can't access ref 14, so I'll assume it's good.
Here is a link to the Liner Notes: https://kappa.vgmsite.com/soundtracks/technosoft-game-music-collection-vol.-7-reincarnation/03%20Booklet%20Interior.jpg Roberth Martinez (talk) 18:49, 31 January 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Tarlby:Sorry for pinging you right now but are there anymore details needed to be addressed in the article? Just to let me know in case. Roberth Martinez (talk) 16:13, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
Sorry for the nonexistent progress in the past few days. Real life is taking up my time here. I'll be able to continue this soon. Tarlby (t) (c) 16:46, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
@Tarlby:Oh OK. Take your time! Roberth Martinez (talk) 21:12, 3 February 2025 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.