| This is Eviolite's talk page, where you can send them messages and comments. |
|
Archives (index): 1, 2, 3Auto-archiving period: 30 days  |
 Archives (Index) |
|
This page is archived by ClueBot III.
|
 | This section is pinned and will not be automatically archived. |
Overall, the Reception section looks nice. One thing reviewers will be looking for, however, is comprehensiveness; does this section include every common critical opinion without leaving things out? Since there are only five reviews, it's easier for the reviewers to see if you did or not. I saw you were struggling with writing a good reception section, so here's a new strategy I started using. It's currently present on Paper Mario: Color Splash for reference:
First, I made five bullet points of what I assumed would be the most common of all critical reviews. Color Splash had a different set, but these four should apply to this game.
- Writing and narrative
- Art and graphics
- Gameplay
- Other (if needed)
Next, I read each review one at a time, and anything they said that fell into any of these categories, I put down for future use. I also generalize the bullet points further if needed. For the sake of example, I'm stealing lines from your article, so some things might be out of context.
- Writing, narrative, and soundtrack
- Jordan Loades from Nintendo World Report, who noted that the soundtrack "offers an incredible yet melancholic backdrop"
- Art and graphics
- Gameplay and mechanics
- Loades largely considered it and the repetitive gameplay a negative.
- Loades also thought that the level design was uninspired, with the puzzle elements seeming more like annoyances.
- Other (if needed)
- Writing, narrative, and soundtrack
- Jordan Loades from Nintendo World Report, who noted that the soundtrack "offers an incredible yet melancholic backdrop"
- Andy Chalk of PC Gamer stated that it "plays one of the best videogame soundtracks [he's] heard in ages".
- Byrd, writing for The Washington Post, applauded the game's use of references to science fiction novels and films.
- Castle, who called the station "[the game's] greatest weapon against any grinding or gnashing of teeth" and "just so darn soothing".[
- Art and graphics
- Chalk writing that "the real hook, though, is everything that's going on in the background".
- Reynolds of Nintendo Life found some of the neon signs to be "needlessly childish" or inappropriate and that they "pulled [him] out of an otherwise pretty engaging and deep narrative".
- Gameplay and mechanics
- Loades largely considered it and the repetitive gameplay a negative.
- Loades also thought that the level design was uninspired, with the puzzle elements seeming more like annoyances.
- Byrd praised Golf Club: Wasteland's simple mechanics
- Wood of PlayStation LifeStyle found the gameplay highly frustrating, with inconsistent swings, necessary trial and error to determine the correct path, and long animations required to restart each stage; he stated that the golf "is simply not all that fun" and that he wished the developers focused more on secrets and interactions rather than "making frustratingly difficult levels that require lobs to barely reachable and tiny platforms
- Castle felt that the distance of shots could be difficult to judge and thought it could be clarified with color coding.
After, I removed the headers and bullet points and mushed all the lines together.
Jordan Loades from Nintendo World Report, who noted that the soundtrack "offers an incredible yet melancholic backdrop". Andy Chalk of PC Gamer stated that it "plays one of the best videogame soundtracks [he's] heard in ages". Byrd, writing for The Washington Post, applauded the game's use of references to science fiction novels and films. Castle, who called the station "[the game's] greatest weapon against any grinding or gnashing of teeth" and "just so darn soothing".[
Chalk writing that "the real hook, though, is everything that's going on in the background". Reynolds of Nintendo Life found some of the neon signs to be "needlessly childish" or inappropriate and that they "pulled [him] out of an otherwise pretty engaging and deep narrative".
Loades largely considered it and the repetitive gameplay a negative. Loades also thought that the level design was uninspired, with the puzzle elements seeming more like annoyances. Byrd praised Golf Club: Wasteland's simple mechanics. Wood of PlayStation LifeStyle found the gameplay highly frustrating, with inconsistent swings, necessary trial and error to determine the correct path, and long animations required to restart each stage; he stated that the golf "is simply not all that fun" and that he wished the developers focused more on secrets and interactions rather than "making frustratingly difficult levels that require lobs to barely reachable and tiny platforms. Castle felt that the distance of shots could be difficult to judge and thought it could be clarified with color coding.
When all of this is put into perspective, I can see that there wasn't too much to say about graphics and art. Are these two points the only things across all the critic reviews?
When I mush all these lines together, I mix in the transitions, shake up the writing style, sprinkle in some quotes, yadda yadda. In the end, Paper Mario: Color Splash#Reception results. Please let me know if this makes any sense. I'm very short on time right now, so thoughts might be scrambled a bit. Panini! • 🥪 17:35, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
- @Panini!: Thanks for the feedback! This looks like a good plan, will try it out. eviolite (talk) 17:40, 12 March 2022 (UTC)
Good article reassessment for Balatro
Balatro has been nominated for a good article reassessment. If you are interested in the discussion, please participate by adding your comments to the reassessment page. If concerns are not addressed during the review period, the good article status may be removed from the article. Jon698 (talk) 09:19, 7 June 2026 (UTC)
WikiCup 2026 July newsletter
The third round of the 2026 WikiCup ended on 28 June at 23:59 (UTC). As a reminder, good article nomination reviews now receive 10 points, while peer reviews, which continue to be worth 5 points, are now listed in the same section as featured article candidate reviews, rather than with good article reviews. Everyone who competed in round 3 will advance to round 4 unless they have withdrawn or been banned. No other changes to the round-point system have been made for this year.
Round 3 was competitive. Three contestants scored more than 1,000 round points; eight scored over 500; and thirteen scored over 300. The top three contestants had at least one featured article (two of them with two apiece). The following competitors scored more than 800 round points:
MCE89 (submissions) with 1567 points, mainly from good and featured articles about Australian people and geography, as well as some article reviews
Bgsu98 (submissions) with 1547 points, mainly from good articles, featured articles, featured lists, and a good topic about figure skating, along with 20 article reviews
Reconrabbit (submissions) with 1004 points, mainly from a high-multiplier featured article on European rabbit and several good articles, DYKs, and reviews
A.Cython (submissions) with 1004 points, mainly from good articles about warfare, along with 22 article reviews
Generalissima (submissions) with 859 points, mainly from good and featured articles about rivers and East Asian topics
The full scores for round 3 can be seen here. During this round, contestants have claimed 12 featured articles, 12 featured lists, 7 featured-topic articles, 117 good articles, 74 good-topic articles and more than 30 Did You Know articles. In addition, competitors have worked on 13 In the News articles, and they have conducted nearly 180 reviews. The tournament points table has been updated.
Remember that any content promoted after 28 June but before the start of Round 4 can be claimed in Round 4. Invitations for collaborative writing efforts or any other discussion of potentially interesting work is always welcome on the WikiCup talk page. Remember, if two or more WikiCup competitors have done significant work on an article, all can claim points. If you are concerned that your nomination—whether it is at good article candidates, a featured process, or anywhere else—will not receive the necessary reviews, please list it on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. If you want to help out with the WikiCup, feel free to review one of the nominations listed on Wikipedia:WikiCup/Reviews Needed. Questions are welcome on Wikipedia talk:WikiCup, and the judges are reachable on their talk pages. Good luck! If you wish to start or stop receiving this newsletter, please feel free to add or remove your name from Wikipedia:WikiCup/Newsletter/Send. MediaWiki message delivery (talk) 13:49, 29 June 2026 (UTC)