This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Rockstar Vancouver article. This is
not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
This article is written in
Canadian English, which has its own spelling conventions (colour, centre, travelled, realize, analyze) and some terms that are used in it may be different or absent from other
varieties of English. According to the
relevant style guide, this should not be changed without
broad consensus.
A fact from Rockstar Vancouver appeared on Wikipedia's
Main Page in the Did you know column on 24 September 2022 (
check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Companies, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
companies on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CompaniesWikipedia:WikiProject CompaniesTemplate:WikiProject Companiescompany articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Canada, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Canada on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.CanadaWikipedia:WikiProject CanadaTemplate:WikiProject CanadaCanada-related articles
Image copyright problem with Image:Rockstar Vancouver logo.svg
The image
Image:Rockstar Vancouver logo.svg is used in this article under a claim of
fair use, but it does not have an adequate explanation for why it meets the
requirements for such images when used here. In particular, for each page the image is used on, it must have an
explanation linking to that page which explains why it needs to be used on that page. Please check
That there is a
non-free use rationale on the image's description page for the use in this article.
That this article is linked to from the image description page.
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.
Reviewing prelude: I review like an FAC in which I go from top to bottom and make suggestions as I go. I tend to focus on prose clarity and conciseness. If you disagree with a comment, I'm happy to discuss - unless it would make the article fail the GACR, I don't usually die on hills for my suggested changes.
Lead
Can we include years for Bully and Homeworld? They have no given year but the other games in the lead do
"The studio also developed"... this makes it seem like the Beta 5 update applied to all 3. Maybe "The studio developed the Beta 5 et etc...as well as..."?
Split paragraph at "Take-Two Interactive" maybe?
History
Include years for Homeworld & Cataclysm?
I feel like paragraph 1 could be split, maybe at "the nascent"
Acquisition...
It feels odd that this section covers 10 years vs the opener that covers 4 years - can it be split? (Splitting would also mean a shorter header, which is a bonus)
Para 2 in this section covers two topics, the other studios and Bully. Needs a split - paragraphs should discuss one idea.
I really have minimal comments here. The prose is crisp and concise and just enough context is given to introduce things and people without overexplaining. Sources are reliable, no concerns about facts/paraphrase on a quick spot check of a random few. Earwig shows no hits. ♠
PMC♠
(talk)09:21, 11 September 2022 (UTC)reply
Thanks for your review, @
Premeditated Chaos! I made a few changes that I believe should satisfy your comments. The only item I'm not entirely sure about is the position of "(2006)" for Bully in the lead: I had originally put it in the chronologically ordered part (now paragraphs 2 and 3), but you seemingly requested it moved up to the game's first mention. Did I interpret this correctly? Regards,
IceWelder [
✉]
09:42, 11 September 2022 (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.
Did you know nomination
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as
this nomination's talk page,
the article's talk page or
Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.
... that Barking Dog Studios developed most of the "Beta 5" update for Counter-Strike? Source: "And that's "not to mention the help we received from Barking Dog, who practically made BETA 5", who apparently "made 90% of BETA 5"."
[1] (ref #12 in the article).
The article has become a GA recently, is of a sufficient size, lacks any copyright violations, QPQ has been completed adequately, the hook is sourced properly and interesting, though I am not too sure about the reliability of Kotaku.
K. Peake07:49, 13 September 2022 (UTC)reply
@
Kyle Peake:Kotaku is a mainstay reliable source for video games; see
WP:VG/RS. In particular, the articles used are from a long-time senior editor (Plunkett) and a former editor-in-chief (Totilo). Regards,
IceWelder [
✉]
07:59, 13 September 2022 (UTC)reply