User talk:Guyinblack25/Sandbox

Feedback from User: Ashnard[edit]

From the start I'll just say that all of these are just suggestions, and not me saying anything that should be done. Feel free to tell me where I'm blatantly wrong. Okay, let's have a look:

It may seem obvious, but the "neutrality" section could be updated to include info about adding excessive positivity when it's not required in the context. Like the other sections, you could label an example of a neutrality violation.
on "Get feedback", may be best to list WP:LOCE when talking about copyediting.
Perhaps you could give more of the guidelines associated with captions, as in punctuation usage and being concise.
For legacy, maybe a guideline should be established on the treatment of sequels, including how much depth is required when talking about sequels.
I actually think that "Reception" should be expanded to talk about how the section should be structured. Many editors have been known to simply have a paragraph dedicated to positives, and the other to negatives, which I think is a poor arrangement. Personally, I advocate dividing the paragraphs by things like graphics and gameplay, and then integrating the positives and negatives. Any thoughts on this?
"some role-playing games may have a longer plot that takes five or six to describe." I would personally dispute this, but that's just me personally. Any plot section this long will have that "X does this, and then battles Y, and then goes to location Z" style, which is totally avoidable. I don't know, I've always felt WP:VG has been ambiguous when it comes to plot sections. Further discussion may be required to gain some sort of consensus on this issue.
For "gameplay", I've seen examples at FACs where editors—wrongly—will write about a gameplay feature, but will then proceed to write why the developer done this, and what there influenecs where for including it in the "gameplay" section. So, like kind of integrating "development" information into gameplay sometimes. Is there any chance that something could be written about this?

Other than that, there's nothing else I have any problems with. Hopefully, this should become the definitive guideline for the project. Thanks. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 11:12, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I've just thought, I don't think anything is mentioned of "Reception" tables. These are very common, so it may be worth mentioning them. Ashnard _Talk ^Contribs 11:23, 18 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Some corrections[edit]

Mostly assumed typos and bit of grammatical errors. I only noticed afterwards that until this point you had been the only editor, if I had noticed beforehand I might have acted differently; however, the corrections had to be made no matter what. :) Salvidrim (talk) 06:31, 21 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]