# Talk:3D Tetris

Can anyone else think of anything to add? --Thaddius 17:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)

Coming here via the reassessment request in the project template; New Age Retro Hippie recently bumped it up to C-class and I agree with that. Some ideas for improvement I noticed while looking through the article:

There's a citation needed tag
'Development' is a bit scant
'Reception' mentions a "range" of scores, but then only mentions a few; in fact, the template lists 3, though there a a couple in the text that aren't listed there
'Reception' is so bereft of sources that there's one guys opinion presented in its own paragraph. You also shouldn't have single-sentence paragraphs
The lead doesn't summarize the article well; it chops reception (1 of 3 sections) down to one short sentence, for example
Really, overall, gameplay's alright (though it could use a copyedit pass) but everything after that is just short on content. I know this is a '90s virtual boy game, but that just means that you have to look hard for offline sources- there are plenty of '90s GAs out there. If this is all the sources there are, well, it could still be cleaned up- for example, reception should be organized by theme (graphics, gameplay, etc.) not by reviewer
Smaller details- the date formats don't match in the references, there are a lot of unlinked publishers in references, the period goes outside the quote unless you're quoting a full sentence, a copyedit is really needed ("A reviewer for magazine Videogames"; "Points are gained based on the number of blocks in, the complexity of and the height of the symmetrical layer" - this whole sentence is hard to parse)
--PresN 03:23, 19 April 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:3D Tetris/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Alexandra IDV (talk · contribs) 14:55, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Will be reviewing this~!--AlexandraIDV 14:55, 2 June 2020 (UTC)

Lead
The developer is variously referred to as "T&E Soft" and "Technology and Entertainment Software" at different points in the article, it should probably be consistent. I am not familiar with the developer, so I can't say which variant is most appropriate here.
ポリゴブロック should be romanized as Porigo Burokku.
Gameplay
It is not immediately clear what the difference between a game mode and a game type is - there is some clarification later on, but the reader is left wondering for a while
Consider re-organizing information so that the game modes' introduction comes immediately before their definition.
The image caption is pretty wordy and spends time on describing the image as an image rather than what's depicted. I would consider something basic like "The player moves falling blocks to fill up a three-dimensional well."
Development
I don't think it is necessary to repeat the Japanese spelling and romanization of Polygo Block (but if you do, the romanization is missing a double consonant here too)
Was it only released in the US, and not Canada?
@Abryn: Some issues, but not too many. I've put the review on hold for seven days - contact me if you have any questions or when the issues are addressed.--AlexandraIDV 09:26, 4 June 2020 (UTC)

@Abryn: Thank you! I went ahead and made one further minor change myself, and think the article is looking good now. I'll promote it to GA in just a moment~!--AlexandraIDV 17:32, 4 June 2020 (UTC)