# Talk:Curse of Enchantia

I think some abandonware advocate has been a bit hasty in categorizing this title... Pseudo Intellectual 07:28, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Curse of Enchantia/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Bridies (talk · contribs) 16:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)
Starting review, will post comments in the next day or two. bridies (talk) 16:01, 3 September 2012 (UTC)

1. Lead is very short, a bit too short for a fairly sizeable article. It needs to summarise the main points of critical commentary. Suggest also a brief description of how the game works i.e. just that it's a point-and-click adventure with problems to solve in order to make progress; just so a reader unfamiliar with this genre can understand the lead without having to click through to the adventure game article.
Prose is mostly fine. I have done some minor copy editing on most of the sections. Some suggestions before I copy edit the plot section:

Plot section is a bit over the top and needs cooled down and tightened up. Examples of excitable prose: "iron hand rule of a coven of wicked witches" and "the most powerful and even more cruel and depraved than the others". Some redundancies: "magically transported" (if he's been transported to another universe by a witch, it's kind of inherently obvious that it's magical) and "perilious mountain cliff" (as opposed to a perfectly safe mountain cliff...), things like that. Some subjectivity that possibly needs better attribution: calling it a "surreal" adventure and the creatures "unique".
Couple of non-essential suggestions:

Suggest moving the sentence about the Polish reggae band into the above paragraph, as a one sentence paragraph doesn't look good.
Suggest removing the review scores from the prose and just having them in the scores box. It's a bit tiresome reading "X gave it a score of..." over and over when the info is just a glance away in the box.
2. Accuracy/sourcing
Looks mostly good (will sample-check some material later), but:

Per WP:VG/RS, Abandonia and Home of the Underdogs are not reliable and their reviews need to go. Can find nothing on The House of Games, but the requests for Paypal donations to help with bandwidth costs give it away as self-published. Gamershell is fine. Suggest moving it to the legacy section though.
Unless there's a reliable source comparing those games, the see also links are original research.
Not sure you can say "some also incorrectly took Enchantia to be the name of the witch antagonist" if it's just one review. Say: "Generation incorrectly took..."; ditto "featured in at least one of the reviews", just say which reviews.
Also don't think you can say "Curse of Enchantia was well received in France" based on 2 reviews. Just say "The French magazines X and Y said..."
Don't link to the abandonware sites (likely copyvios, strictly speaking). Just cite the actual magazine as an offline source.
3. Covers main points
4. Neutral
5. Stable
6. Images and FURS/tags are adequate bridies (talk) 10:26, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Done. --Niemti (talk) 12:53, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Also. --Niemti (talk) 13:29, 5 September 2012 (UTC)

I just see a blank page with the message "You have followed an old direct link from somebody else to the Amiga Magazine Rack". bridies (talk) 13:56, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
CU Amiga interview preview, AdventureSoft's Mike Woodroffe talking of Simon the Sorcerer being a lot like Enchantia, just not "confusing" and "illogical". (That's regarding your "Unless there's a reliable source comparing those games, the see also links are original research.", which was not even really grounded in anything, as it was just a see also link and not a comparison, and nothing of "orginal research" was there.) --Niemti (talk) 14:08, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
OK, that sounds fine. If you could put the issue and page numbers here for future reference, that'd be great. A "see also" with a description of a similar theme, plot game play or whatever is inherently a comparison. bridies (talk) 14:18, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Everything about "the issue and page numbers" is right there in the link. --Niemti (talk) 14:47, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
I see. I'll probably finish this up tomorrow. Also: just a reminder that you should really remove the links to the abandonware and "Kultboy" sites in the refs (i.e. just remove the actual links, leaving the citation info to the magazines). Firstly because they're copyvios - even if in practice no one's much likely to care - and secondly because anyone taking a to-the-letter approach to policy could argue that the sites themselves are being used as sources rather than the real magazines, and are thus not reliable. At least, include the citation information to Power Play magazine (as you've done with the French stuff) rather than just citing the Kultboy page. bridies (talk) 15:52, 5 September 2012 (UTC)
Copy edited the plot section, and I think the prose and layout is at least acceptable now. And as I said, the coverage and balance is good. Pass. bridies (talk)

Because apparently it's needed to be started, so be it. --Niemti (talk) 10:09, 7 September 2012 (UTC)

I Support A-Class. --JDC808 ♫ 04:37, 20 September 2012 (UTC)
I also support.--Wangxuan8331800 (talk) 04:03, 14 October 2012 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 2 external links on Curse of Enchantia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113142800/http://www.hotud.org/component/content/article/38-adventure/19946 to http://www.hotud.org/component/content/article/38-adventure/19946
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20131113142243/http://www.gamesradar.com/what-game-ads-looked-like-when-the-snes-was-alive/?page=14 to http://www.gamesradar.com/what-game-ads-looked-like-when-the-snes-was-alive/?page=14
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 03:43, 10 January 2018 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Curse of Enchantia. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20160605104229/https://www.adventure-treff.de/artikel/interviews.php?id=30&lang=eng to https://www.adventure-treff.de/artikel/interviews.php?id=30&lang=eng
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 06:23, 20 January 2018 (UTC)