# Talk:Sonic Dreams Collection

I think the Reception quotes can be further paraphrased but I don't think the article is at risk for deletion. – czar 13:18, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

@Czar:Yeah, I'm probably going to have to tweak those a bit when I have some more time to take a good look at it. A lot of reviewers have just been like "this has to seen to be believed" with an accompanying video, or generally didn't have anything substantive to say about the thing aside from the "omg so internet-breakingly weird" fluff everyone's saying about it. Do you have any pointers on how I could improve the Reception section's paraphrasing in its current state? BLUSTER⌉⌊BLASTER 14:07, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Took a stab. If it doesn't get more coverage, might be worth considering a merge into a list of fangames, but it's fine as is for now methinks. – czar 21:33, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
https://killscreen.com/articles/high-scores-the-best-videogames-of-2016/ czar 06:08, 25 December 2015 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sonic Dreams Collection/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Nomader (talk · contribs) 19:31, 10 June 2018 (UTC)
I'll be doing this review. Nomader (talk) 19:31, 10 June 2018 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar):  b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): 
I usually try to find at least one thing to nitpick in this section, but I've got nothing. Really good writing and fascinating subject.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section):  b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism): 
Listed 2b concerns below, should be easy fixes.
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects):  b (focused): 

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias: 

It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.: 

It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 
Only screenshot is the title screen, and it has a sufficient summary.
Overall:
Pass/Fail: 
On hold pending fixes to the 2b concerns listed below. Don't anticipate it being a challenge-- really great work on a super interesting game, glad that I decided to click on this one out of curiosity in the GAN list! Nomader (talk) 05:36, 11 June 2018 (UTC)


### 2b concerns
"In Sonic Dreams Collection, the player selects one of four single-player parody minigames based on the Sega game franchise Sonic the Hedgehog." -- neither source backs this up (the first one lists four games but it doesn't explicitly say "there's four")
I've added a Kill Screen source that explicitly states there's four. JOEBRO64 10:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Not sure what citation #4 is-- is there another source that's usable there?
It's the game itself. I used Template:Cite video game. JOEBRO64 10:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Didn't see the Tweet get talked about in the Polygon video (could you provide a timestamp if I somehow missed it?)
Replaced with a primary source. It showed the option in the video; I had assumed that was enough. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Didn't see the Seganet explanation in the cited Polygon video.
Replaced. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Source does not mention "motel" as one of the locations. Says they're all on a bed but isn't specific-- try to sub out or add an additional one.
Replaced with one that's mentioned in the source. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
The game states Sonic Movie Maker would have been a technological achievement but was canceled in 1998 when Sega management discovered its dark and sexual content -- Destructoid does not include this directly and the Polygon source shows it in the video but doesn't talk about it. This might be a good place to use Template:Cite video game.
Done. JOEBRO64 10:59, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
The Unity note doesn't seem to be cited to any article-- is it in the game at all though either?
I've removed it. It's in the game's files but not elsewhere. The only other place that mentioned it was Sonic Retro, which is just a fansite. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
Any non-primary sources for the Archie stuff? Pastebin is kind of a weird place to have a citation for.
I did look for non-primary sources about it, but unfortunately couldn't find any. I was a bit hesitant to include the Pastebin ref, but reviewed the self-published sources policy and determined that it checked the boxes. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
The PC Gamer article added a tag for "Weird shit" to it, but it didn't necessarily summarize it that way.
You're right—replaced it with a VG247 summarization. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)
@Nomader: Thanks for the review! I've responded above and have hopefully cleared everything up. JOEBRO64 16:50, 11 June 2018 (UTC)

I was going to go through and individually respond to these, but I think you addressed my points really well and the places where I asked questions, you explained your reasoning well. I made one more pass through the article and have no other changes-- I'm going to go ahead and pass. Great work! Nomader (talk) 00:43, 12 June 2018 (UTC)

Self-explanatory.

This page should not be speedily deleted because... (Unofficial) --2A01:E0A:88C:3860:99B7:C853:EBA2:17B2 (talk) 13:22, 29 December 2023 (UTC)

They are WP:Likely to be challenged and require sources to be proven. Comment Spae (talk) 00:37, 7 July 2025 (UTC)