# Talk:Spindizzy

Image:ZX spindizzy.png is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.
Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.
If there is  other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page.  Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.
BetacommandBot (talk) 04:50, 21 January 2008 (UTC)

From the Gameplay section in the article:

The player controls GERALD which can take the form of an upturned pyramid, gyroscope and ball (the player can transform between the three to vary the physical characteristics of GERALD) around a series of linked isometric screens.
Are there really differences between the physical characteristics; e.g. does one of the forms accelerate faster or bounce higher than the others?  In the English instructions posted at World of Spectrum (see Spindizzy (video game)#External links), the ability to change the shape is listed under "EYE STRAIN" and there is no hint that it would affect gameplay.  85.23.215.211 (talk) 07:33, 16 May 2008 (UTC)

From what I remember, there is no difference in operation between the shapes. It's worth noting that near the start, there is a screen with 2 bad-guy drones (that zap your time). Changing your own form also changes both these bad-guys forms in sequence also. This probably confirms there is no operational change, though of course all of this is subject to confirmation in any way to begin with! MrZoolook (talk) 18:18, 30 June 2012 (UTC)
wait! they behaved differently on the Amstrad, and afaik, on all other versions as well. play the game a few minutes and see. 🙃  — Preceding unsigned comment added by 27.32.233.114 (talk) 15:37, 25 August 2020 (UTC) 

This review is transcluded from Talk:Spindizzy (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: –MuZemike 21:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

Prose issues
In the lead, Players must navigate ... and feature action and puzzle game elements. → Do players feature action and puzzle game elements? Reword that so that you're properly referring to the game.
In the Gameplay section, Players navigate the probe through the stages to explore the world within a time limit. → Isn't a stage a portion of this vast world, which they must explore in a limited amount of time. If I'm incorrect in what I'm reading ignore; otherwise, please tweak that sentence accordingly.
In the Development and release section, However, the company ... to Shirley and Electric Dreams. → Try and rewrite that sentence without the "however" in there.
In the Reception and legacy section, I'm not sure that the material after that emdash in Reviewers drew comparisons to Marble Madness is needed in there. That following sentence, while relevant to the article and probably fits somewhere, may not be the best fit there.
Other things to remember
Just a reminder to italicize all instances of the title even in the citations. The same goes with WP:DASH usage.

Conclusions
On hold pending the prose improvements. Otherwise, while being short, it is decent prose-wise in general, the images are good and fair-use rationales fine, and everything has consistent citations and is verifiable.
A couple of things I would recommend though for further improvement and expansion:

If there are viable external links that can be added, add them.
I noticed that Spindizzy Worlds is not terribly large, either. I think it's very well possible when that article gets built up that it could be merged into this one without much problems (that's my opinion, though) to create a more comprehensive article on the series of games.
–MuZemike 21:52, 13 February 2010 (UTC)

I made some edits per your suggestions above. Here are some replies to your review:
Since I never played the game, the gameplay section was difficult to write. The game world is divided into separate screens, which most reviews called "stages". I tried to convey that in the section, but admit I'm ignorant to what would be the best way to do so.
I split the Marble Madness release info between the "Development" and "Reception" sections. Hopefully it flows better.
I've always been confused about the italicizing of game titles in citations. WP:CITE, MOS:TEXT, and MOS:TITLE do not clarify this point. My concern is that the magazine title is also italicized and I want to avoid confusion. If you think this is not an issue to be concerned about, then I won't worry about it.
The dash usage in the title was taken directly from the <title></title> tags from the webpages. If the common practice is to switch out the regular hyphens with the en dashes, then I'll make sure to do so from now on.
I did not come across any external link that looked reliable.
I considered a merge, but noticed that Spindizzy Worlds received a number of reviews and felt that a decent C-class article could be written. Depending on the development content out there, B-class and even GA might be possible. But like you said, depending on the content, it might benefit both articles to merge. However, I don't think it's necessary at this time.
Let me know what else I can do for the review. (Guyinblack25 talk 16:30, 15 February 2010 (UTC))
 Passed. Looks good. As far as the titles in the citations are concerned, one FAC reviewer hounded me for that on a recent article. I think consistency in titles is the key there. –MuZemike 16:43, 15 February 2010 (UTC)