Talk:Legend Entertainment

Legend Entertainment is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so.

This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on January 22, 2022.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
March 8, 2021	Good article nominee	Listed
June 22, 2021	Featured article candidate	Not promoted
August 21, 2021	Peer review	Reviewed
November 26, 2021	Featured article candidate	Promoted
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 8, 2021. The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that computer game studio Legend Entertainment* was founded by veterans of the interactive fiction studio Infocom after it shut down in 1989?*
Current status: Featured article

Video games Mid‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles

Mid

This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

Merger proposal

Feel free to comment at Talk:Legend (disambiguation)#Merger proposal.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 02:43, 18 August 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Source

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Legend Entertainment/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 20:01, 6 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments

Lead says "computer games" infobox says "video games", any good reason they're not the same?
" 1989[1]" ref not needed in the infobox as it's referenced in the article.
Any reason TIMEQUEST is in caps? the article doesn't treat it that way.
"based on the novel" eponymous novel?
" rising without a similar rise in" avoid repeat, maybe "similar increase in"?
" Bob Bates and Mike Verdu.[7] Bates and Verdu" repetitive, perhaps " Bob Bates and Mike Verdu.[7] The duo..." or similar.
"r Infocom.[6] a leader" probably should be a comma, not a full stop.
"after years of rising costs" it makes it sound like an age, but it was three years.
"Activision ultimately closed Infocom" is ultimately adding anything here?
No need to link common words like "author".
No need to repeat people's first names if there's no ambiguity after the first use.
No need to link common words like "novel".
Don't use hash (#) to mean "number" per MOS.
"Computer Gaming World's " 's shouldn't be in italics. And use {{'s}} to stop the apostrophe crashing into the last "d".
LucasArts is overlinked.
"publisher Random House,[14][12]" order.
" a blessing and a curse" not really encyclopedic in tone, is it a quote?
"compact disc" is overlinked.
"The Wheel of Time in 1999, a first-person action game" all three overlinked.
No need to link New York or France.
All the spaced hyphens in the table (e.g. "... World - Adventure...") should be en-dashes.
Table needs a caption, row and col scopes for accessibility.
Online refs should have at least one of publication date and access date.
Avoid SHOUTING in ref titles.
"Bytes - Issue" should be an en-dash, not a hyphen, check others.
The defunct date (infobox) and defunct category (2004) don't appear in the prose nor referenced.

That's it for a quick first review. On hold for now. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 19:42, 7 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a lot for the review and suggestions. I incorporated all of them. I also gave a good look over the ref section and the table for formatting. Let me know if I missed anything. I can keep chipping away. Shooterwalker (talk) 02:13, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

No, I think it's all good. I made a couple of minor tweaks but I'm happy this passes GA. Cheers. The Rambling Man (Stay alert! Control the virus! Save lives!!!!) 09:32, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. Shooterwalker (talk) 16:01, 8 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by DanCherek (talk) 02:16, 29 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

(

Comment or view
Article history

)

... that computer game studio Legend Entertainment was founded by veterans of the acclaimed interactive fiction studio Infocom, after it shut down in 1989?

Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/Pass the Kouchie

Improved to Good Article status by Shooterwalker (talk). Self-nominated at 01:24, 10 March 2021 (UTC).[reply]

Excellent article, fitting all of DYK's basic requirements plus more. QPQ checks out. Hook is interesting at least to those of us who enjoy these things -- I can't quite pretend to know what the rest of the world would make of it. However, "computer game developer Legend Entertainer" gives me pause, in that current usage of "computer game developer" generally refers to people rather than companies. "Studio" or "publisher" rather than "developer", maybe? Vaticidalprophet 16:17, 18 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

This is one of those things where you balance the technical term with something that's more readable and clear. I think "game studio" or "computer game studio" would be a good substitute for "computer game developer". What do you think? Shooterwalker (talk) 17:03, 19 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"Studio" sounds good, approving modified hook. Vaticidalprophet 08:53, 21 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

"acclaim" for Infocom

Pulling up some quick research on the studio. Granted they're before a lot of peoples' time, but have a seminal place in early video game history. Here's a quick summary of how a few sources describe them:

Multiple entries on this "7 works of interactive fiction that every developer should study" Gamasutra
"While there were many small companies that created text adventure games, the greatest of them all was Infocom." Ars Technica
"Infocom, the king of text adventure games"GameSpot
"Infocom’s games were considered top-of-class in what was once a very busy genre"Touch Arcade
"Infocom, the granddaddy of the genre" The Atlantic
"Infocom's glorious reign" Wired
"Ingenious programming and broad literary horizons brought (Infocom) ... explosive success" Boing Boing
"classic text adventures", plus additional acclaim for specific titles PC Games N
"classic adventure games", plus additional acclaim for specific titles Tech Raptor
"Infocom, a prominent producer of interactive fiction" Engadget

I thought "acclaimed" was a pretty neutral summary of the sources, but "prominent", "classic", "glorious", "top-of-class", or "greatest of all adventure game companies" would all be reflected in the sources. Shooterwalker (talk) 14:04, 2 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Logo image quality

The image quality for the logo image is pretty awful. Could we get a PNG/SVG version, or at the very least a higher-resolution non-pixelated JPEG? {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 18:48, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Sdkb: What about this one? IceWelder [✉] 19:09, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

That's certainly better than what we have currently; I'd say go ahead and swap it out. {{u|Sdkb}} ^talk 19:19, 22 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I was thoroughly disappointed when I downlaoded the image and saw that it wasn't actually transparent but had a black background. I edit the black out as good as I could but hope we find a better, actually transparent image in the future. IceWelder [✉] 16:32, 23 January 2022 (UTC)[reply]