Talk:My Life with Master

My Life with Master has been listed as one of the Sports and recreation good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
April 30, 2008	Good article nominee	Listed

Role-playing games Mid‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Role-playing games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of role-playing 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.Role-playing gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Role-playing gamesTemplate:WikiProject Role-playing gamesrole-playing game articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Horror Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Horror, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to fictional horror in film, literature and other media on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.HorrorWikipedia:WikiProject HorrorTemplate:WikiProject Horrorhorror articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

untitled

Hello Percy. Why change "with" to "With"? Both the author and most players use a lower-case 'w', both in the full title and in the shorter "MLwM". I'm going to change it, but just tell me here if there's a reason for doing it your way and we can talk about it. Jonas Karlsson 16:00, 19 January 2006 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

This is a nice piece of work, but it still has some shortcomings with respect to the good article criteria.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
My main concern here is the leader section "The lead should be able to stand alone as a concise overview of the article." While you have some summary also lots of unique in for like awards (Should these be in critical reception section?) and when first published.
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
This is my main concern that this is not a good article. While what is there is excellent, I do not feel it gives me a full understanding of what this product is. The gameplay section does a great job of describing the setting. The critical reception section is well done and something often missed on this type of article. Readers of your article will have a great variety of experience of RPGs from nothing to using computer RPG's, to having played PRG's 20 years ago, to playing D&D only currently, to being very familair with a variety of Indie RPG's but not this one, there just feels too many gaps in the info here for the majority of people, need to provide sufficeint backgroud for what this game is to a broader scope of people. My own background is I have heard about but never played some Indie RPG's, this one only really by name but some others in more detail. Some examples of additional information that could be included, mainly from some the questions in my head on reading this article:
1. 1. What format is the game? A hardcover, softcover, pdf or boxed set?
  2. Without giving all the rules a bit more on he mechanices. You mention a series of dice rolls. What dice and how many? Just standard d6 or is it d20 or d%? Are people trying to roll high, roll low, roll against each other or a mixture?
  3. You mentioned that the game ends when Master is killed by one of the players? This seems unusual for a PRG with a definate ending. Is this player the winner? Do players strive to this goal to try and win or strive to avoid it to extend the game?
  4. As this game has a definate end how long does a game typically take? what range of time can it take? Are there aspects of the game that can be controlled to control the expected length of a game?
  5. Is there some sort of Game Master as in most RPG's or are all the players mimions?
  6. Game was published in 2003. Is it still available? Has it been constantly in print? are there different editions

The majority of my questions have now been answered. Main thing though is a Good article needs to be broad and unlike a Featured Article not necesarily comprehensive. This is a fairly subjective criteria, but I definately have much more a a feel of what a game is actually like what is not written there and believe this is now suficiently broad for a good article.

It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars etc.:
It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
More than one picture ia laways nice but I can see where that would be difficult for this article.
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
Good luck improving the article. It really is a good basis of an article, just needs more information.

Waza (talk) 04:56, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the comments. I will try to deal with them, but unfortunately this review comes right as I am preparing to go away for almost a week. As I said, I'll try to deal with them as best I can. Of course, if need be, I can always fix them later and re-nominate the article for GA. --Craw-daddy | T | 10:42, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Great article. With further expansion to make comrehensive and more work with the style guide I believe this could be raised to a Featured Article. Don't be afraid to use the book of the game itself as a reference if needed, while not good to have it as only or even main reference to the article but I believe it is totally appropriate to use it to support points about the game that may not be brought out in other sources, expecially if it has an introduction or designer notes. - Waza (talk) 03:41, 30 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]