Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Peer review

I am putting this up for peer review because this article might become a GA or even an FA. Comments on how to improve this article should be very much appreciated. Thanks, Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:19, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

List of Valkyria Chronicles characters

I am putting this up for peer review, because I intend to get this a featured list, along with Valkyria Chronicles. This article is currently in list class. I have also contributed significantly to the article. I would eventually like to see it featured. Any feedback should be very much appreciated. Thanks, Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 02:13, 4 September 2010 (UTC)

Sonic and the Secret Rings

I am renominating this article for peer review because its first FAC failed and I am planning on pursuing a second one in the future. The first FAC failed on time constraints rather than on not assessing the reviewers' complaints, so I'm unsure what is standing between the article's current state and an ideal FA state. Comments are appreciated. Tezero (talk) 18:23, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot 3: Warped

The article looks pretty good and appears ready for a GAN, but I wanted to get a professional opinion and fix any possible mistakes before I put it up for a nomination. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 19:30, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

I would like to get back with more comments; don't know if time will allow. The gameplay section seems to go into a little too much detail about items, though. Tezero (talk) 21:53, 31 August 2010 (UTC)

Demon's Souls

A second request for the Demon's Souls article since it didn't receive much in the way of feedback for development or a possible improved grade. The article is currently C-class yet at its stage appears to be better in quality. The first review has been archived. Stabby Joe (talk) 18:22, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

The article has a dab link. GamerPro64 (talk) 19:28, 23 August 2010 (UTC)

Care to elaborate since I'm getting no additional information from the link. Stabby Joe (talk) 00:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

It seems that User:Mika1h already had that taken care of. evidence. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:32, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Basically is there any major issue holding the article back? Granted it's not perfect but by this stage has to be higher than a C grade. Stabby Joe (talk) 01:13, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

┌─────────────────────────────────┘
I've assessed the article a B-Class. However in the spirit of actually reviewing it, here are the issues that stand in the way of it passing a Good Article nomination:

The gameplay screenshots are far too large. There is no need to go any higher than 500px wide Fixed
The soundtrack image is too large. It doesn't need to be bigger than 300 x 300px (see File:Achtung_Baby.png as a good example of a music cover). Truthfully the image is not necessary and in fact unbalances the article. Three non-free images are plenty Fixed
The box art should use Template:Vgboxart fur for its rationale Fixed
The Merchandise and other media/Soundtrack section needs tweaking so that it does not offset the Reviews template in the Reception section. Fixed
The Wiki external link should be removed per WP:ELNO, which states that an external Wiki should be substantial (think the Star Wars wiki) to be added. I found no evidence of it being substantial. Also the forums external link should be removed. The US official site is sufficient, and we don't link to forums. Fixed
Shunsuke Kida should be delinked unless you feel there is sufficient notability for this person, in which case the article should be made, or the link removed. Fixed
The first paragraph of Merchandise and other media is unsourced Fixed
The second half of the second paragraph in the Gameplay section is unsourced Fixed
Per WP:LEADCITE if information is found elsewhere in the article, it should not be cited in the lead. Given what is cited, it should probably be mentioned in the body of the article, and the reference moved there. Fixed

That's about it given a quick once-over. I didn't look deeply into the prose, but hopefully that helps. --Teancum (talk) 11:44, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

Appreciated. I'll get on these soon enough. Stabby Joe (talk) 22:45, 27 August 2010 (UTC)

The article and said problems have now been tweaked. Stabby Joe (talk) 16:03, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

Paradigm Entertainment

This is splash-improvement from getting Pilotwings 64 to GA status. I'm not used to writing about companies, so I'd like a better idea about how to improve the article. ~ Hibana (talk) 16:48, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

Birdo

It would be nice if I could get this to good article quality. Yay! Please leave comments Wikipedia:Peer review/Birdo/archive1. - The New Age Retro Hippie used Ruler! Now, he can figure out the length of things easily. 07:24, 15 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Tezero:

Try to find actual "Concept and creation" information for the section titled as such. The section is now almost exclusively "Characteristics"-like stuff.
Appearances should be expanded. You don't have to have a paragraph for each game unless that game has an intricate plot in which she plays a major role. But at least name each of the games that she's in and a one sentence+ mention of what she does in each. Either that or add a timeline similar to the one in Dragon Quest or Espio the Chameleon. Just saying, because Birdo doesn't appear in a huge number of games.
Good job on finding so much reception, but you may want to separate it on specific issues rather than positive vs. negative.
Link to LGBT characters in video games at least once in the article, perhaps in a "See also" section. Tezero (talk) 18:24, 21 July 2010 (UTC)

X-Men Legends

I'm getting ready to seek a B-Class assessment, and possibly moving forward to a GAN. I'd like someone to look over the article and do some copy editing, and perhaps point out (but not remove) any sources that may be dubious so that I can try to find better ones. If anyone is willing to help out with expanding the Development and Reception sections (which are my next priority) that would be appreciated too. Its come a long way since I started Jan 1, 2009, but I'd like to see it eventually hit GA. --Teancum (talk) 14:34, 13 July 2010 (UTC)

Hot Potato (video game)

This is one of those smaller games that I sometimes write up-- I'm thinking about working it up to good article status. I'd really like a general review of the article to make sure that it's all worked out and where the article could really use expansion. Much obliged. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 03:23, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Hulk16

In the opening sentence it says that it is a "action puzzle video game", but in the infobox it says only puzzle as its genre.
- Changed the genre to "action puzzle".
You should split the history section into development and reception sections.
- Per the Organization section of our article guidelines, I think I'm going to stick with a history section... I only have one interview with the developers to go by, and they only asked three mediocre questions.
The second paragraph of the lead and the last paragraph both have pov statements; "humorous charm and amusing gameplay" and " quirky charm and amusing gameplay."
- Removed them.
In the history section it says " Craig Harris of IGN played an early build of the game at E3 and did not grasp the game's basic concept." How is this notable or important?
- It isn't really, is it? Removed that sentence.
If you could find any sales numbers that would help out a reception section.
- I would love some sales numbers too, but no dice. I've searched every possible way in every possible place and I've got nothing. With the smaller games I work with, I've kinda come to accept that sales numbers are blessings.
Finally, I think the development part of the article needs the most expansion. Right now it is only one sentence.
- I did my best to expand it a bit but I again don't have much to work with.

Beyond that, this article looks good. Keep up the good work. Hulk16 (talk)

I tried to address your concerns as best as I could-- thanks for the review, I really do appreciate it. -- Nomader ^(Talk) 05:29, 6 July 2010 (UTC)

PlayStation

I feel the PlayStation article needs to be reviewed as it has been revamped recently and has gone through a major expansion. I think this is definitely not a start class article anymore. The article is well detailed with numerous references covering most topics in regard to the PlayStation brand including its consoles, media types, history, software initiatives and online services. I would like a general review to be done on the article to see if anything needs improving.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 10:27, 1 July 2010 (UTC)

I have seen parts of the article that needs citations. Here's the following sections that needs citations: "Pocketstation", "Life with PlayStation", "PlayStation Plus", "PlayStation Home", "XrossMediaBar", "Linux operating systems", "DualShock series", "Magazines", and most of the "Marketing" section. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:53, 3 July 2010 (UTC)

Added references to all the above mentioned sections.KiasuKiasiMan (talk) 14:20, 5 July 2010 (UTC)

You should go into a bit more detail about the PS-centered magazines, since sections consisting only of pseudoprose lists don't look good. You may want to merge the "current" and "defunct" sections into the main section for the magazines. Tezero (talk) 18:27, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

Role-playing video game

This is an important article and really should be improved... maybe become a good article or featured article...

Is the article comprehensive? Is anything missing from this article that we need to cover here?
Does the article have too much detail about some stuff? Should some sections be trimmed down?
Is the article accurate? Do any statements look suspect, and in need of good research and discussion?
Which sections need references the most? Do you know where we might look?
What is an appropriate way to cover the sub genres (action RPGs, MUDs, tactical RPGs, MMORPGS), considering none of those articles are in good shape either? How long should this section be and what should it say?

Answering those 5 questions will help alot... i'd apreciate more than one response just because the article is too important to be left to one person's opinion... Shooterwalker (talk) 04:01, 19 May 2010 (UTC)

Note: For accessibility purposes, I added an image to demonstrate some key features of RPGs. Tezero (talk) 21:45, 24 May 2010 (UTC) I added another image to break the prose and demonstrate some overworld, coversation, and stylistic stuff. Tezero (talk) 15:43, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments: I can see that this is a difficult article to work with, but here are my major concerns:
- Reference 2 ("fundamentals") is used way too many times in the "Characteristics" section.
- The subgenres section should be expanded into subsections for each genre represented, with a "main article" link at the start of each.
- There seems to be a lot of redundancy in the article in terms of typical features of RPGs stated multiple times. You may wish to do some cleanup. Tezero (talk) 15:52, 29 May 2010 (UTC)

Final Fantasy XIII

I am nominating this article for peer review because I want to make this a Good Article or even a Featured Article. I fixed up the intro to include three paragraphs and there is currently a discussion going on at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Square Enix#Final Fantasy XIII GA push. I am currently working on the character page and the music page as well as the main article in my sandbox, but the music page is already being covered by PresN. Any comments here on how to improve this article should be very much appreciated. Thanks. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 17:40, 8 May 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Tintor2 (talk) 20:04, 10 May 2010 (UTC)

The plot section needs some expansion considering how long is the game.
Various references (from reviews) need to be formatted to include parameters like author, accesdate, etc.

Comments from 陣内 _Jinnai

I disagree with Tintor. The plot section should be tightened up, especially the setting and moreso the character (specifically other characters).
Gameplay subsections on the leveling system and summons should drop a lot of that info as its unnecessary. Comparing the leveling system to another FF game is original research without sources from either the devs or RS reviewers. The gameplay in general is a bit WP:GAMEGUIDEy, especially the battle subsection, with lines like:
- "Every character initially specializes in up to three Roles, and the other Roles are not available in their Crystariums until much later in the game; the Roles that the character does not specialize in have much smaller upgrade paths, providing fewer strength, magic and HP upgrade points, as well as fewer abilities than a specialist has access to." -there is no need to explain about how and when robes are gotten nor that level of detail in the differences between specialization and non-specialization.
- "Snow can ride and steer the combined Shiva Sisters which is a motorcycle, Vanille's Hecatoncheir can transform into a bipedal mech with machine gun turrets in which she can control, and Sazh can ride and steer Brynhildr as a race car. This changes the pace of the combat significantly. Not all summons turn into mechanical vehicles: Odin's Gestalt Mode changes him into a horse for Lightning to ride, Bahamut's Gestalt Mode is a flight mode for Fang, while Alexander's Gestalt Mode changes him into a large tower which surrounds the enemy and fires lasers at them from all sides." - pretty much all that is excessive detail or items that should go in the character section.

Collapsed because of length

"The player selects several actions at once, which are then performed in the order selected by the lead character when the ATB bar has filled. Each action takes a specific number of slots, and the ATB bar increases throughout the game from two slots to a maximum of six.[10] There are no separate Magic Points, or MP, for magical attacks as in previous Final Fantasy games. The player also has the option to select less than the maximum number of possible actions, or to prematurely stop the filling of the ATB bar and perform as many actions as can be done with the current ATB amount. Only the lead character can be controlled; the other one or two characters present in the battle are controlled by the game. The player may also select an "autobattle" command which fills the ATB slots with actions chosen by the game. Actions cannot be performed outside of battle, and the characters' health, measured in Health Points (HP), is fully restored after each battle.[10]

During battles, the player can at any time select the "Paradigm Shift" command, and then select different roles for the characters out of options previously set up in the main menu. These roles correspond with the character classes or jobs of previous Final Fantasy games. There are six roles, those of Commando, the warrior; Ravager, a black mage-type character; Medic, similar White Mage; Saboteur, which performs magic attacks that weaken enemies; Synergist, which casts magic that strengthens allies; and Sentinel, a role which has increased defense and protective abilities. Each of the six playable characters can initially take on only three roles, but later in the game may assume any of them.

When enemies are struck by attacks or spells, their "chain counter", measured in percentage between 100 and 999, increases. Each enemy has their own chain counter, which resets back to 100 if another attack is not performed in time. Attacks by different roles have different effects, with some raising the chain by larger amount while others give the player longer before the chain counter resets. The amount of damage performed by an attack is multiplied by the chain percentage before it is applied to the enemy. When the chain counter reaches a preset amount, different for each enemy, the enemy is placed into "Stagger State". In this mode, the chain is increased by 100 and the enemy begins to glow. Depending on the enemy, other effects may also occur, such as lowered defense or allowing the enemy to be launched into the air with certain attacks. The Stagger State lasts only a limited amount of time before ending and resetting the chain counter back to 100, although the counter may still be increased during Stagger."

- - way too much detail
In gameplay, "The first battle system was shown during the E3 2006, but it was only a prototype. A new interface was shown in September 2009 by Square Enix in various Japanese magazines and trailers. In battle, the player can only control one character at a time out of a party of up to three." - this is fine, but should be referenced and moved to development section as it is about the development, not final version, of the gameplay.

Done. Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 20:33, 29 June 2010 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Peer review articles

The following video-game-related articles are transcluded here from standard peer review.

WikiProject Military history articles

The following military history articles are transcluded here from the Military history project's peer reviews. Such reviews are cross listed between the two projects to obtain the outside view of a military history layman. Video game project members are encouraged to provide comments on grammar, sources, content, etc.

To invite MILHIST participation in a VG peer review, please post the following boilerplate at WT:MILHIST: {{subst:Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Coordinators/Toolbox/Partner peer review notice|Name of article|Raw link to review|Video games}} ~~~~

Inner German border

Over the last few months I've been carrying out a sort of one-man Wikiproject on the end of the Cold War - next month is the 20th anniversary of the fall of the Berlin Wall and the opening of the border between the two Germanies. As well as carrying out a great deal of research, I went to Germany and cycled nearly the full length of the former border, taking a large number of photographs and doing a lot of on-the-ground research over the course of several weeks. I've rewritten and greatly expanded the inner German border article and will be creating and expanding various other related articles in the coming weeks. I'm aiming to get the article up to Featured Article standard, but as a first step I'd appreciate it if it could be peer reviewed and reassessed. -- ChrisO (talk) 14:49, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

Jayen466

Comment As I said on the talk page, it looks outstanding. I've fixed what disambig links there were, and inserted non-breaking spaces after numbers in dates etc. throughout (except in citation templates). I'll do some work on the alt texts as well.
As far as I am concerned, this looks pretty much like FA quality right now – you've done an amazing amount of research – and it would be cool to have this on the main page on November 9, marking 20 years since the Berlin Wall fell.
Queries:
1. We say that the "death strip" was informally known as "Pieck Strasse". It's sourced to Rottman p. 17, but I am perturbed by the fact that I can't find a single reference to that being the control strip's nickname elsewhere. Could you double-check? --JN 466 22:45, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  It's referred to as "Pieck-Allee" by some other sources. Shears calls it by that name in his book (p. 71) and it's also mentioned on p. 178 of Wilfred Ahrens, Hilferufe von drüben: die DDR vertreibt ihre Kinder: authentische Berichte. "Straße" might be an equivalent alternative name or a mistake by Rottman; it's hard to say. But it's clear that it was nicknamed "Pieck-something", whether "Straße" or "Allee". -- ChrisO (talk) 23:07, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  It seems to have been "Allee":
  
  http://books.google.co.uk/books?lr=&id=Kz9aAAAAIAAJ&dq=%22Pieck-Allee%22+ddr&q=pieck-allee#search_anchor (Ahrens, as you say ...)
  http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_1384-544-1-30.pdf
  http://www.kas.de/wf/doc/kas_5916-544-1-30.pdf
  
  GDR humour had a certain something ... --JN 466 23:23, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  just GDR humor? Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:28, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  Adversity gave it a particular edge (although Berlin humour in particular always had that edge). An "Allee" in German is a tree-lined avenue, so it really fits well. --JN 466 23:32, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  OK, I'll change it to match those sources. (If you're after GDR jokes try the following: two Stasi agents are talking one day. One of them asks the other, "What are you thinking?" The other replies, "Oh, same as you." The first retorts: "Then you are under arrest!") -- ChrisO (talk) 23:35, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  :) I note we have an article on this: East German jokes. Many of them lose something in translation though ... --JN 466 14:48, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  I also read somewhere that EG was called the "Banana-less Republic" a spoof on the Banana Republic idea. I'll try to find that source, but you might keep your eyes open for it too. Perhaps in Harsch, I might find it. Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:13, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  
  in his introduction to Banana cultures: agriculture, consumption, and environmental change in Honduras and the United States (2005). By John Soluri. He refers to it in the intro, linking places of production and consumption. Basically, his point is that Bananas are a "staple" only in a consumer-oriented society; furthermore, the consumption of bananas (the ability to transport, buy, etc.) weighs heavily on the backs of laborers in the third world economies, the quintessential exploited proletariat. Probably you'd need to cite pp 1-18. University of Texas Press. ISBN: 978-0-292-71256-0 Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:26, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
  I've seen that too. It's referred to on page 5 of John Rodden, Repainting the little red schoolhouse: a history of Eastern German education: "Jubilant East Germans sported bumper stickers featuring two bananas forming the letter "D" (for Deutschland) or hung Dollar Bananas on the windshields of their little two-cylinder Trabant cars, under the words: "German Banana Republic, R.I.P."" Apparently even now east(ern) Germans eat 20% more bananas than their western counterparts. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:18, 4 October 2009 (UTC)
2. I've done all (or at least most) of the n-dashes, but we still have some non-compliance with the WP:HYPHEN section of WP:MOS. For example, "a 500 metres (1,600 ft) wide strip" should be "a 500-metre (1,600 ft) strip" or "a 500-metre (1,600 ft) -wide strip" according to WP:HYPHEN. Where the convert template is used, the hyphen can be added by using the adj=on parameter. Personally, I find "a 500-metre (1,600 ft) -long strip" well-nigh intolerable; suggest we use "a 500-metre (1,600 ft) strip" instead (i.e. convert template with adj=on, and dropping the word "wide"). What should we do in cases where we give both height and width and "high" and "wide" can't simply be dropped? --JN 466 01:16, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  J, slow down! You'll soon have as many edits as Chris. Let him do the hyphens and such. He's an experienced editor. Auntieruth55 (talk) 01:30, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  
  Just to let you guys know, I just knocked off nearly a hundred n-dashes in compliance with WP:HYPHEN and with the advice of Cameltrader's Advisor (which greatly speeds up the repetitive task of combing over the article's dashes to see that they comply with WP:HYPHEN). Happy editing! Laurinavicius (talk) 03:15, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  Ruth is right, Chris. You've produced 25,000 words of prose with (apparently) just a few dozen edits in the page history, and I've produced a few dozen dashes and non-breaking spaces with almost as many edits. It won't look right if I end up having more edits than you, without having contributed any substance to the article, so I'll slow down a bit. --JN 466 14:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  Appearances are deceptive! I wrote most of it offline and much of it on the ground in the course of visiting the places described in the article. I don't mind in the least if you continue fixing technical issues. In fact, I'd be very grateful if you could continue (as fast as you like!) as it frees me up to resolve the more substantive content issues that have been raised. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  Sounds like a fun holiday!! (Okay then, but I'll avoid making lots of small edits.) --JN 466 23:19, 6 October 2009 (UTC)
3. There are two works by Childs cited. References such as "Childs, p. 30" are therefore ambiguous. It would probably make sense to include both works in the References section. --JN 466 14:14, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  Thanks for pointing that out, I'll fix it. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  Resolved, hopefully. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:53, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
4. The slogan Wir steht hier! said to have been used by protesters can't be right. Please check the source. --JN 466 14:19, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
  An IP has changed this now to Wir bleiben hier, and that seems to be how it was phrased at the time: [1]. Looks okay. --JN 466 18:57, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
5. A few references are hyperlinked, e.g. <ref>[[#Jarausch|Jarausch]] ... or <ref>[[#Cramer|Cramer]] ... but most are not. Reviewers at FAC are likely to ask for one consistent style. --JN 466 14:42, 5 October 2009 (UTC)
6. Is the Herleshausen image dated correctly? It looks as though one could just drive through; that would not have been possible in 1985. JN 466 20:31, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
  There were two sets of border facilities at each crossing point, one on the east side and one on the west side. What you're looking at in that image is the West German border facility. The view is looking west into West Germany - the vantage point is just to the western side of the border. The East German border facility point is further east, behind the vantage point (note that the border line isn't visible). You can see here where the West German border facility (now demolished, of course) once stood. I'll tweak the caption to make this clearer. -- ChrisO (talk) 20:54, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
  Sounds good. --JN 466 21:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
7. The Inner_German_border#Watchtowers_and_bunkers section has a few unsourced paragraphs (the first two, and also some of the detailed measurements and other info on the various types of tower). When you go to FAC, people may want you to add sources; it's probably best to add them now.
  Done. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:46, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
8. The Inner_German_border#The_fall_of_the_border section is also very thin on references, especially the first half. Much of it is arguably common knowledge, but reviewers might want a ref for things like East Germans not being allowed to travel to Poland.
  Done. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:46, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
9. Otherwise, I'd encourage you to take the article to FAC now; you seem to have done all the remaining alt texts, and the last tweaks if any were needed can still be worked out while it's sitting at FAC. Good luck. JN 466 21:16, 14 October 2009 (UTC)
  I'll fix as many of those remaining issues as I can and take it to FAC in a couple of hours' time, hopefully. Thanks very much for all your help - it's been invaluable. -- ChrisO (talk) 21:33, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

(OD) the FA folks will quibble over the use of "the" and similar types of words in the headings. Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:33, 4 October 2009 (UTC)

OK, I'll fix that. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:40, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Done. -- ChrisO (talk) 22:46, 14 October 2009 (UTC)

Auntieruth

This is a fantastic article. I've was impressed when I read it for assessment at the WP Germany, and am still favorably impressed with it now. It's undergone some tweaking, and its in better wiki-shape. I will be very pleased to support it for featured article as well. As far as the prose goes, it's in great shape. Your sources are sufficient, maybe a bit heavy on the East German perspective in some areas, but balanced with the Wessie/Weissie perspective in others. Good Job. Auntieruth55 (talk) 23:41, 11 October 2009 (UTC)

Shimgray

I'm impressed by this article, I have to say! Long and comprehensive and interesting.

One issue that leaps out at me - there's a lot of East German government-produced images here. One or two (eg/ the film screenshot showing the DDR's view of the border) are tagged as non-free, but almost all of them are tagged as PD-GermanGov on Commons. This template says:

"This image is in the public domain according to German copyright law because it is part of a statute, ordinance, official decree or judgment (official work) issued by a German federal or state authority or court (§ 5 Abs.1 UrhG)."

As far as I can tell, though, this seems to be a fairly restricted provision applying to certain specified sets of official documents - laws, rulings, etc - rather than a general government-works-are-free. Do these images really qualify? Even if they do, that law may still be problematic - s.5 refers to the "Änderungsverbot" of s.62, which seems to prohibit making derivatives (but this may be a translation error). Thoughts? Shimgray | talk | 17:44, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

The images were produced by the Stasi and are from the BtSU, the German government agency responsible for managing the Stasi's files. They were published in a series of museum exhibits and handouts as well as being available directly from the BtSU. If they don't fall under PD-GermanGov, perhaps they can be used as fair use? If someone with more experience of German government copyrights could comment, that would be very helpful. -- ChrisO (talk) 23:50, 5 October 2009 (UTC)

Laurinavicius

To put it simply, this article is suberb! There are no glaring problems and the biggest issue I've seen was the minor detail of n-dashes, which has been fixed. I have no qualms about this article and would be glad to support it for featured article status. Great job! Laurinavicius (talk) 00:04, 12 October 2009 (UTC)

Contents

Requests

Valkyria Chronicles