Talk:Luke Smith (writer)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Intro:

• "...readers into accepting PR as news." I may be being nitpicky here, but can you rephrase PR to something like "company promotional material" or something more specific like that?

Early career:

• "Smith eased into game journalism while working..." "Eased into" reads a bit POVish. Could you rephrase?
• Is there no source anywhere that can tell us what college he went to? Or the year he graduated?
• This source mentions that he worked for Real Detroit Weekly. This should definitely be included, as a little bit more specifics on his early days is a bit lacking in the article. (Also, on a related note, can you briefly mention that Clive Thompson writes for Slate?)
• Is there any info on when exactly he worked for Kotaku? Or when he left to go to 1UP? Something lacking in this article right now are dates (months and years); if somebody read this 50 years from now, they'd have no idea whether parts of this article were happening 50 years previous or just recently, know what I mean?
• I'll leave this one up to you entirely, but do you think it's worth mentioning that Smith criticized IGN for not crediting him for a story he broke about the Stamper brothers leaving rare? It's mentioned here and here. Let me know what you think.

Since it's only him talking, I'd like to keep the primary source out, as there's little indication it was noteworthy to anyone else.

• Who is Brian Ashcraft? You mention him, but give no context as to who he is on first reference. Please add that in.
• This source identifies the "Broken Halo" article as the work that really put Smith on the map. Can you add something to the end of the second paragraph to reflect this?
• Also, as per the above suggestion, could you add just a little bit about what he said in the "Broken Halo" article, specifically?
• Can you add a brief something describing what the 1UP Yours show is. You could just tack to the end of that sentence, "1UP Yours show, a weekly video games podcast featuring gaming editors and experts" or whatever.
• "... to part of Ziff Davis' gaming circle." Can you rephrase this or add to this to explain what exactly this means?
• Not sure if this is something you really can address, but is there a specific time that Smith grew disillusioned with the state of video game journalism? You say "Around the same time" while describing this part of him, but there is no context as to when it happens. If its reflected in a source anywhere, could you add this to the sentence, "Smith, however felt disheartened by the state of game journalism."? Even if it's something as general as "While working at IUP" or something like that.
• Along those same lines, can you add in when exactly Bungie approached him for a job. You say "a month later" but never say what month they approached him. (NOTE When you include those months or dates, make sure you include the year. I added a 2007 to the "May 7" under the Bungie section)

Bungie:

• Anything on Smith's response to the various reactions to his taking the Bungie job? If so, can you add that to the first paragraph in this section?

Unfortunately no.

• "In an article for Gamasutra, Andy Robertson said that while Bungie had historically been good at letting fans interact via forums and provided updates and artwork via their site, Bungie.net, the company's releases had a "corporate and muted tone to it", and made less effort and been less successful historically at providing access to the inner workings of the game studio." Is this sentence really necessary? In the sentence after it, you say that Smith's hiring was in part to allow fans more say. Did Robertson's Gamasutra article somehow prompt this hiring or influence it in any way? If not, this sentence isn't really needed; it's not really about Smith, just the state of Bungie in general. It could be shortened, perhaps, to a brief sentence explaining the reputation Bungie was developing just to set a backdrop for Smith's hiring, but if you did that I'd make it much shorter and drop the reference to Gamasutra and Robertson altogether (although you can still use it as a source).

I'm not sure how you think it's unnecessary. The sentence sets up the climate that Bungie intended to be rectified by Smith's hiring.

Eh, I suppose.

• If, however, you convince me somehow the Robertson sentence stays in, it will need a rewrite; is run-on and reads awkwardly. You might want to break it into two sentences or separate them with a semicolon. Also, you'll need to add context for who Andy Robertson is. Even if it's just "In an article for Gamasutra, writer Andy Robertson said..."

Rewrote slightly.

• "Smith brought his experience with the 1UP podcast..." This is borderline POV. Can you rephrase?

Not sure how to rephrase actually.

I did it.

Can you add an External links section:

• There seems to still be a site at 1UP archiving his stories there that you can add to this section: Luke Smith's Page on 1UP

Added.

• You could also add links to other Luke Smith wiki sites like the one on Halopedia and Bungiepedia.

I'm ambivalent about adding wikis which largely don't cite their sources...

Misc:

• Looking at that Bungiepedia site, I see that Smith is apparently well known for his beard. Perhaps this is worth mentioning somewhere in this article? It shouldn't be too hard to find a source...right?

Sadly, there is no source for this, because it is true but not verifiable. Der Wohltempierte Fuchs ^(talk) 04:23, 26 February 2009 (UTC)

--Hunter Kahn (talk) 05:47, 23 February 2009 (UTC)

A good article is:

1. Well-written: Prose is good, MOS is good.
2. Factually accurate and verifiable: Sources are good, no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage: Covers main aspects, no unneeded detail.
4. Neutral: Yes.
5. Stable: Yes.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by images: Yes.

--Hunter Kahn (talk) 00:01, 27 February 2009 (UTC)