| Revision as of 14:38, 4 August 2020 editPopcornfud (talk | contribs)Extended confirmed users, IP block exemptions, Rollbackers71,646 edits OneClickArchiver archived Cover art to Talk:The Legend of Zelda: The Wind Waker/Archive 1← Previous edit |
Revision as of 20:29, 8 August 2020 edit undoCuchullain (talk | contribs)Administrators83,892 edits →Intro edits: new sectionNext edit → |
| Line 58: |
Line 58: |
|
|
|
|
|
{{Archives}} |
|
{{Archives}} |
|
|
|
|
|
== Intro edits == |
|
|
|
|
|
I've twice reverted parts of the recent edits to the introduction. The reason is that the previous version read better than the changes. Specifically: |
|
|
*The following sentence is phrased awkwardly: "The element of ] has a prominent role, by facilitating sailing and being controlled with a magic conductor's baton called the Wind Waker." |
|
|
*The following sentence introduces passive voice: "Instead, a distinctive cartoon-like art style was created through ], originating the ']' character." (I also don't think the sentence benefits from being broken up). |
|
|
*Calling the art direction "whimsical": I don't think this is the right word choice. At any rate the previous paragraph already establishes what the art direction is like. |
|
|
*The article verifies that the divisiveness among North American players contributed to weaker sales in comparison to Ocarina of Time, in fact this is a pretty significant part of the game's history. Removing that hurts the flow. |
|
|
*"As a result, the subsequent '']'' (2006) has a more natural and serious look." This doesn't flow right. As a result of what exactly? As a result ''of comparatively weak sales'', Nintendo changed directions with the visuals. As a result of that decision, Twilight Princess has a more realistic style (I don't think that "natural and serious" are the right word choices) |
|
|
*Splitting the sentence on the character's allies and activities strikes me as unnecessary, but I'm open to this if others support the change. |
|
|
There are some good changes that I'll restore, and others that should be made. In general this introduction has suffered from content creep over the years; I'll get to work on fixing that.--] ]/] 20:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC) |
I've twice reverted parts of the recent edits to the introduction. The reason is that the previous version read better than the changes. Specifically:
There are some good changes that I'll restore, and others that should be made. In general this introduction has suffered from content creep over the years; I'll get to work on fixing that.--Cúchullain /c 20:29, 8 August 2020 (UTC)
