SINS OF A SOLAR EMPIRE EXTENDED 4X FULL SIZE
SINS OF A SOLAR EMPIRE EXTENDED 4X SERIES

SINS OF A SOLAR EMPIRE EXTENDED 4X SERIES

вЂ My other nomination would be Blizzard, for consistently high success with the -Craft series and Diablo, but I think Meier should win by half a length.

While I think Meier has a fair claim to be considered the greatest game designer of them all вЂ , I think the OS/2 version of Gal Civ was more relevant because: it shows the birth of another long-running series that has always been highly regarded the article is about '4X' in general, not about the Civ series or Sid M. I also notice that in 'History' the image of the mid-1990s OS/2 version of Gal Civ has been replaced with one of Sid Meier.

SINS OF A SOLAR EMPIRE EXTENDED 4X FULL SIZE

I notice the section about tech trees once again has the FreeOrion image, which I replaced with one from Civ 3 because at thumb size the FreeOrion image has too little contrast for the structure to be visible, and it's pretty hard to read when enlarged - it's not even good at full size when you play the game. I'll reply later when I have soething more concrete. I feel that a lot of points are being made that aren't relevant to the article, or were just added because you found a reference that says it. However, I feel hesitant about including it, as a lot of removal of material is involved. Randomran ( talk) 20:06, 11 July 2008 (UTC) Copy-editingДЄs promised, I tentatively started a draft in which I've edited the article for style (I'm not concerning myself with content, as I don't have time currently to do the research). I've nominated the article for peer review. I would peer review it, again if you have already beforehand though.

Randomran ( talk) 17:45, 11 July 2008 (UTC) I would go for it, I think it could make it through, with a lot of work done on the way. My strategy is to choose my battles very carefully. But usually it's not so bad if you just shut your mouth and trust the wisdom of these reviewers. I figure, why not? Sure it will be a pain to change some of the more pedantic concerns. It's very well researched, and pretty well written. Philcha ( talk) 17:29, 11 July 2008 (UTC) The article has come a long way. Randomran ( talk) 17:00, 11 July 2008 (UTC) I noticed the GA - well done! But do you really want to let yourself in for a FA review? Everything I've ever read about these says 'PITA'. I think it's already there in a lot of ways. I'm going to take a closer look at the FA requirements over the next few days and bring the article up to that standard. This article just hit 'good article' status. Talk:4X/Archive 5/GA1 Featured article status? I'll be doing whatever I can to address your criticisms. I am optimistic that with a little patience and a lot of constructive criticism, this article is not very far off from GA status. So I've decided to be WP:BOLD and nominate in spite of this article's few weaknesses. I've tried to change all the sources to ones that are widely considered reliable, but there has been some resistance to removing some references. I solicited the help of outside editors to do some copyediting, but I didn't get as much help as I would have liked. I'm aware the article can always stand to improve. Nominator's note: this is my first effort to promote a good quality article.

15 '4X' used in advertizing and/or promotion.

Sins of a solar empire extended 4x