Talk:Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 4

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Takara Tomy[edit]

What you are deletion this Takara Tomy in the engine Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 4 but what of Naruto Sorm series has the game's engine called Takara Tomy. 200.153.166.112 (talk) 23:15, 23 May 2015 (UTC)[reply]

A Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion[edit]

The following Wikimedia Commons file used on this page has been nominated for deletion:

Participate in the deletion discussion at the nomination page. —Community Tech bot (talk) 11:54, 2 February 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Removal of the Copy Edit Tag[edit]

This is not usually how it's done, but whatever. Miniapolis 23:25, 29 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Naruto Shippuden: Ultimate Ninja Storm 4/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Reggie's Wrath (talk · contribs) 05:23, 5 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria[edit]

Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2]
    (c) it contains no original research; and
    (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review[edit]

  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) The language used in the article will most likely stick out to the average reader Fail Fail
    (b) (MoS) The reviewer has left no comments here Pass Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) A good amount of reliable references Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) ^ Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) No original research Pass Pass
    (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) No plagarism Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) The reviewer has left no comments here Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) The reviewer has left no comments here Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    The article is neutral Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Notes Result
    Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) all copyrighted images are low-res and/or comply with fair-use policies Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) ' Pass Pass

Result[edit]

Result Notes
Fail Fail It needs to change the general language and grammar used in the body of the article, several things stick out throughout the article.

Discussion[edit]

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Naruto_Shippuden:_Ultimate_Ninja_Storm_4&oldid=1198857742"