Talk:Wisp (Sonic)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 18:12, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

I'll take up this review. I will leave down some initial comments within 24 hours but judging by the size of this article the GAR shouldn't take that long. I mainly focus on copy editing issues. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 18:12, 31 March 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   It is well referenced.

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

Lead

• The lead definitely complies per WP:LEAD and the GA criteria. Well done

Design and characteristics

• "The mother of all other Wisps is a giant, pink one named Mother Wisp" - I'm quite confused here - all 'other' Wisps? The sentence before this didn't say if the Wisps were divided so what others?
  • By "other" I meant all Wisps other than her, since she can't be her own mother, but I removed it anyway. Tezero (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
• "while Orange Rocket Wisps (for blasting rapidly into the air) are very emotional" - what does being emotional have to do with the game?
  • Elaborated. Basically, Orange Rocket Wisps have very unstable and explosive emotions, and that reflects how they work as a power-up. Tezero (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
• "Takashi Iizuka, head of long-time developer Sonic Team" - doesn't really make sense here. Is 'long-time developer' meaning that Sonic Team is a long-running games developer or is Takashi Iizuka a long-time developer at the studio?
  • Rephrased. Tezero (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Appearences

Some parts of this section doesn't have great sentence structure. I'll list some examples below:

• "Suspicious, Sonic and Tails investigate,[36] and they rescue two Wisps from Eggman's henchmen Orbot and Cubot" - how about Suspicious, Sonic and Tails investigate and rescue two Wisps from Eggman's henchmen Orbot and Cubot (you may want to add to this as the reference should be moved from the mid sentence).
  • Done. Tezero (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
• "When Sonic defeats her, she reverts to normal,[ also thanks Sonic and Tails, and returns to Planet Wisp with her children." - this isn't great grammatically. How about When Sonic defeats her, she reverts to normal and returns to Planet Wisp with her children thanks to Sonic and Tails
• "When Sonic defeats her, she reverts to normal, also thanks Sonic and Tails, and returns to Planet Wisp with her children" - I don't like the syntax here... how about After Sonic defeats her she returns back to normal. Also thanks Sonic and Tails she returns to Planet Wisp with her children...
  • Is there a difference between these two complaints? Anyway, I don't think it's a good idea to change it to one of those, as "thanks" is being used as a verb, not an interjection or preposition (as in "no thanks to your dumb ass..."). Instead, I changed "thanks" in that sentence to "expresses gratitude". Tezero (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)
    • Yeah you're right there, what you done was better than my suggestion! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:07, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Reception

• Everything checks out here - this section's prose is good and complies per the GA criteria!

On hold

This is a neat and compact article. Most of the prose is generally good and this definitely has a good shot at achieving GA status if those copyediting issues I have mentioned above were addressed to. I will put this on hold for seven days. Other than some prose issues I could find nothing else wrong with this article as all the references are in check and everything else is in good standard! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:32, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

@Jaguar: How about now? I think it'd be pretty sweet to have the article promoted while it's still on the front page. Tezero (talk) 21:55, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Close - promoted

Thank you and well done for addressing those issues so quickly!! I had no idea it was on the front page today. With only an hour to spare, you've addressed those copyediting issues I had mentioned above. Nothing else seems to be wrong with this article and it now meets the GA criteria. It was lucky that I came back online just in time to promote this! Well done again! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:01, 2 April 2014 (UTC)

Thanks for being online! Tezero (talk) 22:09, 2 April 2014 (UTC)