Talk:XXX (video game)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:XXX (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 00:55, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

   b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

1. Reception could be summarized a bit more; for instance, "...remarked on Samuel L. Jackson's character that "I've seen guys at McDonalds that bear better resemblance than the likeness the artists created for this game"" could be "...felt that Samuel L. Jackson's character in this game looked nothing like the actor." or something to that effect.
2. I cleaned up some redirects and added a caption.

Ultimately I think that the paraphrasing "issue" is not much of an issue, just something I'd recommend fixing. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 12:45, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Lightburst (talk) 21:48, 29 May 2023 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that although most Game Boy Advance games are developed in at least five to six months, XXX was developed in two? Source: IGN ("The entire project took approximately two months to develop, which is extremely quick considering most Game Boy Advance games get around five to six months for development (minimum).")
  • Reviewed: Template:Did you know nominations/The Canadian Conspiracy

Improved to Good Article status by Cat's Tuxedo (talk). Self-nominated at 16:20, 23 May 2023 (UTC). Post-promotion hook changes for this nom will be logged at Template talk:Did you know nominations/XXX (video game); consider watching this nomination, if it is successful, until the hook appears on the Main Page.

General: Article is new enough and long enough
New enough: Long enough:

Policy: Article is sourced, neutral, and free of copyright problems
Adequate sourcing: Neutral: Free of copyright violations, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing:

Hook: Hook has been verified by provided inline citation
Cited: Interesting:

QPQ: Done.

Overall: a new edition to Wikipedia Good articles, Kudos! first and foremost. Thanks for archiving the sources. I see no issue in using "two months" and not "approximately two months". Nice work and good to go! and I am glad you did not make the hook sexual (due to the infamous use of XXX) FuzzyMagma (talk) 17:49, 23 May 2023 (UTC)