Talk:Among Us/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Lazman321 (talk · contribs) 17:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

As part of the October 2020 Backlog Drive, I will be reviewing this article. Lazman321 (talk) 17:58, 12 October 2020 (UTC)

• I just want to voice an opinion and say this should fail its GAN due to stability issues. The article is not at all within the lines of criterion 5 as there is constant editing disputes. GamerPro64 03:29, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
  • While there are constant edits to the page, these are almost entirely vandalism which are quickly reverted. I don't think that qualifies as edit warring. The constant vandalism to the page is something I've brought up before, and the page was protected, but only for a limited time. In any case, the article is stable outside of that vandalism from what I've seen. Harmonia per misericordia. OmegaFallon (talk) 04:06, 16 October 2020 (UTC)
    • Alt PC of Omega, here. Someone has protected the page. Shouldn't be any more disruptive edits now, so GAN criterion 5 should no longer be an issue. 72.82.230.145 (talk) 13:44, 16 October 2020 (UTC)

Lazman321, if you don't want to take up this review I would love to take over. OmegaFallon, I'd be willing to review this in less than 2 days. The Ultimate Boss (talk) 06:05, 17 October 2020 (UTC)

Well written

Clear and concise prose

Personally, I don't like filling up the review with prose issues that could be addressed. As a result, I will correct the prose issues myself with help from Grammarly after the rest of the issues have been taken care of. The article is easy to understand and read at a glance though.

MoS adherence

This article satisfies all the MoS guidelines required for GA promotion. The lead summarizes all the key points of the topic, the layout flows nicely, there is no questionable word usage, fiction is used in a real-life context, and there are no lists.

Verifiable with no original research

Reference list

Yes, there is indeed a properly formatted reference list.

Reliable sources

The phrase, though contrary to popular belief, the Among Us community did not invent the word, as it has been in use long before the game's release. cites an unreliable source, a dictionary that anyone can edit. I find this website to be more suitable due to being run by a university.

Citation 6 is supposed to back up, [Among Us] was initially intended to be a mobile-only local multiplayer game with a single map It never says this in any way. Citation 7, however, does say this.

Fixed this. Harmonia per misericordia. OmegaFallon (talk) 11:13, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

No original research

There is no original research used in this article. This one is safe.

No copyright violations

This tool detected a 96.4% chance that it violated the copyright of a website. At first, I was worried, but then I realized that the website was a forum that copied the Wikipedia article. Anyway, this one is safe.

Broad in its coverage

Main aspects

and due to this initially had no sound, as to avoid revealing hidden information. Can you be a little bit more clear. I don't know that sentence is supposed to mean.

Besides that, I believe that this article does address the main aspects of the topic at hand.

I think I fixed this up, in any case the sentence is meant to explain that, when the game was local multiplayer only, there was no audio, as audio could potentially reveal hidden information. (For example, if you killed someone and that made a sound, everybody would hear it and know it was you.) Harmonia per misericordia. OmegaFallon (talk) 11:16, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Add a note that says e.g. the sound of an impostor killing a crewmate could reveal to the other crewmates who the impostor was.

Done. Harmonia per misericordia. OmegaFallon (talk) 19:05, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

Focus

There are no focus issues, every fact that is stated is related to the topic in some way and are organized in a coherent format.

Neutral

This article is neutral about the topic at hand. Most of the opinions in this article are in the critical reception section and are attributed to a webpage. All facts are stated neutrally.

Stable

This article is not going under any edit wars currently.

Illustrated

Free or tagged media

All media used is either free or tagged with a fair use rationale. However, the cover art's resolution does need to be smaller.

Relevant media

Every media used relevant to the topic. The cover art and screenshot are used as the primary means for identification, the picture of Sodapoppin is relevant due to him being the one who popularized Among Us, and the crewsona is used as an example of fan creations of crew members.

Overall

This is a pretty fine article and does have GA potential. I am placing this  On hold for 7 days. Lazman321 (talk) 05:12, 21 October 2020 (UTC)

This article has  Passed the GA criteria. Lazman321 (talk) 16:39, 22 October 2020 (UTC)