Talk:Geneforge 2/GA1
Latest comment: 14 years ago by ThinkBlue in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 18:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Well done.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
In the lead, "It was released as demoware for the Macintosh on July 24, 2003 and" ---> "It was released as demoware for the Macintosh on July 24, 2003, and", commas after dates, if using MDY. In the Reception section, In the Reception section, the Ken Newquist review, the two hyphens should be changed to a spaced en-dash or unspace em-dash, for more on that go here.- Check.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- 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):
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
File:Geneforge2Logo.png and File:Geneforge 2 roaming 2.png need lower resolutions.- Check.
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Not that much to do. If the above can be dealt with, I will pass the article. Good luck!
- Pass or Fail:
-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 18:25, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
I believe that's all taken care of, thanks very much for the review. Someoneanother 23:06, 21 July 2010 (UTC)
- Yes, they have, and you're very much welcome for the review, just doing my part. Thank you to Someoneanother for getting the stuff I left at the talk page, because I have gone off and placed the article as GA. Congrats. ;) If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to take it to a GA review. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 17:52, 22 July 2010 (UTC)