Talk:Metro: Last Light/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cognissonance (talk · contribs) 13:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Will get to this review shortly. Skimming the article, I noticed that sources 2, 7, 53, 84 and 85 don't cite the website they're from. Some sources are also missing wikilinks. Just a few minor inconsistencies I would take care of. Cognissonance (talk) 13:57, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

Gameplay

• "the game makes use of audio and visuals cues" — Fix grammar: "the game makes use of audio and visual cues".

Development

• "The game's lead developer was 4A Games, based in Ukraine. The game was developed by more than 80 people" — There are some undesirable repetitions here. Perhaps make it its own sentence: "The Ukraine-based lead developer 4A Games made the game with a team of more than 80 people".
• "the team decided to keep the feature in Last Light but to improve" — The second "to" is not necessary.

Release

• "being victims over the game's release.of any uncertainty" reads like a mess. Replace with "being misled by the game's uncertain release".
• "Both Ubisoft, Clearlake, and Koch Media, who were originally set to distribute the title" — Ubisoft is not mentioned in the VG247 citation, which would explain the inaccurate use of "Both"; Clearlake is mentioned in the following Gamasutra source. "who were" should be replaced with "the latter of which was", referring to Koch Media.

Downloadable content

• Sources 56 and 57 are duplicates of each other. Remove 56, since it is missing parameters.
• Source 58 is missing the first= last= date= accessdate= parameters.
• Can Coin-Op TV (source 59) and RealGamerNewz (source 60) be replaced?
• GameTrailers (source 61) merely goes to its YouTube homepage. This needs to be repaired.
• "within 60 days of the release of the" can be simplified with "within 60 days of releasing".
• Xbox360Achievements.org (source 62) doesn't strike me as reliable.
• I'm not too sure about Steamprices.com (source 66). Can it be replaced?

Redux version

• The announcement is not mentioned in the cited source. Remove or find a source to confirm it.
• CBS Interactive should be removed as publisher from source 68.
• "Last Light Redux was released as DRM-free games" — Fix grammar: "Last Light Redux was released as a DRM-free game".

Reception

Critical reception

• "multiple flashback scene" — Fix grammar: "multiple flashback scenes".

Overall

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 fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall: The article has some issues with references, grammar and prose. Putting the article on hold until they are addressed.

   Pass/Fail:

   @AdrianGamer: Cognissonance (talk) 18:11, 17 October 2016 (UTC)

@Cognissonance:: Thanks for the review! I think I have fixed all the issues. AdrianGamer (talk) 14:51, 18 October 2016 (UTC)

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):

   Pass/Fail:

   @AdrianGamer: Everything looks great. Cognissonance (talk) 15:23, 18 October 2016 (UTC)