Talk:New Super Mario Bros. U/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Namcokid47 (talk · contribs) 04:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

I've kept an eye on this page for a while just because of the amount of vandalism it gets and because I intended to flesh it out. I was real confused to see this be nominated for GAN because, at the moment, it is nowhere near GA-level right now. Because of this, I've decided to immediately fail this, because there simply exist way too many issues at hand that makes me feel keeping this open would be inappropriate.

• The writing varies in quality. Sometimes the article overexplains certain details (why do I need to know that the other New Super Mario Bros. games don't have a seamless map? Why is that even important to mention?),
• other times it doesn't even mention key details (such as basic player moves). It's also real choppy, and frankly just isn't very interesting to read.
• The article sections are relatively the same, with some being excessively long (Gameplay)
• and others way too short for a game like this (Reception).
• I also do not like how some info, such as most of the Development section, aren't merged into other sections are just floating around with no real context behind them.
• The reception itself is my biggest problem. There's over twenty reviews in the review score box to the right (it shouldn't even really be that long), most of which aren't even in the text, and it's only like two paragraphs and a free-floating sentence. It's simply unacceptable to have a GA with a reception that tiny. What's there isn't good either, because in addition to more awkward word choices it doesn't really do a proper job at actually explaining the what and why, since it's mostly just reviewers saying "this was good" or "this was bad".

I do not like failing GAs because I understand nominators have put a lot of time into these, and it can lead to feelings being hurt. But this article cannot pass at this stage with these three big problems present. Three issues might not seem like much, but they're so important and cover the majority of the page that it simply can't pass. My recommendation would to set up a peer review for this and have other editors take a look at it, and provide some more minor corrections in additions to the ones I've mentioned here. This article definitely has the potential to be a GA, it just can't right now. You can definitely get it there. Namcokid47 ^(Contribs) 04:49, 6 December 2020 (UTC)

Namcokid47, Thanks for your review! I now know what I need to focus on. I'll get to this soon. I most likely didn't think too hard about this one, as I've been busy with Paper Mario: The Origami King and it's featured article process. Le Panini ^Talk 17:17, 6 December 2020 (UTC)