 | Tornado Low Level has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: May 27, 2019. (Reviewed version). |
GA Review
edit| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Tornado Low Level/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: J Milburn (talk · contribs) 18:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
Looks interesting. Happy to offer a review. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:57, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- The non-free images have incomplete rationales. Do we need both? I wonder if just the gameplay image would be sufficient?
- It would be weird to have a game article not have anything like a title screen or boxart. Also I filled the rationales. GamerPro64 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- "GamesTM declared that, despite stating flaws in the game, said it stood the test of time." This sentence is a bit all over the place!
- I removed the source. It did not add much overall. GamerPro64 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Why not incorporate the Your Spectrum external link as a reference?
- Added it as reference. GamerPro64 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- What's the value of the other two external links? If they're reliable sources, perhaps incorporate them, and, if not, perhaps remove them?
- Fits in line with the Manual of Style. GamerPro64 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Ok - could you explain what they are adding? If they're reliable sources, perhaps you could add them as full references in a further reading section? I think I would prefer that to external links. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- I don't believe they are considered reliable sources. I can replace them with a Mobygames link instead. GamerPro64 12:25, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Ok - could you explain what they are adding? If they're reliable sources, perhaps you could add them as full references in a further reading section? I think I would prefer that to external links. Josh Milburn (talk) 07:42, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Fits in line with the Manual of Style. GamerPro64 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Category:Multidirectional shooters? Category:Combat flight simulators (or Category:Flight simulation video games)? Is it worth creating a Vortex Software category?
- I think the first one. Also might be worth making a Vortex category. Might do that later. GamerPro64 00:37, 27 May 2019 (UTC)
- Perhaps you could mention more explicitly that this was developed in the UK?
Other than that, this looks great from a first read through. The prose is maybe a little choppy, but of GA-standard, as far as I'm concerned. Please double-check my edits. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:29, 26 May 2019 (UTC)
- I'm now happy with the external links, and I think the image switch was a good move. Happy to promote. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:33, 27 May 2019 (UTC)