Jump to content

Talk:Toys for Bob/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 16:23, 12 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

[edit]
  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -
[edit]
  • Had a lot of clean-up to do here, but I think this should all be addressed. Removed MobyGames and tried to improve consistent dates and publishers, for consistency and clarity. The blog post is from Tim Cain, creator of Fall Out. It's already cited in the book, but I thought it was nice to link a web-based version, for people who like to check the footnotes for further reading. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]
  • I tried to mention the awards in aggregate, but I can expand on that if you think that's useful. I tried to clear up the parts that sounded wrong. The important thing I wanted to stress about their similar schooling is that they didn't meet until years later, after they both graduated. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General

[edit]
  • The founding and naming seemed like a good thing to pair up, but I could probably expand it with some verified information for how they operate as a company -- if you think that would help. I bundled the citations for clarity and readability. I tried to clarify their involvement in Crash Bandicoot and Spyro, and fixed the ref table for their list of published works. Hopefully that addresses your concerns. Shooterwalker (talk) 21:33, 6 August 2020 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  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:
    Pass/Fail:

Review meta comments

[edit]
  • I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA and FA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definitely not mandatory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)
    • Meta-reply I'll work hard to get this one up to quality. I'd rather have more time or even a hold than to give up. This is my first Wikipedia GA in a long time so I plan on using this experience to learn the standards and process. I am eager to return the favor (and also pay it forward) and help WP:VG when this is done. Thanks for taking this on. Shooterwalker (talk) 00:41, 13 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]