Talk:Mass Effect 2: Overlord/Archive 1
Appearance
This is an archive of past discussions about Mass Effect 2: Overlord. Do not edit the contents of this page. If you wish to start a new discussion or revive an old one, please do so on the current talk page. |
Archive 1 |
RfC: Mass Effect series capitalization of alien race names
You're invited to join the discussion at Talk:Illusive Man#Request for comment. czar · · 03:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)
GA Review
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
- This review is transcluded from Talk:Mass Effect 2: Overlord/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 00:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
All right, let's get started, shall we?
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- I had to tweak one duplicate use of the word "pack", but otherwise the prose reads reasonably well. There are a few patches that could use a little tweaking from an experienced copyeditor for sentence fluency, but none of these are major enough to get in the way of this review.
- a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- Very nicely done with the sources. All appear to be reliable per WP:VG/S per their usages in the article, and everything appears quite well referenced. Aesthetically, I'd double-check to make sure all references come in number order when using more than one in a sentence, but again, not in the way of this review.
- a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- Hits all the major points of a video game article: plot, gameplay, development and release, and reception. More than enough real-world content to balance off the fictional elements.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- No point of view issues I can see.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- Does not appear to be the subject of edit wars.
- No edit wars, etc.:
- 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):
- Two fair-use images. Both have good rationales and are used appropriately. No other images are used.
- a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- Well done! I'd say we have enough to pass right away. Let me know if you have questions.
- Pass/Fail:
Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 00:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
- You just beat me to this one, Red Phoenix! Congrats, Niwi, on another quality contribution. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)
Thanks to both of you. I wasn't expecting this review to be so good and quick. Cheers :) --Niwi3 (talk) 09:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)