Talk:$456,000 Squid Game in Real Life!/GA1

GA Review

Passed. Skyshifter ^talk 01:33, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

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

Reviewer: Skyshifter (talk · contribs) 03:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will try to review this in a day. Skyshifter ^talk 03:53, 31 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Couldn't do it. But I should end it soon. Skyshifter ^talk 19:14, 1 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Infobox and lead

Image has a valid fair use rationale
Infobox seems okay
You could add a note stating that the original capitalization is "$456,000 Squid Game In Real Life!" (with "In" instead of "in")
Is it necessary to note that it is a 25-minute video in the lead? I think you could remove "25-minute"
"YouTube video by American YouTuber Jimmy Donaldson, known on YouTube as MrBeast" — change the last "YouTube" to "the platform" to avoid repetition of "YouTube[r]"

Background

Seems fine

Production

Seems fine

Video

"and is not intended to be a parody" — according to who?
"the players competed in a series of games, each reducing the amount of players" — writing could be improved here to avoid repetition of players; maybe something like "the players competed in a series of games where losing would result in elimination".
"The winner of the grand prize was player 079." — I'm not sure if this is relevant
I feel like the last paragraph ("The video was published to the MrBeast [...]) and the entire Style section should all be in Reception, as they're not in the video. They are about the impact of the video after its release and analysis of it.

Reception

"Squid Game creator Hwang Dong-hyuk apparently responded to the video" — why "apparently"?
"other writers described it as 'perfect'" — name the writers
"Youshaei's tweet was criticized" — who criticized it?
"from the work of others (e.g. reaction videos)" — "from the work of others, such as reaction videos" for better flow
"Donaldson received criticism from a number of journalists" — "from some journalists" would be more appropriate IMO, especially if Distractify gets removed so we'll only have 3 sources, which isn't enough to say "a number"

Others

Distractify is unreliable per WP:RSP. Please remove it.
Change source 19 title to "MrBeast" and website to "YouTube"
No copyvio detected

On hold Skyshifter ^talk 02:26, 3 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review, will get to these soon.

— PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 01:57, 5 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Skyshifter 46.6.57.13 (talk) 20:07, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

? Skyshifter ^talk 21:11, 6 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skyshifter, I have edited the article and have followed your suggestions. Could you please re-evaluate it? — Davest3r08 (^_^) ^(talk) 15:46, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Davest3r08: Thank you, but wasn't PerfectSoundWhatever supposed to evaluate them? Skyshifter ^talk 16:44, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Skyshifter, oh, sorry, I was unaware. I pinged you because you were the reviewer. — Davest3r08 (^_^) ^(talk) 16:52, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take a second look because I don't think I agree with everything. But overall it looks good and thanks to Davest3r08 for putting in the time to fix these. — PerfectSoundWhatever (t; c) 21:12, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

PerfectSoundWhatever, you're welcome. — Davest3r08 (^_^) ^(talk) 23:24, 9 November 2023 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass Skyshifter ^talk 01:31, 1 December 2023 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.