Talk:Cannon Fodder 3/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: GreatOrangePumpkin (talk · contribs) 09:22, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   "Cannon Fodder 3 is an action-strategy PC game developed and published - originally in Russia - by Game Factory Interactive, along with developer Burut CT." perhaps: developed and published in the Russian-based Game Factory Interactive, along with developer Burut CT (however, I don't know where the last company is located)

That sentence would actually say that the game was developed in the company, which I don't think makes sense. I believe Burut CT is based in Ukraine, but that's not mentioned in any of the sources. bridies (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

1. "a popular acclaimed game released for multiple formats in 1993. " - popularly acclaimed? Suggest to remove one of the words. If you want to say that it was both commercially and critically successful, then write it.

Done. bridies (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

1. Not a requirement, but I would add in brackets the abbreviation of Game Factory Interactive, eg Game Factory Interactive (GFI) in the first sentence

Done. bridies (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

1. " though using the keyboard to deploy additional weaponry" How about "though the keyboard is used to deploy additional weaponry"?

Done. I was keeping it in the default active voice. Changed it nevertheless. bridies (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

1. What role had Burut CT in the development?

A couple of the sources state it developed the game. Which I assume means it did the programming, design, actually making the game (with GFI doing the legalities, licensing, marketing, publishing). However, a couple of other sources said GFI did the development. So I just reported both versions. There's one source (Metro) which lists both as developers but as it's the only source that does this, and it appeared several days after I put up this article, I believe its source for that was this article xD And whichever the source, it's not any more specific than "developed the game". bridies (talk) 13:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall: Looks good but needs a few corrections. --Kürbis (✔) 10:08, 8 September 2012 (UTC)

   Pass/Fail: