Talk:Champion of the Raj/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs)) 04:11, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar: Grabbing this for a review.

Lead

Replace the semicolon after factions with a colon

Done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would suggest linking Mogul, Sikhs, and Marathas (but this is merely a suggestion and not a requirement)

Done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Remove “mostly” and just say “mixed reviews”

Good point, done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Be specific with “various aspects of gameplay”. While this is the Lead, every sentence should be specific and not ambiguous so specify what aspects of gameplay are being praised.

I've corrected this. Upon reading it again, most of the gameplay was viewed negatively, so I mentioned that the storyline was praised instead JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Put a semicolon between “gameplay” and “however”

Done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay

Image needs an alt. and I would recommend using "upright"

I've added an alt. I don't know if I done something wrong, but every time I added "upright" it appeared to drastically shrink the image, so I was forced to leave that as it was JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

I would reword the second sentence to avoid repetitive language and be more concise: (Before starting the game, the clay can pick a player-character and side to play.)

Rephrased. JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Link Maruthras, Gurkhas, Maharajah, and Sikhs (Again a suggestion, but you can tell me why you would prefer not linking these)

Linked all JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Link or specify the meaning behind “chokey” as I am not entirely sure what you are referring to (I could be missing something very obvious).

Oops. I didn't know what a chokey was either, but I looked it up and it appears to be slang for "prison cell" (which is what I was expecting, but I thought it was a formal use for something). It's actually Anglo-Indian slang! I've just changed it to "prison cell". JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Just say “1800”. The “the year” part is unnecessary and redundant

Done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Specify what you mean by “status”

Changed to "popularity" for clarity JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Move the reference on the “game hunting session” to the end of the sentence.

Done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Put a comma after “however”

Added JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Replace “has died through assassination” with “is assassinated”

Done JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Background

Remove comma after England

Removed JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Great job with this section. I am very impressed with the research put into this section and the overall article.

Thank you! It wasn't easy, but I'm certain that's all of the information that can be found on a small company in the 80s. JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Reception

I really like how you separated this section into two clear paragraphs with clearly defined topic sentences.

Thanks. I'm glad to see that there were no errors in this section this time. I was expecting this game to have more coverage, but half of the reviews were just snippets. JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

References

While not required for the nomination, I would highly recommend archiving all the links when applicable to avoid dead/broken links in the future.

I've archived what could be archived (excluding scans) JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Final comments

@Jaguar:This article is already in great form; my comments are more focus on smaller details and once they are addressed, it will be a quick and easy pass. Aoba47 (talk) 04:39, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: thank you for the review! I've addressed all of the above. The majority of the references were scans, which can't be archived, but I did the rest. One of my main interests are in British India and I had high hopes for this game, but when I watched a playthrough video of it on YouTube it turned out to be so bad. I'm glad the article doesn't appear that way, at least! JAGUAR 21:24, 15 March 2016 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar: Great work! And I am glad that my comments could help in some way. I am very impressed with the work put into this article (especially as it is an older game and a majority of the references are scans. I am sorry that you are disappointed in the game, but at least you could make something great out of it! Looking forward to reviewing and reading your future working on here. ✓ Pass

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

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): 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): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail: