Talk:Daytona USA/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Crimsonfox (talk · contribs) 08:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

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 (references): 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, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

In progress, will update with comments CrimsonFox ^talk 08:38, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Crimsonfox

Overall it reads well and appears to cover everything, few nit picks on wording and some refs need fixing per below

Refs

#3 - No article date, name should be capitalised
#12 - Article title shouldn't have site name in
#18 - No article date (Optional: Not archived)
#20 - Needs all details
#21-23 - Remove site name from article name, no access date
#22-23 - No author, need to be distinguished from each other (Eg. Daytona USA - Review (PC))
#25-16 - Need formatting correctly
#46 - Name of the site is not the URL
#56 - No access date

- All refs fixed, except for #20. Not sure what you're looking for here. Red Phoenix ^talk 16:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Gameplay

The first sentence doesn't read very encyclopedia-like.
"introduced the possibility of linking " - Be more certain in your wording (Eg. "Up to eight cabinets can be linked to...")
"Sega originally planned to use actual car seats, but changed the seats before releasing the game" - Source needed

- Fixed. The source on the seats is the same source as the whole paragraph. Red Phoenix ^talk 16:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Development

The first three paragraphs have only once source at the end, which is fine, but can you confirm if they are for the whole paragraph?
First sentence doesn't read nicely
The comment in the image caption regarding the linking is unnecessary and is already mentioned in the Gameplay section

- Fixed. Yes, the sources at the end are for the whole paragraph; the book is an excellent source that covers the development in more rigor than any other source I've seen. Red Phoenix ^talk 16:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

- At the time of release, GE Aerospace was actually under Martin Marietta, so I don't quite follow why the older name is used here? Is it to accommodate the link to the Wikipedia article on GE Aerospace? F355fan ^talk 16:18, 27 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reception & legacy

"(which are based strictly on sales achievements)" - I don't think this needs to be in brackets
- Fixed. Red Phoenix ^talk 16:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

CrimsonFox ^talk 11:39, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Crimsonfox: other than ref #20, which I'm confused what you're looking for, all addressed. Red Phoenix ^talk 16:03, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Red Phoenix: Great work! Ref #20 that links to this article doesn't have a proper title, author, date, website etc. it's just "Archived copy" CrimsonFox ^talk 17:16, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, I see it now, haha. It doesn’t show up in VisualEditor because none of the refs in the review box do - #20 when VE is on was a Next Generation ref that was filled in. Anyway, filled in. Red Phoenix ^talk 19:45, 6 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Ah that would explain it, all done! Congrats! CrimsonFox ^talk 08:57, 7 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]