Talk:Gears of War 2/GA1
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
Okay, I said I would do this, so here I am.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- For the most part, it's good. I had to fix a few minor things.
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- Good for the most part, but there is only one citation in the "graphics" section, and the first part of the "gameplay" section needs a few more. Try using some of the reviews, as those always discuss the gameplay.
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- In the gameplay section, every statement has a references to support. It's just that the comments and the refs and sometimes spread far apart. As for the Graphics section, ref 33 applied to both paragraphs.--(NGG) 03:57, 6 May 2009 (UTC)
- C. It contains no original research:
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- C. It contains no original research:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- I'm putting this on hold so you can add more references where needed. I'll give you a week or so. I think it's something you can do; if you can, I'll pass it.
- Pass or Fail:
