Talk:Iridion 3D
This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Iridion 3D article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Iridion 3D" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
Iridion 3D is a featured article; it (or a previous version of it) has been identified as one of the best articles produced by the Wikipedia community. Even so, if you can update or improve it, please do so. | ||||||||||||||||
This article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page as Today's featured article on March 29, 2010. | ||||||||||||||||
| ||||||||||||||||
Current status: Featured article |
This article links to one or more target anchors that no longer exist.
Please help fix the broken anchors. You can remove this template after fixing the problems. | Reporting errors |
Failed "good article" nomination
[edit]This article failed good article nomination. This is how the article, as of February 24, 2007, compares against the six good article criteria:
- 1. Well written?: Weak Pass Prose seems written well enough, but I have a few suggestions. There are some commas where commas aren't needed (such as before the word and) and articles tend to flow better without brackets.
- 2. Factually accurate?: Fail I'm reluctant to pass an article with so few unreferenced statements. There are entire sections that only have one reference.
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Pass Very Comprehensive for a little-known video game.
- 4. Neutral point of view?: Pass Article seems to be written from a neutral point of view.
- 5. Article stability? Pass Seems to be stable.
- 6. Images?: Pass Good use of images.
When these issues are addressed, the article can be resubmitted for consideration. Thanks for your work so far. --Scorpion 05:11, 24 February 2007 (UTC)
- It's looking pretty good at this point. I'd say do another copy edit, then try for GA again. -- Scorpion 00:15, 26 February 2007 (UTC)
New GA review
[edit]All of my previous suggestions have been implemented, so I grant this article GA status. Great job! This article is very comprehensive for a little-known flop, more comprehensive than many articles for the "franchise" games. One small question, would it be possible to add at least one source to the lead? I don't think sources in the lead are a necessity for a GA, but I would prefer to see at least one.
Cape Feare, an article I have been working on is currently a GAC, and if you could review it for me it would be much appreciated. Thanks for the time, Scorpion 18:49, 28 February 2007 (UTC)
Reference material
[edit]Found this: Game Informer review. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 01:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)
- Thanks for the find. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:51, 21 October 2010 (UTC)