Talk:Microsoft Flight Simulator X/GA1

GA Review

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

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

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:

   Pass/Fail:

The main problems with the article is that multiple parts of the page is without sources as well as the lack of mentioning of "Development" or "Reception" of the game. For that I'm gonna have to fail it. GamerPro64 23:24, 4 December 2011 (UTC)