Talk:Ninja Theory/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Anarchyte (talk · contribs) 09:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

I'll do this. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

Given there are multiple places called Cambridge, perhaps writing "Cambridge, England" (or United Kingdom, as done in #History) would be better.
The project was not a commercial success → The game failed to be a commercial success. This way we don't have "project" being repeated within 2 words.
You mention the success (or lack thereof) of every game mentioned besides DmC. How about and DmC: Devil May Cry, a [successful/unsuccessful/well received/etc] game whose design was highly controversial...

History

Tameem Antoniades is linked in the caption but nowhere else. His article redirects back here, so the link should be removed.
Write "United Kingdom" instead of "UK".
had three staff but had no money → had three staff but no money
highly stylized. What does this mean? Does this mean gamers preferred realistic games over magic or sci-fi? I'm not quite sure.
licensed version of Unreal Engine. Do we need to say it was licensed? Without their own technology, the team used Unreal Engine
unprofitable, the team needed. "the team" is used quite often. Change this instance to "they" or "Ninja Theory".
small budget, the team did not and mental illness and psychosis, the team consulted professional. Same as above.

Philosophy

less risky. Not sure about this phrase. Is it possible to reword it?
Merge the last two sentences of the first paragraph. They discuss the same idea.
helped enhance the game as an experience → helped enhance the experience

Games developed

I went ahead and capitalised "as" here.
I'm not sure if the company names should be in italics. Neither names are ever in italics anywhere else.

References

None of the references have correct publisher parameters.
Ref 11 needs IGN to be under |work or |website rather than |publisher.
Rock, Paper, Shotgun needs to be linked in ref35.
Gameindustry.biz is a redirect, but I don't see any harm in linking it either.
None of the references are archived. Optional, but it's always nice to have GAs with archived links.

Miscellaneous comments

I've left a message on the talk page of the admin who protected the page with a request to unprotect it. However, they haven't edited in a month so if I don't get a response I may unprotect it myself to see if any vandalism follows. This will have no bearing on the GA review, just thought I'd let the lead contributor know. Anarchyte (work | talk) 09:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Overall review

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. Has an appropriate reference section:

B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
Overall:
Pass or Fail: (Passed)

@AdrianGamer: Fantastic work with this article. I managed to find a few errors, which I've pointed out above. Once those are fixed I see no reason to not pass this. Anarchyte (work | talk) 07:39, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@Anarchyte: - Thanks for the review! I think I have fixed most of the issues you have raised. Let me know if I have missed any. I will archive the sources when I have time later. AdrianGamer (talk) 07:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]

@AdrianGamer: Great! I went through and changed American English to British English (per the talk). As having references archived is not an actual criterion, there is no reason to not pass this now. I will add the publisher parameters myself in just a moment. Anarchyte (work | talk) 08:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]