Talk:Pokémon Sword and Shield Expansion Pass/GA1

GA Review

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

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 02:51, 25 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: DoctorWhoFan91 (talk · contribs) 14:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'll take this one. Expect remarks in a few hours. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 14:40, 29 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Made the changes myself as they were minor.

~~Are the overworld and Alolan Diglett quest important to mention?~~
- The overworld is a large aspect of the base game which is expanded upon here, and was highlighted in reviews for the game. The Diglett quest is not as important, but still worth mentioning given it's one of the more expansive features added in terms of length. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:07, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - It's still a 'side quest', though
    - The Isle of Armor didn't add much, and this is one of the biggest pieces of content in there. I don't see much point in removing it given it would be the DLC's only real major addition not covered in the section. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Use more "if"s or "when"s, it's a video game. Also, write the last para in crown tundra better - note is found in the first sentence, revealed the next. Done
- I'm confused what the issue with the note is. Could you clarify? Additionally, what spots would greatly benefit from "ifs" and "whens"? I left them out because I felt I didn't need to work in vague language when most of this is pretty concrete. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:06, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - For eg- The rivals attempt to cheat to win against the player, but the player defeats them despite this.: Is that every time, or just when the player is winning. And it's presented like a statement of truth, so does that mean the player wins every time no matter their inputs? or They manage to find a way to do so: Is that gameplay or a cut scene; and so on?
    - Fixed this one. Didn't see any others so if there are let me know. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed them myself (pls feel free to revert any changes you want)

~~Use quotes more, some stuff might sound like wikivoice, for eg, "lack of narrative weight", "lack of difficulty"~~
Can you expand the reviews a bit Done
- Will do both of these later when I'm home. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:04, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Admittedly not sure how Wikivoice factors in, since that's more focused on prose and misconstruing facts. The bits here are being presented as opinions of particular reviews and not as fact, and I've made sure to frame them as such. Additionally, I feel there aren't many areas where quotes directly improve understanding of the writer's thoughts, as many of them were very cut and dry with stating the good and bad (And many summarized them at the end). If there's any particular spots you want me to look at though, I can see what I can do. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
    - You are probably right, I'm just being over cautious

Fine

~~Why are the following reliable-~~

Fanbyte

Gematsu

Automaton Media

Some publisher/website names are not wikilinked, do that (those with articles, of course) Done
- All sites without wikilinks do not have articles. Fixed one I missed with Metacritic, but everything else is already handled. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:02, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- These are all listed as reliable at Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources with the exception of Automaton, which has been used without issue in other GANs in the past. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 12:03, 30 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  - Everything fixed. I'll pass it some time later in the day after a second readthrough. DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 07:46, 31 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Checking every 8th ref in general

Ref-1: re role-playing games. Players will adventure through
Ref-9: Players are assigned a Pokemon
Ref-17: The platform offered a lot more ... opened up a whole range of possibilities,
Ref-25: new Pokemon Presents would be taking place on June 24 (the surrounding refs attest that it is this pack)
Ref-34: 7 Good
Ref-41: haven't seen the entire story, but what I have seen is fun,it's the repetition elsewhere in the Wild Area that may lack the dazzle and excitement
Ref-49: Good 7/10
Ref-54: Including Legendary Pokémon ... a boon ... but it undercuts the world-building Pokémon has so diligently crafted ... capturing Legendary Pokémon is where The Crown Tundra shines, the Galarian Star tournament fails to live up to the potential ...

Well written, Pokelego999, not many changes needed. DoctorWhoFan91

Did the spot-check, everything came out fine, passing to GA. Well done, very easy read. Congratulations, Pokelego999, keep up the good work! DoctorWhoFan91 (talk) 18:34, 31 October 2024 (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, as shown by a source spot-check. 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:
· · ·