Talk:Space Run/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 12:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I'll have this finished today. JAGUAR  12:43, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Initial comments

• The lead needs to be expanded slightly to comply per WP:LEADLENGTH. It needs to mention more parts about plot, development (if there is any) and the reception it received from critics

• Add mention of mixed reviews and sequel. -- ferret (talk) 18:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

• The infobox image should have a caption, like "Official cover art"
• "The player acts as pilot for a cargo ship" - how about The player assumes the role as a pilot of a cargo ship?
• I would recommend merging the second and third paragraphs into one, to improve prose flow
• "Reputation, displayed as stars, is rewarded based whether or not" - are rewarded

• Reputation is the subject and singular, is is correct. -- ferret (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

• "Accompanied by the android, Adaam-12" - link Android (robot)
• "located in Lyon, France." - link Lyon
• "Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from critics" - how about It received an aggregate score of 73 from Metacritic, which assigns a weighted average score out of 100 to reviews from critics
• "PC Gamer scored the game 69 out of 100" - needs italicisation
• "The best part of the game in their view was the time bonus, which is necessary to earn full reputation" - tad informal, try The reviewer considered the best part of the game as the time bonus, which is deemed necessary to earn full reputation
• The legacy section is too short, try merging it with a sub-section under reception?

• Merged into dev section. -- ferret (talk) 18:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

• No dead links
• No dab links

Not a bad article considering the lack of coverage, which I totally understand as I used to write a load of obscure 80s games! I done a search for any other reviews and PC Gamer and GameSpot were the only ones considered reliable, so I suppose that can't be helped. Once all of the above are addressed then I'll take another look at this. Please let me know if you have any questions. I'll leave this on hold. JAGUAR  18:42, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

First pass of comments implemented. -- ferret (talk) 18:45, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Those were all of my comments, I see why it confuses people when I put "Initial comments" but that's a bad habit I've been doing since 2011! JAGUAR  18:47, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

Tidied up some more. -- ferret (talk) 18:51, 15 April 2016 (UTC)

I see that all of the issues have been dealt with, so this now meets the GA criteria. Well done! JAGUAR  20:12, 15 April 2016 (UTC)