Jump to content

Talk:Tetris Classic

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.


GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Tetris Classic/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 11:41, 10 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I may use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

[edit]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]
That's really only the procedure if the staff is independently notable (i.e. Shigeru Miyamoto or Yuji Naka) and/or if the game is an indie title of a particular vision (i.e. Toby Fox). Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 15:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]

General

[edit]

Review meta comments

[edit]
All points have been addressed. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 15:53, 24 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Did you know nomination

[edit]
The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by CSJJ104 (talk19:57, 10 September 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Improved to Good Article status by Cat's Tuxedo (talk). Self-nominated at 17:34, 25 August 2022 (UTC).[reply]

  • This is good to go -- it's not every day that you actually have the full PDF of the old magazine article to review! Meets the good article requirement, is long enough, the hook is cited in the prose, and is within policy. It has an neutral point of view, has overall adequate sourcing, and is free of copyvio, plagiarism, and close paraphrasing. Nomader (talk) 19:42, 25 August 2022 (UTC)[reply]