Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Super Smash Bros. Brawl/1

Super Smash Bros. Brawl

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch article reassessment page

Result: Listed as a GA through WP:GAN. PeterSymonds | talk 13:12, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

The article is about a video game currently unreleased in NTSC territories and thus information is liable to change when the game does get released in such territories; thus the article fails criterion 5 (Stability). Not currently on Wikipedia:Good articles. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L13 ½-Raichu Soulknife)} 02:45, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

• Question. I can't figure out if the article legitimately passed GAN. There are two conflicting GA templates on the talk page. Who reviewed the article? Did the reviewer pass or fail the article? Majoreditor (talk) 04:49, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

Passed by User:Cheesefee, but I doubt it was a legitimate assessment. « ₣M₣ » 17:52, 9 March 2008 (UTC)

I've given it a hasty read. My initial reaction was favorable, although the lead could include more material on the game's reception. I'll try to look at it in detail later; if I had to shoot from the hip right now I'd say it meets GA standards. Majoreditor (talk) 01:06, 10 March 2008 (UTC)

• Nominate at GAN: If the original GA listing was suspect and the article was never on WP:GA, should it have a 'DGA' tag? As regards quality, I wouldn't have had a problem with upholding the original (albeit flawed) promotion. However, as we've moved past that, GAN would seem to be the sensible place for this. EyeSerene^TALK 12:17, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

  It originally went through an assessment on November 2, but due to the fact that the game was unreleased and the article was unstable, it was quickfailed. -Jéské ^{(v^_^v :L14 Grarrl Barbarian)} 17:57, 11 March 2008 (UTC)

• Passed by User talk:Redphoenix526. --haha169 (talk) 03:29, 23 March 2008 (UTC)