Talk:Star Wars Jedi Knight: Dark Forces II/GA1
GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
This article is in decent shape, but it needs more work before it becomes a Good Article.
- Is it well written?
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
- I noticed that dates in the references are linked and it would be best if they were unliked, per here. In the lead, "GameRankings ---> "Game Rankings" and "MetaCritic" ---> "Metacritic". In the Story section, "The story is set one year after the events in Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi" ---> "The story is set one year after the events in Star Wars Episode VI: Return of the Jedi (1983)", so that it can provide context for the reader.
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- Is it verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check?
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
- C. It contains no original research:
- Is TrustedReview and The Adrenaline Vault reliable sources?
- D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Image:JediKnight-cover.jpg is missing a FUR.
- B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- If the statements above can be answered, I will pass the article. Good luck with improving this article!
- Pass or Fail:
-- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:38, 22 December 2008 (UTC)
- 1b - Done
- 2c - Personally I think they are. I don't know if they have been discussed within the project to whether they're considered reliable or not. Trustedreviews was held up to the scrutiny of a Featured Article review for PlayStation 3 and it was included. Adrenaline Vault has a weaker case as it is run by volunteers but the site does seem to have some sort of a structured editorial review system in place. I can try to dig up an alternative source if required.
- Only reason I asked is since I never saw these sources before, per me reviewing video game related articles, and I wasn't sure on their "reliability". But, I due warn, if you want to take this article to FA, I would make sure to see if they are reliable indeed. -- ThinkBlue (Hit BLUE) 22:36, 23 December 2008 (UTC)
- 6a - Done