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

Nominator: Chlod (talk · contribs) 20:09, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 20:32, 9 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Will review this. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:32, 9 August 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:
· · ·

• There is unlikely any copyright violation in the article. Earwig's Copyvio Detector has reported only 12.3% in similarity.
• There are no cleanup banners, such as those listed at WP:QF, in the article.
• The article is stable.
• No previous GA reviews.

• Prose, spelling, and grammar checking.
  • "a global catastrophe which" → "a global catastrophe that"
  • "both predetermined or chosen by the player" – replace both with either
  • "his parents working abroad" → "his parents, who are working abroad"
  • "which causes their memories" – cause, not causes
  • "sends the two" → "sends them"
  • "parts of the other's childhood" → "parts of each other's childhood" (also mentioned later in the text, so replace it there too)
  • "and both him and Nicole" → "and both he and Nicole"
  • "Release of the game" → "The release of the game"
• Checking whether the article complies with MOS.
  • The article complies with the MOS:LEDE, MOS:LAYOUT, MOS:WTW, and MOS:WAF guidelines. There are no embedded lists within the article, so I am skipping MOS:EMBED. Overall, the lede's length is okay, and it summarises the article, the article has appropriate sections, and there are no biased words in the article.
    • I feel like another sentence in the lede about the game's development would be good to add.
• Checking refs, verifiability, and whether there is original research.
  • References section with a ((reflist)) template is present in the article.
  • No referencing issues.
  • All references are reliable. Good job on archiving them.
  • Spotchecked Ref 2, 3, 6, 8, 11, 14–all verify the cited content. AGF on other citations.
    • Infobox: R.V.A., Joshua James San Juan, Dave Von David, Dominique Duran, Gerald Dizon, Adel Garangan, Sharlene Yap, Harold Pongco, and Kyle Patrick Naval are unsourced and not mentioned in the text.
  • Copyvio already checked.
• Checking whether the article is broad in its coverage.
  • I've found two more sources that you could potentially add to the article (if they cover something that is not already in the article). See: Digital Trends and PSU.
  • "Despite the setting, Nulud wanted the setting to be universal" Why?
  • The rest of the article addresses the main aspects, and it stays focused on the topic.
• Checking whether the article is presented from an NPOV standpoint.
  • The article meets the criteria and is written in encyclopedic language.
• Checking whether the article is stable.
  • As noted in the initial comments, the article has been stable.
• Checking images.
  • Images are properly licensed.
  • Optional: Add alt text to the image in the Gameplay section.

@Chlod: Good job on the article! Once the issues get addressed, I'll promote the article. The review will be on hold for a week. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:31, 10 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]