GA Review

[edit]

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

Nominator: Johnson524 (talk · contribs) 04:59, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: LunaEclipse (talk · contribs) 23:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hello! This is my first GA review, so I might do some missteps here and there. Trying to step out my comfort zone to see what works and what doesn't for me. I will start adding comments in a few days. lunaeclipse(talk) 23:50, 1 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@LunaEclipse: Thank you so much for taking up this review! I hope you at very least find the article an interesting read. Cheers from North Carolina 😁 Johnson524 00:34, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. 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):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. 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:

· · ·

Prose & formatting

[edit]

Verifiability

[edit]

Broadness

[edit]

Neutrality

[edit]

Stability

[edit]

Media

[edit]

@Johnson524: I will put this article on hold for the time being. The article is in good shape, but has some issues with verifiability.lunaeclipse(talk) 21:07, 2 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not the nominator but tried to remove a bit of YouTube research from the article where possible. However I'm not familiar enough with the topic to do a more comprehensive removal of the YouTube/Maxout.gg sources. The input of the original nominator @Johnson524 would be useful at this point. StewdioMACK (talk) 08:26, 5 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@LunaEclipse: OK, minus a little more removal of the aGameScout source, all of your listed improvements are complete 🙂 I did ask for clarification on one of the things you said above if you could take a look at that. Sorry for the three day delay, life got really busy for a moment, but I should respond quickly to any new feedback now its the weekend. Thank you for your review and patience, and thank you @StewdioMACK: for helping out a bit too. Cheers! Johnson524 15:58, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]
OK, all suggestions above have been replied to as of now. If you have any more suggestions, especially around better grammar/ways to word a sentence, please let me know. Cheers! Johnson524 19:59, 6 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]