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

Hi, I'll be assessing this article for GA class promotion and will outline any queries/suggestions here in due course. Someoneanother 22:37, 7 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Thanks for nominating the article, it's been a very good read. There are some issues with the prose and I have to draw a small question mark over the article's stability. Here's some points, please bear in mind I still need to check all internal and external links so there may be others.

• Stability - though the article's hardly unstable, have editors agreed on this current build? If this nom. had sat in the queue for a week or two this probably wouldn't need to be asked, but since we're here now.
  • The most recent changes were because the primary editor rewrote the entire page. But the build seems alright.
• The image of the original game (Samus revealed) IMO isn't so vital to the development section that it couldn't be relocated somewhere else like Appearances - in the series and right-aligned, having left-aligned images under level 2 headers isn't desirable and it's also a little big for the development section.
  • Moved.
• Could the development text be split into two roughly equal paragraphs, or could the lonely sentence on the end not be added to form a single paragraph?
  • Rewrote it.
• The prose issues stem almost solely from the characteristics section, which is very in-universe and in some cases follows the source too closely in terms of flowery language.
  • Done some rewriting. See if anything else's needed.
• "After infusing her with Chozo DNA, Samus trained with them as a warrior and received an armored suit created by the Chozo[7] called the Power Suit.[1] A biological uniform,[1] it entwines itself with Samus's body, mind, and soul.[7]" This section is a little awkward. I'd suggest something like: "Samus was infused with Chozo DNA, then trained as a warrior and given one of the alien race's artifacts; a suit of armor. It is a biological uniform called the Power Suit, which entwines itself with Samus's mind and body." Thoughts? In particular removing the term 'soul', which is meaningless really, results in a more workable description.
  • Replaced.
• "in the year 20X5 C.C.," this is the only year from the game's timeline in the entire section, since there's no other years to anchor it to why not cut it?
  • Cut.
• "Samus destroys Mother Brain, in a scene that is "more than a little emotionally charged"." quotes need cites directly after.
  • Everything after "computer." in that paragraph is covered by the following ref. But I'll put one after the quote.
• "Defined by the mysterious lifeforms known as Metroids, Samus's career often cross paths with them. She has proven time and again that she is the galaxy's best hope against this threat.[4]" The first sentence seems a little.. hollow? We've already read about metroids so having "mysterious lifeforms known as metroids" here is a little odd, and we know the games typically involve metroids in one form or another. The second sentence sounds like comic-book superhero blurb and isn't adding anything. Would you consider cutting them?
  • Moved, but if you feel like a detailed description for the Metroids is needed, warn me.
• Under appearances: "At the end, she battles Mother Brain" end of what?
• "Galactic Federation once again taps Samus to execute" overly casual term.
• "Locating the now fully grown Metroid, Samus faces off once again against Mother Brain." same again.

That's it, only a few issues really, placing the article on hold. If you take a look at the above for me I'll focus on those links. Someoneanother 23:43, 11 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Internal and external links checked, no problems, made a few more tweaks (see the edit history). The only thing I would ask is that you wikilink the publisher in the web citations at least the first time that particular publisher appears in the references, if not every time just to have it done with. Someoneanother 01:00, 12 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Done them. Anything else? igordebraga ≠ 00:40, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]

That's great, many thanks. Samus is now a Good Article. Someoneanother 00:39, 13 April 2009 (UTC)[reply]