Talk:DayZ (mod)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Shaun9876 (talk · contribs) 00:38, 20 October 2012 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	I'm not sure.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Again, I'm not sure.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	All the sources are reliable.
	2b. 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).	All the citations are correct.
	2c. it contains no original research.	No Original research I can see.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	Addresses most of the main aspects of the game.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	No clear bias I can see.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	No edit wars I can see in recent history.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Ghillie Suit pic needs a reason why it isn't replaceable with free media or replacement.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	They seem to contribute to the article.
	7. Overall assessment.	As I am a new-ish Reviewer, I want another opinion before a promotion.

In my opinion, the screenshot has one fundamental problem: I don't think it's actually well represenating for the gameplay. On Sept. 20 Canwin87 offered to provide a better one, but he still didn't. I guess I'll look for something better. --Niemti (talk) 19:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)

Second Opinion - Reading through this article, I was only looking for the elements the previous reviewer stated they were unsure about. The prose seems to meet GA standards and complies with the manual of style. I would note, however, that the reception section borders issues raised by editors before regarding the 'x said y, a said b' format. However, I would still say this article is at GA standards. I would like to see Niemti (or any other editor) source a better replacement of the ghillie suit picture that demonstrates gameplay a bit more (I believe it's a rendered production shot but I could be mistaken having never played DayZ or Arma2) -- Cabe6403 ^{(Talk•Sign)} 09:59, 5 November 2012 (UTC)

Anyway I just fixed a lot of things (again). --Niemti (talk) 19:49, 5 November 2012 (UTC)