Talk:Xenosaga Episode III/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 08:15, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   Does the game ever explain what "AGWS" stands for?

   I've added that.

   I was going to say the first instance of KOS-MOS (in the first "Setting" paragraph) isn't Wikilinked, rather the third mention (in the "Characters" section) is. However, is seems unclear from the wording whether there are multiple KOS-MOS androids or only one. Can you clarify this? And Wikilink the first mention of the character KOS-MOS? The character is also mentioned in the second paragraph in the "Setting" section

   I've clarified; KOS-MOS the character is a prototype model of the KOS-MOS battle android line. Also, I've fixed it so the characters are wikilinked in their first mention.

   "a landmass that seemingly originating from Lost Jerusalem" - grammar error

   Fixed.

   "who tended him with he was injured" - same here

   Fixed.

   "reached #2" - change to either No. 2 or number 2 as per MOS:HASH

   Done.

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail: Very close to passing. Placing on hold. Freikorp (talk) 09:07, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

   @Freikorp: I've attended to all the issues you raised with the prose. --ProtoDrake (talk) 10:17, 10 September 2017 (UTC)

   Looks good. Happy to pass this now, though after re-reading I've noticed the year of release is not mentioned in the lead. I think that should be added. Freikorp (talk) 15:49, 10 September 2017 (UTC)