Talk:Xevious/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Indrian (talk · contribs) 20:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

It might take me a couple of days to get to this, but I would love to review this article on such an important game. Indrian (talk) 20:54, 13 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I hope I'm not coming off as impatient, but do you plan to review this soon? I'm fine with waiting if it's in your plans. Thanks. Namcokid47 (talk) 13:24, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Does not come off as impatient at all. I should have it reviewed before the end of this coming week. Indrian (talk) 14:47, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Ok, thanks. Namcokid47 (talk) 15:05, 25 May 2019 (UTC)[reply]
- Hey there, it's been about two months since I've seen any activity on this nomination page. Do you still plan to review it? Namcokid47 (talk) 18:28, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]
  - Yeah, I'm really sorry. Got hit with a big project in the real world that knocked me off course here. I should get to it in the next few days. If for some reason I don't and you want a new reviewer at that point, I will completely understand. Indrian (talk) 20:47, 4 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

@Indrian: @Namcokid47: I took a quick glance review, and I do have concerns. I'm not sure an Amazon page is considered a reliable source for Xevious VHS. In addition, the development section for the first paragraph doesn't explicitly state that the game they're working on is Xevious itself, so that needs to be clarified. I'm not sure if it's necessary to keep information on Endo developer on when he was hired, but the development section doesn't inform on what his role was for developing the game. The infobox says designer but the infobox should reflect what's on the article. Sales information should be in the Reception section, Release dates and ports should be kept in the Release section. If you want, i could take over the review if you feel comfortable with that.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 16:20, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I'd be okay with that. In the meantime I'll start fixing the issues you brought up.Namcokid47 (talk) 17:49, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Please do take it over. I took this with the best of intentions but got hit with real life right afterwards. Indrian (talk) 18:50, 24 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A few things that drew my attention. I'm not sure if critical acclaim is the right choice considering how few reviews there are of the game. Narusawa reference seems a little sparse, is that a book or is it a reference to another citation in the article? Could i get more clarification on that?Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 17:46, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Honestly that whole section should be bulked up with information, I didn't do a good job with that. I found a few print-based sources from around the game's original release which should help justify the "critical acclaim" the second paragraph says. Narusawa is also infact a book, which I've since made more clear in the article. Namcokid47 (talk) 18:41, 25 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Its looking pretty good. I'm still going to double-checking some areas.18:49, 25 July 2019 (UTC)

I still think the Development section needs work, but perhaps this isn't an issue for GA. I will promote it to GA now.Blue Pumpkin Pie (talk) 19:34, 27 July 2019 (UTC)[reply]