Talk:Dirge of Cerberus: Final Fantasy VII/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: ProtoDrake (talk · contribs) 12:38, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Right, I'll take this on. Expect something in a day or two. --ProtoDrake (talk) 12:52, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Criteria[edit]

Good Article Status - Review Criteria
Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) 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);[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) 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.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Review[edit]

  1. Well-written:
    2. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (prose) Apart from the issues I've highlighted below, very good. Pass Pass
    (b) (MoS) Consistent read from beginning to end. Pass Pass
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (references) All references good. Pass Pass
    (b) (citations to reliable sources) All sources cited acceptable. Pass Pass
    (c) (original research) All information cited. Pass Pass
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (major aspects) It all seems present and correct. Pass Pass
    (b) (focused) Each section keeps to the point, and does it well. Pass Pass
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
    5. Notes Result
    No obvious bias. Good to see on a game that is a bit of an oddity in the series. Pass Pass
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. Notes Result
    No signs of edit warring or content disputes. Pass Pass
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. Criteria Notes Result
    (a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales) All respects correct. Pass Pass
    (b) (appropriate use with suitable captions) All suitable for the sections they are in. Pass Pass

Result[edit]

Result Notes
Pass Pass It was a bit of a chore, but it's very good to see this game enter the ranks of GAs.

Discussion[edit]

A few minor points for you. First is in the gameplay section: the piece on Vincent's Limit Breaks doesn't have an accompanying reference. It is not necessary as far as I can tell, but it is probably preferable. The majority are in the plot section and purely matters of grammar and repetition: in the fifth paragraph, the piece where Vincent finds Weiss has one too many 'howevers' there, making the thing read in a clumsy fashion. In the sentence describing Hojo's possession of Weiss, it's not entirely clear which 'he' is which: maybe using 'the latter' in the part referring to Weiss would remove the possible confusion for novices. The last sentence of the sixth paragraph is missing an 'is' between 'Vincent' and 'found'. In the last paragraph, the extra 'however' appears unnecessary. One final note: combining the second and third paragraphs might be an idea to streamline things a little. One last little issue: in the development section, there is a minor error in the sentence "Hideki Imaizumi, the producer of Crisis Core, liked the mysterious role of G so much, he decided to expand his character in that game." Maybe the comma between 'much' and 'he' should be the word 'that'. That's all I can really find on the first lookthrough. --ProtoDrake (talk) 16:11, 28 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Second note: looked through the references, and I'm not sure the direct link to Amazon for the game's Ultimate Hits version is suitable. If it could be possible to find a secondary source that said the same thing, it would be useful. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:06, 29 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
I'll make those changes.Lucia Black (talk) 20:44, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]
On another note, you don't wait to pass or fail the review. You can show what passes and what fails already and if it can be fixed soon, then you allow the changes to be made before closing the review.Lucia Black (talk) 21:29, 30 September 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, I'll try again, this time focusing entirely on the grammar issues. I've run through it again and decided on the ones that really need to be fixed.

  • 1: "However, he is surprised to find Weiss slumped in his chair, dead. However, as Omega begins to manifest itself, Weiss seems to revive, and confronts Vincent." The first 'however' makes it look clumsy.
  • 2: "Omega sprouts wings and tries to ascend from the planet but Vincent manages to destroy it and disapearing in the process." I know this is your most recent edit, but it's clumsily worded: the second 'and' should be a comma, and it's 'disappearing'.
  • 3: "He then found by Shelke outside the cave, and she tells him that everyone else is waiting for him." It would sound a lot better if it was "He is 'then' found by Shelk".

Well, there we are. I've gone through the article again and that's all that really needs doing before I can pass it. --ProtoDrake (talk) 08:28, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

  • Made those three edits. --PresN 22:45, 3 October 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Additional Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Dirge_of_Cerberus:_Final_Fantasy_VII/GA1&oldid=1038143807"