Talk:Fallout Online/GA1
Appearance
GA Review[edit]
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Famous Hobo (talk · contribs) 19:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 10:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
Hello! I'll be reviewing this article as part of the ongoing GAN backlog drive. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not) |
---|
|
Overall: |
· · · |
Initial comments[edit]
- It is possible that there is copyright violation in the article. Earwig's Copyvio Detector has reported 48% in similarity.
Will analyse this in depth later in the review.See below. - There are no cleanup banners, such as those listed at WP:QF, in the article.
- The article is stable.
- No previous GA reviews.
General comments[edit]
- Prose, spelling, and grammar checking.
- No issues were found in the lede.
- The rest of the article also looks good. I did not find any grammar errors.
- Checking whether the article complies with MOS.
- Add alt texts to the images in the article.
- The lede could be shortened to just two paragraphs, per MOS:LEADLENGTH. It meets the rest of the MOS:LEDE guideline.
- The article complies with the MOS:LAYOUT, MOS:WTW, and MOS:WAF guidelines. There are no embedded lists within the article, so I am skipping MOS:EMBED.
- Checking refs, verifiability, and whether there is original research.
- References section with a {{reflist}} template is present in the article.
- No referencing issues.
- Listed references are reliable. Good job on archiving the refs.
- Spotchecked Ref 2, 3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 19, 23–all verify the cited content. AGF on other citations.
- Checking potential copyvio.
- Seems to be a false positive. It picked up the quotes that are in text.
- Checking whether the article is broad in its coverage.
- For a cancelled game, this is a well-researched article.
- When was Interplay acquired by Titus Interactive?
- The article stays on the topic.
- Checking whether the article is presented from an NPOV standpoint.
- The article meets the criteria and is written in encyclopedic language.
- Checking whether the article is stable.
- As noted in the initial comments, the article has been stable.
- Checking images.
- All looks to be good.
Final comments[edit]
@Famous Hobo: There are only a couple of minor issues that need to be addressed. Other than that, the article is in a good shape. I'll put the review on hold for a week. Once the issues get addressed, I'll promote the article. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)