Jump to content

Talk:Mass Effect 2: Overlord

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Good articleMass Effect 2: Overlord has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones
DateProcessResult
July 9, 2013Good article nomineeListed

RfC: Mass Effect series capitalization of alien race names

[edit]

You're invited to join the discussion at Talk:Illusive Man#Request for comment. czar · · 03:06, 6 June 2013 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mass Effect 2: Overlord/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Red Phoenix (talk · contribs) 00:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

All right, let's get started, shall we?

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
    I had to tweak one duplicate use of the word "pack", but otherwise the prose reads reasonably well. There are a few patches that could use a little tweaking from an experienced copyeditor for sentence fluency, but none of these are major enough to get in the way of this review.
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
    Very nicely done with the sources. All appear to be reliable per WP:VG/S per their usages in the article, and everything appears quite well referenced. Aesthetically, I'd double-check to make sure all references come in number order when using more than one in a sentence, but again, not in the way of this review.
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
    Hits all the major points of a video game article: plot, gameplay, development and release, and reception. More than enough real-world content to balance off the fictional elements.
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
    No point of view issues I can see.
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
    Does not appear to be the subject of edit wars.
  6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
    Two fair-use images. Both have good rationales and are used appropriately. No other images are used.
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:
    Well done! I'd say we have enough to pass right away. Let me know if you have questions.

Red Phoenix build the future...remember the past... 00:07, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You just beat me to this one, Red Phoenix! Congrats, Niwi, on another quality contribution. -- Khazar2 (talk) 00:21, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to both of you. I wasn't expecting this review to be so good and quick. Cheers :) --Niwi3 (talk) 09:25, 9 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]

[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Mass Effect 2: Overlord. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

checkY An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

  • If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
  • If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 00:06, 21 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Mass_Effect_2:_Overlord&oldid=1208855444"