![]() | Galarian Corsola 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. Review: June 16, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Corsola is a single Pokémon species, with Galarian Corsola just being a variety. In my opinion it seems a little strange to limit the scope of the article to just the Galarian form. After all, if Galarian Corsola is notable, then by definition Corsola is too. I think it would make sense to move the page to Corsola and include more information about the species as a whole, even if the main focus is on the Galarian form because of the number of sources. Does anyone else have any opinions on this? Di (they-them) ( talk) 04:14, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Pokelego999 ( talk · contribs) 23:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Kung Fu Man ( talk · contribs) 21:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
So I did a light copyedit prior to this, to help fix some wording folow and also match other articles. However, I feel there's still some issues that need consideration:
Now the biggest issue: the reception section is a bit harder to get through. The separation between the paragraphs doesn't feel quite so clear, especially with the design discussion bleeding into both and the journal being split between both. If you could give it another onceover maybe that can help, it led to the point I had to make sure the journal entry cited was the same between both for example. All other sections are looking good, that one just tends to sadly stand out.
I'll keep going with the review after your response, I do want to say I feel this is a very well done article and an enlightening read!-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 21:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
![]() | Galarian Corsola 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. Review: June 16, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
![]() | This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Corsola is a single Pokémon species, with Galarian Corsola just being a variety. In my opinion it seems a little strange to limit the scope of the article to just the Galarian form. After all, if Galarian Corsola is notable, then by definition Corsola is too. I think it would make sense to move the page to Corsola and include more information about the species as a whole, even if the main focus is on the Galarian form because of the number of sources. Does anyone else have any opinions on this? Di (they-them) ( talk) 04:14, 8 June 2024 (UTC)
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Pokelego999 ( talk · contribs) 23:22, 11 June 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Kung Fu Man ( talk · contribs) 21:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)
So I did a light copyedit prior to this, to help fix some wording folow and also match other articles. However, I feel there's still some issues that need consideration:
Now the biggest issue: the reception section is a bit harder to get through. The separation between the paragraphs doesn't feel quite so clear, especially with the design discussion bleeding into both and the journal being split between both. If you could give it another onceover maybe that can help, it led to the point I had to make sure the journal entry cited was the same between both for example. All other sections are looking good, that one just tends to sadly stand out.
I'll keep going with the review after your response, I do want to say I feel this is a very well done article and an enlightening read!-- Kung Fu Man ( talk) 21:38, 16 June 2024 (UTC)