Power Drive Rally 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: March 23, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
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 |
Reviewer: Vrxces ( talk · contribs) 05:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Will take this one on as discussed earlier. Thanks for your patience!
VRXCES (
talk) 05:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Please find some comments below. Feel free to cross them out as you go, there's not that much. I will do a spot check on some of the sources when I can to wrap up the GAN assessment when I can. VRXCES ( talk) 05:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Does the article conform to the general standards of WP:VG articles including the WP:MOS? Pretty much by the book.
Is the article generally well-written? The quality of writing is great and above-average for GANs. I appreciate the concision. No issues from what I can see.
Is the article broad enough in its coverage? Absolutely. The article has a significant coverage of review sources and a sizable amount of sourcing on the development and release for the game.
Do the sources cited verify the text in the article? TBC. Some articles are WP:OFFLINE so I will need to do some digging.
Are media and links properly attributed and do not have copyright issues? Stock-standard non-free use templates are used correctly for images. Best practice is to explain why the image is needed for illustration, but as a general gameplay screenshot this is unlikely to be needed.
Any other personal opinions or miscellaneous feedback that may or may not be relevant to the nomination? Yes, some include:
Power Drive Rally 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: March 23, 2024. ( Reviewed version). |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||
|
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 |
Reviewer: Vrxces ( talk · contribs) 05:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Will take this one on as discussed earlier. Thanks for your patience!
VRXCES (
talk) 05:08, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Please find some comments below. Feel free to cross them out as you go, there's not that much. I will do a spot check on some of the sources when I can to wrap up the GAN assessment when I can. VRXCES ( talk) 05:37, 16 March 2024 (UTC)
Does the article conform to the general standards of WP:VG articles including the WP:MOS? Pretty much by the book.
Is the article generally well-written? The quality of writing is great and above-average for GANs. I appreciate the concision. No issues from what I can see.
Is the article broad enough in its coverage? Absolutely. The article has a significant coverage of review sources and a sizable amount of sourcing on the development and release for the game.
Do the sources cited verify the text in the article? TBC. Some articles are WP:OFFLINE so I will need to do some digging.
Are media and links properly attributed and do not have copyright issues? Stock-standard non-free use templates are used correctly for images. Best practice is to explain why the image is needed for illustration, but as a general gameplay screenshot this is unlikely to be needed.
Any other personal opinions or miscellaneous feedback that may or may not be relevant to the nomination? Yes, some include: