Squirtle is currently a Video games good article nominee. Nominated by Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) at 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Pokémon species |
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2024. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Squirtle article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Squirtle" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||
|
Passed. Appropriate references, gives a good explanation of what the creature is, and has competent sections on what role was played in the video games. I'm somewhat dissapointed the article did not posess a charteristics section like others I'd noted of this type, though. This may be attributed to the data on the creature. - Zero Talk 19:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
He's playable in ssbb -- 23.112.40.177 ( talk) 16:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Design and charicteristics section, paragraph 2 states "However, host of the show Pokémon Talk claims that Squirtles is based on squirrels, his evidence being that he, "Loves Nuts."" This refences an unofficial YouTube series and should be removed. Time Vault ( talk) 19:12, 4 November 2020 (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) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula ( talk · contribs) 14:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Might as well claim this too. :D
TWOrantulaTM (
enter the web) 14:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. 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). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. 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. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Pokelego999 ( talk · contribs) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Nominator: Pokelego999 ( talk · contribs) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Joseph Buell ( talk · contribs) 17:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
I submit this review of the 00:05, 21 April 2024 revision of
Squirtle.
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Everything is written concisely, correctly, and with necessary explanation of topics to be understood. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The article complies with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | References are placed after every researchable fact. | |
2b. 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). | All sources are reliable and credible. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | The authors argue nothing and only offer cited opinions of others. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Nothing, of images, information, or anything, is taken without appropriate citations. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Each main aspect is addressed and expounded on in concise, satisfactory detail. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | No aspect of Squirtle is focused on or mentioned too much. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | The article displays no bias that interferes with statements of facts. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Edits are fairly recent but not overwhelmingly often and never to be spiteful. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are used fairly and rightly attributed. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The two appropriate images provided are captioned perfectly. | |
7. Overall assessment. | Excellent article entry! A good article. |
Joseph Buell ( talk) 18:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC)Joseph Buell
Squirtle is currently a Video games good article nominee. Nominated by Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 ( talk) at 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC) An editor has indicated a willingness to review the article in accordance with the good article criteria. Further reviews are welcome from any editor who has not contributed significantly to this article (or nominated it), and can be added to the review page, but the decision whether or not to list the article as a good article should be left to the first reviewer. Short description: Pokémon species |
This article was nominated for deletion on 21 January 2024. The result of the discussion was keep. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Squirtle article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "Squirtle" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
This article is rated B-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
Passed. Appropriate references, gives a good explanation of what the creature is, and has competent sections on what role was played in the video games. I'm somewhat dissapointed the article did not posess a charteristics section like others I'd noted of this type, though. This may be attributed to the data on the creature. - Zero Talk 19:57, 11 June 2006 (UTC)
He's playable in ssbb -- 23.112.40.177 ( talk) 16:22, 19 October 2013 (UTC)
This
edit request has been answered. Set the |answered= or |ans= parameter to no to reactivate your request. |
In the Design and charicteristics section, paragraph 2 states "However, host of the show Pokémon Talk claims that Squirtles is based on squirrels, his evidence being that he, "Loves Nuts."" This refences an unofficial YouTube series and should be removed. Time Vault ( talk) 19:12, 4 November 2020 (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) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula ( talk · contribs) 14:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Might as well claim this too. :D
TWOrantulaTM (
enter the web) 14:01, 19 April 2024 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | ||
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | ||
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | ||
2b. 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). | ||
2c. it contains no original research. | ||
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | ||
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | ||
3b. 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. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | ||
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | ||
7. Overall assessment. |
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Nominator: Pokelego999 ( talk · contribs) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Nominator: Pokelego999 ( talk · contribs) 13:48, 16 April 2024 (UTC)
Reviewer: Joseph Buell ( talk · contribs) 17:22, 11 May 2024 (UTC)
I submit this review of the 00:05, 21 April 2024 revision of
Squirtle.
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Everything is written concisely, correctly, and with necessary explanation of topics to be understood. | |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The article complies with Wikipedia's Manual of Style. | |
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | References are placed after every researchable fact. | |
2b. 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). | All sources are reliable and credible. | |
2c. it contains no original research. | The authors argue nothing and only offer cited opinions of others. | |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Nothing, of images, information, or anything, is taken without appropriate citations. | |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | Each main aspect is addressed and expounded on in concise, satisfactory detail. | |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | No aspect of Squirtle is focused on or mentioned too much. | |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | The article displays no bias that interferes with statements of facts. | |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Edits are fairly recent but not overwhelmingly often and never to be spiteful. | |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | Images are used fairly and rightly attributed. | |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The two appropriate images provided are captioned perfectly. | |
7. Overall assessment. | Excellent article entry! A good article. |
Joseph Buell ( talk) 18:17, 11 May 2024 (UTC)Joseph Buell