I am failing this page, as it seems much too short and unreferenced. Bettering the Wiki ( talk) 15:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I meant there does not seem to be enough information. Bettering the Wiki ( talk) 16:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Here's a breakdown of where this is on the GA criteria:
This article has very few flaws, and should be passed as a GA. the event horizon ( t • c) 19:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry but I'm not seeing a C-class article here let alone a suitable GA candidate. There's at least one whopping gap in information and a lot of the text is meaningless to an information gatherer. Some observations:
So in the big picture: of the three major sections which virtually all video game articles should contain (gameplay, development/history and reception), two are missing entirely and one contains relatively little suitable info (history). One of the further sections needs a major overhaul (places) and the other could probably do with merging (sponsorship). Realistically this isn't a GA candidate, it would be unfair to expect the article's contributors to do this kind of work within a week. The videogame project's peer reviews and assessment dept. are there if further advice is needed and I'd heartily recommend them.
Someone
another
10:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Note I've got my wires crossed and posted this on a long-dead GA review, will tweak and cross post to a new GA review. Someone another 15:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
I am failing this page, as it seems much too short and unreferenced. Bettering the Wiki ( talk) 15:19, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
I meant there does not seem to be enough information. Bettering the Wiki ( talk) 16:00, 21 August 2008 (UTC)
Here's a breakdown of where this is on the GA criteria:
This article has very few flaws, and should be passed as a GA. the event horizon ( t • c) 19:23, 13 September 2008 (UTC)
Sorry but I'm not seeing a C-class article here let alone a suitable GA candidate. There's at least one whopping gap in information and a lot of the text is meaningless to an information gatherer. Some observations:
So in the big picture: of the three major sections which virtually all video game articles should contain (gameplay, development/history and reception), two are missing entirely and one contains relatively little suitable info (history). One of the further sections needs a major overhaul (places) and the other could probably do with merging (sponsorship). Realistically this isn't a GA candidate, it would be unfair to expect the article's contributors to do this kind of work within a week. The videogame project's peer reviews and assessment dept. are there if further advice is needed and I'd heartily recommend them.
Someone
another
10:27, 30 October 2008 (UTC)
Note I've got my wires crossed and posted this on a long-dead GA review, will tweak and cross post to a new GA review. Someone another 15:21, 30 October 2008 (UTC)