GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: DasallmächtigeJ ( talk · contribs) 10:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Will have a lot of time on my hands tomorrow (today‘s) morning and will try to do the entire review by then. Used to love this game as a kid, been looking forward to this!
From what I can tell at first glance, the article looks good!
(Note to anyone it may concern: it was past midnight in my timezone and I did not actually start reviewing anyways, so I will take the liberty of counting this for my backlog drive.) -- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 10:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Generally yes, however; the article is overly detailed in some section, which I will address in section 3 of this review. Some things that could/should be changed:
So all in all, a well-written article with a few minor flaws.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 11:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree All sources are reliable and check out, the nominator managed to find A LOT of sources togive a detailed account. As I will point out in section 3, partly the article is even a bit overly detailed.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 10:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Does the game have story or framing narrative? E.g., an explanation as to why they are racing?
The nominator managed to go into a great amount of detail here. To my mind, some of the sections, such as gameplay, are overly detailed (do we really need to know different coloured life bars indicate aggression? Or examples of which roles which production member played as a background character?), but not in a way that it is overly problematic.
However, I would suggest trimming some content down a bit, mainly in the gameplay and evelopment section. Here are a few examples as to what I mean, but both sections could generally be shortened by opting to summarize information that is spread across several sentences into one (or two):
Those are just two examples where things could be shortenend in the gameplay section.
-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 10:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree -- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree Considering that this is a dead franchise without any edit wars going on, yes.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree Everything about the pictures checks out.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
All in all, the article is thouroughly researched and definitely meets the GA criteria. However, the detailed research at times proves to be a bit too thourough. After some of the sections are a bit streamlined, this should definitely pass.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 11:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: DasallmächtigeJ ( talk · contribs) 10:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Will have a lot of time on my hands tomorrow (today‘s) morning and will try to do the entire review by then. Used to love this game as a kid, been looking forward to this!
From what I can tell at first glance, the article looks good!
(Note to anyone it may concern: it was past midnight in my timezone and I did not actually start reviewing anyways, so I will take the liberty of counting this for my backlog drive.) -- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 10:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Generally yes, however; the article is overly detailed in some section, which I will address in section 3 of this review. Some things that could/should be changed:
So all in all, a well-written article with a few minor flaws.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 11:01, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree All sources are reliable and check out, the nominator managed to find A LOT of sources togive a detailed account. As I will point out in section 3, partly the article is even a bit overly detailed.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 10:29, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Does the game have story or framing narrative? E.g., an explanation as to why they are racing?
The nominator managed to go into a great amount of detail here. To my mind, some of the sections, such as gameplay, are overly detailed (do we really need to know different coloured life bars indicate aggression? Or examples of which roles which production member played as a background character?), but not in a way that it is overly problematic.
However, I would suggest trimming some content down a bit, mainly in the gameplay and evelopment section. Here are a few examples as to what I mean, but both sections could generally be shortened by opting to summarize information that is spread across several sentences into one (or two):
Those are just two examples where things could be shortenend in the gameplay section.
-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 10:27, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree -- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree Considering that this is a dead franchise without any edit wars going on, yes.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
Agree Everything about the pictures checks out.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 09:59, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
All in all, the article is thouroughly researched and definitely meets the GA criteria. However, the detailed research at times proves to be a bit too thourough. After some of the sections are a bit streamlined, this should definitely pass.-- DasallmächtigeJ ( talk) 11:03, 1 March 2021 (UTC)