Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TenPoundHammer (talk · contribs) 00:53, 9 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

I've actually played this game quite a lot, so while I don't normally touch video game articles, I figured I might take a crack at it.

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   I did do a couple tweaks here and there to make things flow better.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

   I consulted WP:VGRS to make sure that every source cited was considered reputable for the sake of video game articles, and all of them passed.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   I feel the major points are sufficiently addressed. My only question would be if you could elaborate on the "Kill the past" thing.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   Good work! I'm a big fan of this game so I'm glad to see it getting some attention here.