Talk:God of War: Ghost of Sparta/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Hahc21 (talk · contribs) 03:31, 13 August 2012 (UTC)

Review

Lead

• Will go back to this later

Gameplay

• "it features a fixed camera from the third-person view" >> "it features a third person fixed camera view"

Fixed.

• "The game features new weapons, magical powers" >> "It additionally features new weapons, magical powers"

Fixed.

• "gameplay than its PSP" >> "gameplay that its handheld"

• I consider that "handheld" is a more general word.

Fixed.

• "Kratos acquiring an addition weapon" >> "acquiring an additional weapon"

Fixed (not sure how I missed that).

• "and in this game acts as the "Rage" feature."

• Could we elaborate a little more to give the reader a more general apporach as to what is the rage feature?

Added a tidbit to the end of the sentence. Does it need more elaboration?

• "return and are found in plain, non-colored chests."

• What does "return" means here? :)
• Oh i think what deos it mean now, but i think you'd have to rewrite the sentence, as it is quite confusing. Also, pointing that it is a returning feature from a past game is quite needless, i think.

Made it "return from previous installments." I like the idea of informing about returning features. It's a nice little extra thing to know, at least I think. --JDC808 (talk) 04:17, 16 August 2012 (UTC)

Development

• ""state-of-the-art visual technologies" that allow" >> shouldn't it be "allowed"?
• "members received early access to the demo." >> "to it" instead of "to the demo"

Fixed.

Release

• Good

Reception

• "storytelling and sheer wow factor" >> "wow factor"?

It's part of the quoted text. I believe it's referring to how the games have those "wow" moments.

• Game Informer should go italiziced

Italicized.

Soundtrack

• " (41 minutes and 8 seconds in length)" you have it on the infobox.

Removed (forgot to remove that when I added the infobox). --JDC808 ♫ 03:45, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

References

• Will check them later. Regards. — ΛΧΣ21™ 02:25, 21 August 2012 (UTC)

• I see different date formats, keep consistency.

Are you referring to how the article date format is different from the accessdate format?

What I say is that you must keep the same date format throughout all the article. But you can chose different formats for the article body and the references. The issue is that several dates and accessdates within the references have different formats. An example:

• Pereira, Chris (October 25, 2010). "God of War: Ghost of Sparta Review". 1UP. News Corporation. Retrieved 2010-10-25.
• Evans, Shawn (June 21, 2010). "E3’10: God of War: Ghost of Sparta hands-on impressions – Kratos fanboys rejoice!". Gamer Limit. Retrieved 2010-06-28.

There is two different formats there. — ΛΧΣ21™ 03:28, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Okay. The formatting was actually brought up in the FAC for Chains of Olympus. They said (as per MOS:DATEUNIFY) that the date of the article should be spelled the same as the articles text (e.g. June 21, 2010 or 21 June 2010) and should be consistent but the accessdate can use that or the hyphenated format that's currently there (and be consistent amongst those). --JDC808 ♫ 04:19, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

• Most references seem to be perfect, although, i see some with work/publisher and other with only the work. If you can add the publisher for the most references as possible, it would be better. Of course, this is not required for GA.

When checking for the publisher on those few, it had the same name as the work (e.g. Game Limit is the publisher and also the work. Do I have to list it twice?)

No, in that case, you only write it once :) — ΛΧΣ21™ 01:08, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Nothing else to note. — ΛΧΣ21™ 16:01, 23 August 2012 (UTC)

Verdict

Ok. So, I think all have been fixed, so here's my verdict.

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Regards. — ΛΧΣ21™ 20:21, 24 August 2012 (UTC)

Awesome. Thanks again. :) --JDC808 ♫ 02:59, 25 August 2012 (UTC)