Talk:Sophitia Alexandra/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Cukie Gherkin (talk · contribs) 00:48, 23 May 2023 (UTC)

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

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

   b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a. (reference section):

   b. (citations to reliable sources):

   c. (OR):

   d. (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a. (major aspects):

   b. (focused):

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:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

Lead

1. Should have some more info on development
2. Xiphos is only in the infobox
3. Athens, Greece is only in the infbox
4. Aya Takemura is only in the infobox
5. Her voice actresses is only in the infobox

Conception and design

1. Like with Voldo, should clarify that it's not unique that she was worked on solely by one team
2. "for male fans. It would also be a terrible change" this is a little confusing; it sounds like they're saying it didn't happen.
   1. I think I addressed everything, how's that?

The changes to the stuff I listed looks good. I got some more now:

1. Unsure about how RS is done with merch; would it be reasonable to have only merch cited by an RS? Also, is souledge.jp reliable?
   1. That's honestly the best source I have for the merch sadly, a lot of times it isn't covered. SoulEdge.jp however was Namco's own website for the game before they took it down.
2. Reception should be paraphrased somewhat more
   1. Fixed I think?
3. The voice actresses aren't mentioned in the article; is there no info regarding their performances?
   1. Should be fixed now.
4. Infobox image looks a bit scuffed, and the rationale could be improved a bit.
   1. Replaced and redid rationale.

Looks good.