Talk:Speed Dreams/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Teancum (talk · contribs) 21:55, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Criteria

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

   B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:

   B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Comments

• Is it reasonably well written?

• Per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the article in an appropriate way according to the article size. Given the size of the article the lead is incredibly short
• layout sections that are short should be merged to their parent, and short paragraphs should also be merged. There are several instances where there are one-paragraph sections and very short paragraphs

• Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

• While it is well sourced, there is no indication that most of these sources pass reliable sources guidelines. Many a primary sources which are directly related to the project, and thus cannot be used to establish facts and notability, only to support it. Several more third-party reliable sources are needed.

• Is it broad in its coverage?

• The article provides excessive details per WP:GAMETRIVIA. Please see Halo 3 for a good example on what content is appropriate and what is too excessive in detail.

• Is it neutral?

• It seems to largely promote the game. The amount of detail, the lack of any real criticism in the Reception section, etc.
• For that matter, I couldn't find any reliable media outlets in the Reception games that had reviewed the game, and only one that is questionably reliable

• Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

• The amount of images given seems excessive. Again, the detail feels far too complex. Between the text and images it reads more like a technical document.
• Have these images been checked by an admin on Commons? I couldn't find any confirmation that the proper permissions had been given to make them freely available.

Unfortunately given the number of issues I can't pass this as a good article.