Talk:Gran Turismo 5/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality:

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources:

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

C. No original research:
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects:

B. Focused:
Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias:
Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc:
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:
Overall:
Pass or Fail:

Issues found

There is one disambiguation link to Chinese people that should be clarified.
File:Gran Turismo 5 - Road cars racing at Nürburgring Nordschleife.jpg is an extremely large image per WP:NFCC. It also has no encyclopedic value, being more of a promotional shot.
File:Gran Turismo 5 customisation screen shot.jpg seems to be about customization, but the average reader will not be able to depict that this Challenger is in fact custom. If a screen of a customization menu is available and cannot be explained with prose, replace this screen with it. Otherwise this should be removed as it's also promotional.
The non-free rationales for all screenshots need beefing up significantly.
There are two dead links as seen here. Please replace them or get an archived version at http://www.archive.org if possible. If they cannot be replaced, remove them and any content that can't be supported by the other references.
Watch qualifiers at the start of sentences. (However, In regards to, etc)
Footnotes (reference links) should only go after puncuation. There are multiple instances, but an example is the reference right after the Laguna Seca track. Note that when moving the ref it should also be in numbered order, so in that case, put it between the period and the next footnote.
Gran Turismo 5 and GT5 should always be italicized, as should any game listed in the prose.
GT PSP should be listed in parentheses next to the first instance of a wikilink to Gran Turismo PSP, that way users know what GT PSP means.
Quotations are only for quoting actual text and should not be used to describe in-game content such as "Premium" cars. Simply capitalizing the item (if necessary) is sufficient.
If downloadable content has a specific name has a specific name such as Racing Car Pack, it should be italicized.
DLC is never defined. In the first instance, change 'DLC' to 'downloadable content (DLC)' so that non-gamers know what that means.
The lead should be heavily expanded to summarize all major points of the article, and references should be moved out of the lead per WP:LEADCITE.
WP:LAYOUT dictates that small paragraphs or sections should be merged. There are multiple instances of 1-2 line paragraphs that can simply be merged with another, and the 'Downloadable tracks' section can be merged with the 'Tracks' section.
The paragraph on track glitches is WP:GAMETRIVIA and should be removed. It is also unreferenced.
'Song Track Naming Competition' should be 'Song track naming competition' unless it is a proper noun.
Under the 'Other peripherals' section, who is G4?
Whole numbers under 10 should be spelled out as words, except when in lists, tables or infoboxes (WP:NUMERAL)
The Reception section could use major expansion and cleanup given the size of the article and popularity of the game. Also note that publications "can't talk". In other words (for example), IGN didn't say the game had "the series' now trademark zombie A.I.". Martin Robinson of IGN did.
What makes the following sources a reliable source? -- Consoles+, DigitalBattle, InsidePS3, GamersGlobal, GamingMedia, Gamingreality, Lens of Truth, Online Race Driver, PlayStation LifeStyle, PS3BLOG, PSX Extreme, The Sixth Axis, touchline.tv
"Golden Joystick Awards 2011 - Best Racing Game (Won)" can be moved into the infobox with all the other awards.
This 'reference' to an image should be replaced with the actual magazine reference.
While GT Planet is an extremely popular site, care should be taken in the future as it might be challenged as a reference. I will note that it's used FAR too often to pass WP:GAN as it's not confirmed as reliable, and therefore should be used minimally/replaced with something reliable where possible. 23 uses of this references is just too many, and on that along it could fail GAN.
Wikis, such as this ref, should never be used as a source. In this case the reference before it covers everything, so this can simply be removed.
The references are a bit of a mess. Some are bare URLs, some have a publisher one way, others another (example: Game Informer vs www.gameinformer.com -- the former should be used). The date format should also be consistent per WP:DATE. Authors need to be added where possible, as well as both the date of publication and the access date.
The community forum links in the External links section should be removed per WP:FANSITE.

I did not do an in-depth review of the prose given the amount of other issues. This article has a lot of potential, and I hope to see it pass GAN someday (I'm a big GT fan!), but unfortunately today is not that day. In addition to fixing the above I'd highly recommend having it looked at by Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors to improve the article's prose. Please feel free to renominate this once the issues have been addressed, but there are just too many to fix at the moment.

✗ Fail -- Reviewer: Teancum (talk · contribs) 13:26, 29 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]