Talk:Hatoful Boyfriend/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: SuperHamster (talk · contribs) 00:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Silver seren: I'll be glad to review this (and this will be my first GA review) - quite the interesting game! ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

Checklist to pass, based off of the good article criteria:

Well-written:
- Clear and concise:
- No copyright problems:
- Spelling and grammar are correct:
- Complies with the manual of style guidelines (lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation):

Verifiable with no original research:
- Contains a list of all references, in accordance with the styling guidelines:
- All in-line citations are from reliable sources:
- Citations done correctly for living persons or science-based articles (when applicable):
- Contains no original research:

Broad in its coverage:
- Addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail:

Neutral:
- Represents viewpoints fairly with due weight and without bias:

Stable:
- Does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

Illustrations:
- Images are adequate and relevant to represent the topic, and have suitable captions:
- Images are appropriately tagged with their copyright status and, if applicable, fair use rationales for non-free content:

Overall:
- Pass/Fail:

Comments

@Silver seren: I know this game is currently listed in the Humble Bundle, and has got some coverage (particularly with their...interesting...pillow case) if that's worth investigating for sources and updating the article with. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 00:44, 17 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Added. Silver seren^C 02:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I have tagged File:Hatoful Boyfriend screenshot.png for automatic size reduction by a bot. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done, image reduced. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:53, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The gameplay section mentions characters not yet introduced in the article (such as when explaining additions to later versions of the game, or specifying characters needed to trigger certain things). I think this is both confusing (coming before the characters' introduction section) and unnecessary detailing for a gameplay description. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Names removed and trimmed the detail a bit. Silver seren^C 02:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The Bad Boys Love plot summary is in-depth and well-written, but it's a bit too detailed and lengthy for the article. Would be worth looking into and trimming excessive details whenever possible. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 04:12, 18 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The sequel, HolidayStar, is covered in the lead, but only has a couple mentions scattered through the rest of the article - the sequel should ideally be covered in the body, too. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 23:53, 20 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Info added. There's not much to go with though, since there was no official release. It didn't get much coverage. Hopefully Devolver does an official release for it at some point, which will prompt more coverage. Silver seren^C 02:04, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

As for Bad Boys Love, i'm not sure how it can be trimmed that much. It is basically the entire plot and has to weave in the backstories of about 10 characters from all of their routes. Silver seren^C 02:05, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Fair enough - thanks for the rest of the changes! Will look at again and offer any final input. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@Silver seren: I noticed that File:Hatoful_Boyfriend_screenshot.png is from the older version of the game; I imagine a screenshot of the remake would be more appropriate? I've got a screenshot of the same scene from the newer edition ready to upload if you agree. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 19:45, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

@SuperHamster: Fine by me. I don't really have an opinion either way on which one is used. The one from the remake probably looks better though. Silver seren^C 20:24, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I also wouldn't mind have a side-by-side comparison of the two images; I think it would be good to show for the sake of commentary, which I feel would meet our fair use requirements. ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 20:27, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Whatever you'd prefer. Silver seren^C 20:47, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Done ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

✓ Pass: Everything looks good to me, very impressed with the depth of the article and all the requirements seem to be met. Thanks for the nomination and the work you've put into it (along with anyone else who might be reading this, who has worked on the article). Cheers, ~SuperHamster Talk Contribs 21:32, 21 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]