Talk:Mr. Driller Drill Spirits

Mr. Driller Drill Spirits has been listed as one of the Video games good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 15, 2020. (Reviewed version).

Video games Low‑importance

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game

Low

This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks:

Summary of Video games WikiProject open tasks

AfDs

Carlton Wilborn (1 participant)
Cossacks (video games series) (2 participants)
Rat Race (video game) (7 participants)
Red Barrels (3 participants)
The Campaign Trail (Web Game) (24 participants)
Paper doll (video games) (6 participants)
TheoTown (10 participants; relisted)
Old Grandma Hardcore (6 participants; relisted)
WePlay AniMajor (2 participants; relisted)
Zero Hour (video game) (6 participants; relisted)

Merge discussions

Other discussions

No major discussions

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mr. Driller Drill Spirits/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: DasallmächtigeJ (talk · contribs) 14:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Going to review this over the weekend, as it seems to be a very well-written article with a managable workload.--DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 14:06, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

1. Is it well-written?

Yes, only a few minor points I would like to adress...

Lede

I would either remove "drilling" from the lede or make it a point to mention that the characters operate drillers (or are drilling robots?)

Gameplay

does the game have an actual story that could be summarized here? It seems to have rather fleshed out characters for this type of game...
...taking advantage of the Nintendo DS' dual screens... -->basically the same sentence as in development later on. One of the two shuld be rephrased.

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

Copyvio etc. come up negative. The article is very well researched, all sources, including magazines, are archived and available, all information seems to be fatual (can't say anything about the Japanese sources though)

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

As far as coverage of the game itself is concerned, yes, it is extremely detailed. Yet, shouldn't there be a section about (direct?) sequels/future installments?

4. Is it neutral?

Yes.

5. Is it stable?

Yes.

6. Is it illustrated?

Yes.

Conclusion

Overall, a great piece of work. Should easily pass, if the points above are adressed.--DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 14:23, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@DasallmächtigeJ:: Fixed the issues you addressed. There really isn't much of a story to this game (or barely one), so I didn't include it. Namcokid 47 ^(Contribs) 20:07, 14 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]

ALright, article is passed.--DasallmächtigeJ (talk) 09:44, 15 February 2020 (UTC)[reply]