Talk:Muramasa: The Demon Blade/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Judgesurreal777 (talk · contribs) 23:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Ok, I am claiming this article for Good Article Review! I will have some notes soon as to where it lies on the article quality spectrum. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 23:19, 29 May 2016 (UTC)
Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
---|---|---|
1. Well-written: | ||
![]() |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Plot Section- "of her soul is unharmed" - Probably should be "if".
|
![]() |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | The article has two hidden cleanup tags; Official_website_different_in_Wikidata_and_Wikipedia, and Category:CS1_maint:_Multiple_names:_authors_list.
|
2. Verifiable with no original research: | ||
![]() |
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | http://www.mmv.co.jp/special/game/wii/oboromuramasa Needs to be archived, it showed up in the Check Links tool.
|
![]() |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | Please show that Inside games, VGMDB, and Game Watch Impress are reliable sources.
|
![]() |
2c. it contains no original research. | There are many reliable sources that are attached to all the content of the article.
|
![]() |
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | I ran the copyright checker and there is no evidence of any level of plagiarism. |
3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
![]() |
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | All the usual sections are present and full of contents including gameplay development and reception.
|
![]() |
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | Though tremendously detailed, I see nothing I would call extraneous or unnecessary. |
![]() |
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | Nothing discernible as an opinion or editorial is present in the article. |
![]() |
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | Ever since the nominator finished his edits, the article has been extremely stable at a very high-quality. |
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
![]() |
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | The images are tagged appropriately, are low resolution, and are limited to illustrations of the games involved, of which there are several versions. |
![]() |
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | The images include the games cover, a gameplay screenshot from the original we version, and a group shot of characters from a side quest in the later version of the game.
|
![]() |
7. Overall assessment. | On hold for seven days, and if progress is made extensions are possible. Please let me know here or on my talk page if you have any questions or need any help!
|