Talk:Squabble (video game)

GA Review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Squabble (video game)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: A412 (talk · contribs) 21:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

I'll take a look at this. ~ A412 ^talk! 21:45, 17 March 2024 (UTC)

Unfortunately I think this is going to have to be a WP:QUICKFAIL, as it's a long way from meeting some of the GA criteria.

• The elephant in the room is that the article is short. Primarily, this leads to issues with 3a (broadness), as some expected article elements are not discussed at all. I recognize the sourcing may not be there for some elements, but the result is an incomplete article.
• I also have concerns, though more addressable ones, about 2c (OR), primarily in the reception section, 1b (MOS), primarily in the guidelines on lead sections, and 6b (images). ~ A412 ^talk! 20:37, 18 March 2024 (UTC)

References

As of this revision.

Spotcheck

There are few enough refs that I'm just going to check all of them.

• [1] - CNET's Mark Serrels described the gameplay as possibly causing one to have a mental breakdown - I get what you're quoting, but having this as prose and not a quote, and linking to mental breakdown, makes it look like it's making a medical claim, when it's clearly just an exaggeration from the author from reading the source. I recommend playing it at least once - I don't think "recommended the game" and "recommend playing it at least once" are quite equivalent here.
• [2] - Upon release, several journalists noted the game's frantic gameplay Given that none of [1], [2], or [4] use the term "frantic", and I can't cleanly determine what you're citing in each source here, I think this needs to be expanded as to what each publication wrote that could be summarized as "frantic".
• [3] - Checks out.
• [4] - PC Gamer's Christopher Livingston was more critical of the game - I think this statement is a bit synth-y, as I think that while the source makes the claim that Squabble is more frantic than Wordle, I don't quite think it's appropriate to describe it as critical, absent a statement to that effect or some comparable / numeric scoring.
• [5] - Checks out.
• [6] - Checks out.
• [7] - Checks out.

RS

• Checks out.

CV

• Checks out.

OR

• See concerns about verifiability and synth from the spotcheck.

Broadness / Focus

• This article isn't very broad.
  • There's little contextual information. There's no development information (who is Ottomated? Is it a person or a studio?). There's minimal release information ("it was announced on Twitter" is the extent, currently). Did anything ever happen outside of it getting released in February 2022?
  • The reception section has been summarized to the point of being hard to verify where the information is sourced from, and not giving a reader a good sense of the reception of the game.

Lead

• I know some authors like doing this, but web-based battle royale word game is a sea of blue.
• a word game created by Josh Wardle on The New York Times - this is only in the lead, uncited, and a bit misleading (It implies that Wardle created the game on NYT, when I'm pretty sure it was acquired).
• and battle royale mechanics seen in games such as Fortnite: Battle Royale - Also only in the lead.
• Squabble received a positive reception from journalists, who focused primarily on the fast paced gameplay. - Absent some review aggregator, it's generally synth to label reception as "positive".

Gameplay

• There are two modes in Squabble: Blitz and Squabble Royale. In Blitz, 2 to 5 players compete, while in Squabble Royale, there are 6 to 99 players - Bit redundant, I would combine as There are two modes in Squabble: Blitz, where 2 to 5 players compete, and Squabble Royale, with 6 to 99 players.
• Each player has a health bar decreasing by one health point (HP) every second. - It's not particularly useful to know players lose 1 HP/s without knowing a total. We should add that information if its sourceable, and remove the specific number on the rate of loss otherwise.
• To restore health, players must consecutively solve Wordle puzzles by guessing a five-letter word within six tries. Additionally, when a letter within a word is correct, an opponent gets damaged - Is it more natural (doesn't break up the discussion of the effects of scoring) to say Players must consecutively solve Wordle puzzles by guessing a five-letter word within six tries. When they guess letters correctly, an opponent gets damaged and the player's health is restored.?
• others grids -> others' grids or other players' grids
• one -> the player

Release and reception

• The release of the game was announced on their Twitter on February 2, 2022 - Clarify if the game was released on this date, or just announced.
• Blaine Polhamus of Dot Esports wrote the game to be - Unless Polhamus wrote Squabble, I think the wording should be Blaine Polhamus of Dot Esports wrote that the game was.

Images

• Infobox image is fine.
• We should be able to get a NFCC-compatible gameplay image.

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.