Talk:Super Punch-Out!!/GA1

GA Review

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

I can't see any major problem with the article. Perhaps some parts of it could be slighlty rewritten in order to avoid repetitions - in particular in "Reception" (repetition of "released") and "Gameplay" (repetition of "The player" / "The game", especially at the end). The gameplay section could also be shortened a bit, as the readers may not be interested in every single details of the gameplay. Other than that, I think it's a good article which fully covers the subject. Well done!

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   Too many repetitions in some sections, but overall it reads well.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Many different sources are used and they all seem reliable

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   Broad in its coverage, but the gameplay section is actually a bit too detailed.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   Both praises and criticisms are included in the Reception section

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: