Talk:Pilotwings 64/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Airplaneman ^talk 20:08, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for criteria)

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose): b (MoS):
I will copyedit myself unless I am not sure, in which case I will list the problems below for you to address:
Under the "Gameplay" section, the lead sentence, Pilotwings 64 is a 3D flight simulator in which the player must complete a variety of missions using different airborne vehicles and aerial sports. I think it is meant to say something along the lines of Pilotwings 64 is a 3D flight simulator in which the player must complete a variety of missions using different airborne vehicles in many aerial sports events. or something. Please clarify. Airplaneman ^talk 20:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done — will pass. Airplaneman ^talk 03:32, 5 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
Checklinks fine. Sources look good. Airplaneman ^talk 20:35, 4 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
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):
Overall:
Pass/Fail: