Talk:Shadowrun (1993 video game)/GA2

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Shaun9876 (talk · contribs) 16:11, 18 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written: {{GATable/item\|1a\|y\|
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
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.
	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).
	2c. it contains no original research.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
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.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.

I'd disagree and say they're perfectly fine actually. There was, of course, no DLC or anything else that can be added. And whatever could be still added to Legacy (which is a big section), I have no idea. The screenshot has "free-use rational[e]" alright, it's in the section "Summary". --Niemti (talk) 14:24, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

OK now? --Niemti (talk) 14:48, 27 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, you convinced me! §h₳un 9∞76 03:04, 29 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]