Talk:Angry Video Game Nerd/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Anarchyte (talk · contribs) 11:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

I'll start reviewing this. -- Anar  chyte   11:07, 1 July 2015 (UTC)

Overall comments/Misc

 * Copyvio rating: 77.3% chance of violation of this page.
 * Hmm, I don't know if this is because other websites copy Wikipedia or if Wikipedia copied this source. I'll get a second opinion on that.
 * Please reword these sections.


 * This article relies a lot on Cinemassacre, which is a primary source.

Lead

 * A starting independent filmmaker, Rolfe's earliest videos of the Nerd character was intended as a joke privately shown to his friends.
 * What do you mean by this?


 * [...] the Nerd was highly influential in bringing online video reviews to the mainstream public.
 * Seems a little promotional, IMO.

Premise

 * Reference #2 (first sentence) is a deadlink with no available archive.
 * This section is reliant off 1 deadlink and 1 working reference, the last paragraph isn't referenced at all.
 * [...] him destroying whole game cartridges, or defecating, burning and sometimes even crushing entire video game consoles.
 * I can't find where this is mentioned in the article. Using CNTL+F for all of the words "burning", etc also finds no results.

Production

 * Rolfe diversified the reviews of platforms and products such as the Atari 2600, Super NES, Sega Master System and Sega Genesis video game consoles, the Power Glove and U-Force peripherals, films such as The Wizard, and the Nintendo Power magazine.
 * I can't find the reference for this, I've added a cn tag.


 * expressive lighting and camera angles to emphasize its horror film-themed narrative in which the Nerd is attacked by Jason Voorhees for disliking the game. Later episodes have alternated from straightforward game reviews to those with a narrative focus resembling a documentary, with Rolfe pointing out information about the game or gaming console under review.
 * This seems to be copy/pasted from the source.


 * Ref 10 is a YouTube video and isn't reliable, if I remember correctly.
 * I'll get a second opinion on that as well.

Other media

 * This section is pretty good, although if the references could be updated, it'd be better.
 * Reference 24 is a YouTube Let's Play video and is thus not reliable.
 * A few other references are to other media sharing sites.

Reception and legacy

 * The section is good. Face-smile.svg

Overall review
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: (Fail)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: (Fail)
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: (Fail)
 * Pass or Fail: (Fail)

The article stays focused but the references aren't very good. I'll put it on hold so people to fix these errors before I pass or fail it. -- Anar  chyte   03:16, 2 July 2015 (UTC)
 * I'm failing this because nothing changed in the 7 days it was on hold.   Ana  r  chyte   01:09, 10 July 2015 (UTC)

Re:
Thank God somebody finally picked this one up, although I was already starting to lose interest in it, but anyways. I'll try to fix the problems you've posted, but I think that most of the copy/paste problems on the article were coming from the quotes taken from the external sites. Still, I'll be restructuring them just in case. Godzilladude123 (talk) 14:12, 3 July 2015 (UTC)