Talk:Fallout 4: Nuka-World/GA1

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

Reviewer: Cognissonance (talk · contribs) 22:11, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Why do I always mistake Fallout for BioShock... Cognissonance (talk) 22:11, 25 October 2016 (UTC)

Lead

 * "found in Fallout 4's code" — Clarify: "found in Fallout 4's source code". Also, link to Source code.
 * "Development of this expansion was confirmed" — Minimize repetition: "Development was confirmed".
 * "The expansion received a mostly positive reception" — Minimize repetition and correct: "Fallout 4: Nuka-World received both a positive and mixed response".
 * "with reviewers praising the new locations, but they compared" — Improve flow: "with reviewers praising the new locations, but comparing".

Infobox

 * Add | modes = Single-player.
 * Done on Wikidata.

Gameplay

 * "Nuka-World is an expansion pack for the post-apocalyptic action role-playing single-player video game Fallout 4" — Coincide genres with lead.
 * "It is the territory of raiders," — Clarify: "Nuka-World is the territory of raiders;".
 * "and upon arrival, they are dropped" — Improve flow: "and upon arrival are dropped".
 * "new enemies and more powerful versions of existing enemies" — Minimize repetition: "new enemies and more powerful versions of existing ones".
 * "The Pip-Boy, a small computer strapped to the character's wrist which contains maps, statistics, data, and items, plays a role" — Simplify: "The Pip-Boy – a small computer strapped to the character's wrist which contains maps, statistics, data, and items – plays a role".
 * "The ability to swap between first-person and third-person perspectives is available in both the expansion and the original version" — Move up so that it follows the first sentence.

Development and release

 * "(in order of release)" — Not necessary.

Reception

 * Instead of putting the publications in parentheses, write it in prose.
 * I'd like this article to be consistent with the other expansion pack article (Far Harbor), so I'm going to leave them in parentheses.
 * The section could also do well with being written in the past tense.
 * Remove the Spanish and Italian IGN scores. This is an English article about an American video game.
 * References don't need to be in English. They add content to the article and I see no reason to remove these.
 * I don't see the use for two XONE scores though. As a reader, it could easily be confusing.
 * I'll remove one of them from the template.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   08:54, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Done.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   09:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)


 * "The releases of Nuka-World" — Simply say "Nuka-World". The different platform scores are elaborated on in the next sentence.
 * Stuff like "Bob Fekete (iDigitalTimes) said", "Davide Ambrosiani (IGN) said" and "Juan Garcia (IGN) said" needs to be reworded with more variety.
 * See above
 * You misunderstand. As was done in Far Harbor, the word "said" needs to be reworded with more synonyms, per User:Mike Christie/Copyediting reception sections. Cognissonance (talk) 08:45, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Ah ok. I'll try to add some more variety.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   08:54, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Done.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   09:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)

Overall

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall: Prose is a problem. Otherwise it's a solid article.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Also, while you're at it, change the instances of British English spelling to American English for consistency. Cognissonance (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick review. I've left a few comments above and striked everything I've done.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   06:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your replies above.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   09:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall: Prose is a problem. Otherwise it's a solid article.
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Also, while you're at it, change the instances of British English spelling to American English for consistency. Cognissonance (talk) 16:30, 26 October 2016 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the quick review. I've left a few comments above and striked everything I've done.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   06:02, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your replies above.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   09:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)
 * I've addressed your replies above.  Anarchyte  ( work  &#124;  talk )   09:01, 27 October 2016 (UTC)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Good to go. Cognissonance (talk) 09:04, 27 October 2016 (UTC)