Talk:Fire Emblem: Three Houses/GA1

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

Reviewer: Abryn (talk · contribs) 00:02, 28 November 2019 (UTC)


 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 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:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 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:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:


 * The fair use rationale for the school setting image is weak, and is just a copy of the one for the combat image. I would recommend cutting the school image, as it doesn't really convey anything that readers would need visual identification in order to understand.
 * Removed.
 * A lot of the people in the infobox are unsourced and not mentioned in the article's body. It would be best if you could find sources for their involvement and mention them elsewhere. Also, the directors are mentioned in the body, but readers lack clarification that they were the game's directors.
 * I've cited them the best way I can. Most of the credits weren't filled out by me.
 * While players primarily engage with students from their own house, it's not entirely accurate to say that the Garreg Mach portions are for interacting solely with people from their own house.
 * Corrected.
 * Taking off on this point, the Gameplay does not make mention of the recruitment system, specifically in that you can recruit people from other Houses to join yours as well as recruit certain teachers. It should mention that you can recruit characters you build support with either through them randomly deciding to join you or by the player-character defeating them in battle post-timeskip (if you have a high enough Support level).
 * I didn't find any sources for the latter, but I've cited the former.
 * It should be clarified that Byleth obtains the ability to reverse time from Sothis following her protecting Edelgard from harm.
 * That's more gameplay related. I've added that the ability comes with a story event, and clarified Sothis's role in the story section.
 * "If Byleth sides with Edelgard, Byleth reunites with their students and Edelgard" -> "If Byleth sides with Edelgard, they reunite with their students"
 * Fixed.
 * "teh" typo
 * Fixed.
 * "Voice recording took three months," "Voice recording took three months;"
 * Sorted.
 * "The English title referenced the three school houses featured in the story. Due to its awkward English rendering, the team decided against directly translating the Japanese title." A little redundant, you could instead say "Due to its awkward English rendering, the team decided against directly translating the Japanese title, calling it Three Houses in English instead."
 * Sorted.
 * The "multiple characters on screen for the first time" detail is a little confusing. I understand what it means, just that it should be clarified that it's not merely multiple but a large number.
 * Done.
 * The Reception section feels a little light. This is not enough that I would say "add more or I fail!!", but it would be nice to see more over time. I also notice that the style changes from the first two paragraphs to the last, with opinions not being directly cited to the authors in that paragraph where they were in previous ones.
 * I would've filled it out a bit, but I'd have been parroting very similar sentiments from each outlet. As to the third paragraph, I seriously couldn't find enough variety in commentary to have individual citations. I've used it in other articles that were passed for GA, so I didn't think it would be too troublesome.
 * The digital sales, were they worldwide? In the UK?
 * Didn't write that section, it was physical only.
 * It says that it became the second best-selling in the series in November, but it doesn't clarify what the numbers of the mentioned games (Fates and Awakening) were to give a sense of scale. It also doesn't indicate how much more the game sold in order to hit that milestone.
 * Previous uncited statement said it was best-selling period. I've removed the thing.
 * "The Gamer" and "GameRant" are not considered reliable sources.
 * Both removed.
 * I've done my best to address the issues you raised. --ProtoDrake (talk) 22:28, 29 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Aight, we good. Nice job. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 16:55, 30 November 2019 (UTC)