Talk:Halo Wars 2/GA1

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

Reviewer: Prinsgezinde (talk · contribs) 12:01, 10 April 2017 (UTC)


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

An impressively extensive article, props to nominator The1337gamer and everyone else who contributed.
 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * Article follows the MOS, clarifies its fictional nature and has little to no more spelling/grammar mistakes.
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * E̶n̶t̶i̶r̶e̶ ̶"̶S̶t̶o̶r̶y̶"̶ ̶s̶u̶b̶s̶e̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶i̶n̶ ̶t̶h̶e̶ ̶"̶P̶l̶o̶t̶"̶ ̶s̶e̶c̶t̶i̶o̶n̶ ̶i̶s̶ ̶u̶n̶s̶o̶u̶r̶c̶e̶d̶
 * Article is well sourced and all the necessary inline citations to back up its claims.
 * 1) It is broad in its coverage.
 * a (major aspects): b (focused):
 * Focuses exclusively on all aspects of the game without going too much into other games of the franchise or unnecessary details.
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Reception is well described, giving proportionate attention to positive and negative reactions
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars, etc.:
 * No disputes, naturally.
 * 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):
 * Three images related to a copyrighted video game is a fairly good amount. The two that feature copyrighted material have sufficient fair use rationales.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Passed! A thoroughly well done job.


 * Thanks for the review. I've corrected the grammar issues. Regarding the unsourced story section, video game plots follow the same conventions as film plots (WP:FILMPLOT), so they generally don't require references. E.g.: Halo: Reach and many other VG articles passed featured article review with entirely unsourced plot sections. Let me know if that's a satisfactory explanation. I could add citations and quotes of individual scenes in the game but it's rather tedious and so it's usually not worth it unless there is a dispute over the plot section. --The1337gamer (talk) 17:18, 10 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Excellent! That was actually bugging me too.. I was unaware of said policy but completely support it, as plot material is so easily verifiable (and full of spoilers) that no non-wiki source would normally describe it. In that case there are no more issues. Well done. Bataaf van Oranje (Prinsgezinde) (talk) 17:58, 10 April 2017 (UTC)