Talk:If Found.../GA1

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

Reviewer: Lazman321 (talk · contribs) 17:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

Introduction
Hello, I will be reviewing this article for adherence to GA criteria, as this article seems to have been the video game article that has been pending. Let's hope it passes and your patience has been awarded. Lazman321 (talk) 17:59, 3 February 2021 (UTC)

a - Clear and concise prose
The article is definitely readable and understandable. It does explain the main aspect of the gameplay pretty well, especially since I have never played this game before. There are some prose errors in the article

Here is what they are and what I recommend changing them to:


 * ...wherin the player advances through scenes... to ...wherein the player advances through scenes...
 * Done


 * The science fiction chapters of the story follow the explorer as she journeys towards Planet X, to The science fiction chapters of the story follows the explorer, Doctor Cassiopeia, as she journeys towards Planet X,
 * [chapters...follow], not follows, and we named the explorer only the paragraph before; I'll replace "the explorer" with "Doctor Cassiopeia" instead


 * ...returning to her home town in Achill Island... to ...returning to her hometown in Achill Island...
 * Fixed both instances of "home town"


 * ...her older brother Fergal and mother Brid, to ...her older brother Fergal and her mother Brid,
 * Done


 * After a fight with her mother over her feminine clothes... to After a fight with her mother over Kasio's feminine clothes...
 * Done


 * ...abandoned, decrepit house they are squatting in. to ...abandoned, decrepit house that the band is squatting in.
 * Done


 * ...through a hole in the abandoned house's roof; the next morning, to ...through a hole in the abandoned house's roof. The next morning,
 * Done


 * ...Shans informs Kasio that she agreed to run away together to Dublin as a couple. to ...Shans informs Kasio that he wants him and Kasio to run away together to Dublin as a couple.
 * Not done, this changes the sentence- Shans isn't telling her that he wants them to run away together, he's telling her that Kasio already agreed to that the night before, she just doesn't remember because she was drunk. Changed to "that she had agreed" to clarify.


 * ...despite Colum and Jack's upset with Kasio. to ...despite Colum and Jack being upset with Kasio.
 * Done


 * ...unworthiness to stay with Maggy, and rejected by Shans who tells her... to ...unworthiness to stay with Maggy, and from being rejected by Shans, who tells her...
 * There's still some verb tense misuse here, but the real problem is that it's like 3 clauses jammed together. Split up into "Kasio feels distraught by her estrangement from her family and unworthy to stay with Maggy. She is rejected by Shans, who tells her he wants to be "normal", and Kasio breaks into the abandoned house again."


 * ...and put it in the letter box for a woman... to ...and put it in the letterbox for a woman...
 * Done


 * ...by Irish developer Dreamfeel; studio director Llaura McGee was... to ...by Irish developer Dreamfeel. Studio director Llaura McGee was...
 * Done


 * It was published by Annapurna Interactive and released for Microsoft Windows, macOS, and iOS devices on May 19, 2020, and for the Nintendo Switch on October 22, 2020.[1][3][4] should preferably be put at the end of the development section.
 * Mostly moved; I'm leaving the mention of Annapurna because they're referenced a paragraph later.


 * ...Initial development on the game began in 2016; McGee sent a proposed design... to ...Initial development on the game began in 2016. McGee sent a proposed design...
 * Done


 * ...dark hole within Kasio preventing her from having relationships, or missing altogether. to ...dark hole within Kasio preventing her from having relationships, or missing the relationships altogether.
 * Done

I believe that's it. Hope you get to correcting them. Lazman321 (talk) 13:51, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * All done, thanks for reviewing! We clearly have a difference of opinion on semicolons... -- Pres N  15:52, 4 February 2021 (UTC)
 * This article now does ✅ the criterion of "Clear and concise prose". Lazman321 (talk) 17:47, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

b - Adherence to the Manual of Style
The GA criteria only requires that five guidelines of the manual of style be followed, those being the guidelines for the lead section, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. How does the article do?


 * Lead: The lead nicely summarizes the key aspects of the article. It mentions what type of game it is and how it is played, it mentions the plot of the story and some of the development behind it. It also mentions how well-recieved the game is and the awards it has been nominated for. This one does ✅.
 * Layout: The article does follow standard video game article layout. It has a lead section, a gameplay section, a plot section, a development section, a reception section, a references section, and an external links section. This one does ✅.
 * Words to watch: There are no words that needed attention. All potential weasel words are backed up by citations, making the opinions clearly attributed. This one does ✅.
 * Fiction: This article is not written from an in-universe perspective. All mentions of fiction are clearly marked as such. This one does ✅.
 * List incorporation: With the exception of the external links and references section, there is no lists, nor does any need to be formatted as such. This one does ✅.

With analysis in mind, this article does ✅ the "Adherence to the Manual of Style" criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 17:45, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

a - Reference layout
The easiest criterion to meet. This article does ✅ the criterion of "Reference layout". Lazman321 (talk) 17:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

b - Reliable sources
All the secondary sources are reliable and trustworthy. All the primary sources are used appropriately. This article does ✅ the criterion for "Reliable sources". Lazman321 (talk) 17:58, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

c - No original research
I have performed a source check on the article and can conclude that this article has no original research. As a result, this article does ✅ the criterion of "No original research". Lazman321 (talk) 23:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

d - No copyright violations
With a copyvio score of 16 % and the Turnitin option turning up no results, this article does ✅ the criterion of "No copyright violations". Lazman321 (talk) 22:55, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

a - Main aspects of topic
In my source check, I detected no main aspect that was neglected. This article does ✅ this criterion of "Main aspects of topic". Lazman321 (talk) 23:43, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

b - Focused on topic
At no point does this article go off-topic and talk about something else that isn't related to this game. This article does ✅ the criterion of "Focused on topic". Lazman321 (talk) 22:57, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

4 - Neutral
The only section that would have to worry about this criterion (the reception section) is already fine. All opinions are clearly attributed to many critics. This article does ✅ the criterion of "Neutral". Lazman321 (talk) 22:59, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

5 - Stable
For the last two months, you have been the biggest contributor to this article. Not many others have been editing this article and there is no edit war on sight. This article does ✅ the criterion of "Stable".

a - Proper copyright tags and fair use rationales
The two images in this article have proper fair use rationales. This article does ✅ this criterion. Lazman321 (talk) 23:08, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

b - Relevant media
The two images are relevant to this article. The image in the infobox is the cover art of the game. The image in the plot section is a screenshot from the game to show readers the erasing mechanic. This article does ✅ the criterion of "Relevant media". Lazman321 (talk) 23:09, 4 February 2021 (UTC)

7 - Overall
I have finished this review and can now conclude that thanks to your efforts in editing this article. As a result, I believe that this has the GA criteria and will therefore be of GA status. Great work, PresN. Lazman321 (talk) 23:48, 4 February 2021 (UTC)