Talk:Mario & Luigi: Partners in Time/GA1

GA Review
This review is transcluded from Talk:Mario &amp; Luigi: Partners in Time/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I've given the article a quick scan, and it seems like it will pass the GA criteria. I will continue reviewing and leave a list of things to fix below soon. Good luck! --haha169 (talk) 17:20, 30 June 2008 (UTC)

Problems to fix:
 * Try not to use IGN as a primary source. Try and find others if possible.
 * "Regarding the game's controls, reviewers expressed difficulty with coordinating the four characters...", is it just me, or does it sound a bit odd? How about: "Reviewers complained about the game's controls, expressing difficulty..."
 * "Only the adults receive damage, although it will be transferred to a baby if their respective partner is eliminated from battle.", What will be transferred to the baby, the adult or the damage? Try, "although damage can be dealt to the baby if..."

Overall, great article! Good job on the jump from C-rating to GA, (soon) if you fix the errors listed above. I may come up with more later on, but stay with these for now. --haha169 (talk) 22:52, 30 June 2008 (UTC)


 * Okay, I think I've fixed all of the issues. For IGN, I don't necessarily see this as an issue unless there is an imbalance in "Reception", as these are just facts being supported. However, I do see your point, so I've provided some extra refs besides some IGN refs so the article is less dependent on IGN in parts. Thank you for the review. Ashnard  Talk  Contribs  07:42, 1 July 2008 (UTC)


 * Good job. Thanks for your quick reply, since I wasn't sure if I could handle a long GAN (like my assessment with MGS) during a FAC. I've promoted it. Good job! (This is the first time I haven't used a checklist...) ack. If I forgot to do something, or made an error, please correct it for me. :) Thanks! --haha169 (talk) 17:06, 1 July 2008 (UTC)
 * Much appreciated. Since you asked, the "page=n" on the template corresponds to the review number, which is 1 in this case, since this is the article's first GAN. Thanks. Ashnard  Talk  Contribs  17:52, 1 July 2008 (UTC)