Talk:Marvel vs. Capcom/GA1

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

Reviewer: Argento Surfer (talk · contribs) 19:16, 6 April 2017 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria It may take two days for me to complete my initial review. I will note/pass items as I go along. You don't need to wait for me to finish to begin addressing them. Most of my comments are open for discussion, so feel free to question anything. Once complete, I will be claiming points for this review in the 2017 WikiCup.
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * Games
 * Does "arcade systems" mean "Arcade game"? If so, why not say it was released as an "arcade game" with a link?
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "ported" should link to Porting
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Street Fighter is linked directly, but no link for X-Men?
 * Should I link the X-Men portion of X-Men vs. Street Fighter or something? The term by itself (instead of part of a title) doesn't appear until the development section. Wani (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I didn't see the link in Development when I added this one. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:30, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Yeah, I just added that. My fault. Wani (talk) 19:40, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "Marvel universe" should link to Marvel Universe
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:16, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Gameplay
 * "...players select multiple to form..." missing the word characters here
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:19, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "This feature was replaced in..." This sentence is a little choppy. I suggest combining it with the following sentence.
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:19, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Characters
 * "The games have seldom introduced original characters, which include... " I think seldom is an awkward adjective here. I think "Rarely, the games have introduced original characters such as..." or something similar.
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:22, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Is there a character article that Abyss can link to? Upon inspection, I see there is not.
 * Development
 * "Community, Seth Killian, stated " The commas aren't needed here as worded. Was Killian the "former" Marketing Director when he said this? If not, I suggest rephrasing it as "In 2011, then-current [title] Seth Killian stated..."
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * "Capcom lost the use of the Marvel license" to whom? Any reason given? What year did they get it back? I assume 2010, but this is not stated.
 * All sources are pretty vague on the details here. I assume their licensing contract simply expired, similar to what happened after the release of Ultimate Marvel vs. Capcom 3, but I'm not sure if I'll be able to find a reference for that. Wani (talk) 19:35, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * I hate when that happens. If nothing's available, this is not an issue. Argento Surfer (talk) 19:39, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Reception
 * "As of December 2016, approximately 7 million units have been sold, currently making it Capcom's eighth best-selling franchise" to avoid potentially becoming dated, I suggest rewriting this as "Approximately 7 million units of the series had been sold by December 2016, making it Capcom's eighth best-selling franchise." or something similar.
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 19:45, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * no concerns
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * Citations [17], [24], [49], [55], [63], [64], [65], [100], and [117] use all caps for the page title. Please change these to sentence case.
 * ✅. But while on the subject, do you have any idea why the reference numbers are being thrown off? For example, [117] in the reference section corresponds to [123] in the reception section. I've tried finding the issue, but wasn't successful. Wani (talk) 19:57, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It's caused by the 6 notes under the list of characters, although I'm not sure why. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * no concern
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * Is there a source for the playable characters in the upcoming game?
 * Since they are sourced within the Marvel vs. Capcom: Infinite article, I wasn't sure if it was necessary. Should I copy the references over anyway? Wani (talk) 20:00, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * If there's one citation that covers them, it can be added at the top of the table next to the MvCI header. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 20:41, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * Earwig has some weak returns due to the various game names. One strong match between the article's "which showcased a two-on-one fight with Ryu and Ken against M. Bison" and the source's "which showcased a two-on-one fight of Ryu and Ken against M. Bison." This needs to be reworded or more accurately quoted.
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 20:03, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * Does the minimate line not warrant a mention in the related media? Some sources can be found here.
 * ✅ Wani (talk) 20:34, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Is there any explanation for the ten year delay between 2 and 3? I now see this is discussed in the Development section.
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * no concern
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * The article is actively edited, but no obvious vandalism or edit warring.
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * Rationales provided
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * The use of "current" in the infobox caption is vague and may become MOS:DATED. I suggest revising it to "Marvel vs Capcom logo used since YEAR", or something similar. Per WP:CAPTION, the caption for the image in Gameplay is too long. It needs to be shortened and/or the image size should be upscaled.
 * I shortened the caption. Is it still too long or is it good? Wani (talk) 20:46, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * It works for me.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass pending minor concerns listed above
 * Additional note - does Diamond Comics link to the right article? It's currently pointing at a publisher in India. Argento Surfer (talk) 20:20, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Nope, it did not. Corrected now. Wani (talk) 20:38, 7 April 2017 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the corrections - promoted. Argento Surfer (talk) 12:10, 10 April 2017 (UTC)