Talk:Neverwinter Nights 2: Storm of Zehir/GA1

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


 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose): b (MoS):
 * The voice acting was widely panned, but the music was praised. → Rewrite the sentence without passive voice and with more information.
 * Good. MuZemike 05:15, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * That is, per . MuZemike 05:16, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (references): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):
 * The last two sentences in the second paragraph in the Plot section is unsourced (After some difficulty, they also manage to open a portal to the Sword Coast, allowing them to find Crossroad Keep and establish it as a base of operations for their growing trade empire. Sa'Sani instructs the party to establish outposts in nearby towns and forge ties with various merchant guilds in Neverwinter.). The last part of the Plot section is also unsourced (after the last given citation). Please reference.
 * I won't be able to do this; I don't have access to the game. —   Levi van Tine  ( t  –  c )   02:10, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Put in a request at the WP Video Games talk page? BOZ (talk) 05:18, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * I'll look into it, too. I mean, I absolutely do not want to fail on the basis on a pair of unsourced sections when everything else looks very good. Just as in Neverwinter Nights 2, there might be something in the official strategy guide that would at the least provide some verifiability behind those sections. It might also help to look more into those sources above and below the unsourced content to see if you can include something that maybe wasn't earlier. If you're going to remove content, make sure it still follows logically per the sources given. That's some suggestions. MuZemike 07:24, 17 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Good enough. I removed the first passage altogether and did some combining. I also added a fact tag at the end to indicate that you need to source it. Any print source (i.e. a guide) should verify this. MuZemike 15:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)


 * 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, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * A couple of the images are not of low-resolution, a requirement per WP:NFCC; the gameplay images have already been tagged for speedy deletion—not good. I cannot do anything about it right now, but I'll try to fix this up later for you with my own image-editing software.
 * If your wondering how big an image can be check here, it says 400x300 is fine. Is that still applicable? Salavat (talk) 13:12, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * At the higher levels, people have been cracking down harder on this, so it might be something to discuss at WT:VG. I reduced them to 256px (which is still larger than the default size with thumbnails) while still preserving .1 megapixel resolution. Is this OK? MuZemike 15:05, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * After looking at the poor quality of one of them, I bumped both screenshots up to 300px (the largest default width for thumbnails and per WP:MOS) that doesn't have the dithering as before. MuZemike 15:22, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 300 looks to be a good size, i believe that screenshots need to be large enough in order to provide some insight which a 200px thumb cant show while at the same time holding within the lines of non-free rules. Salavat (talk) 15:58, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * A good point of reference for guidance is Wikipedia Signpost/2008-09-22/Dispatches in regards to non-free image use (many examples cited are video game images). Actually, that makes me want to go back and redo all the other images I've non-free reduced :( . Anyways, this is good. MuZemike 16:21, 16 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Placed on hold until necessary corrections are made. MuZemike 21:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Passed. MuZemike 15:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! :) BOZ (talk) 03:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Placed on hold until necessary corrections are made. MuZemike 21:33, 15 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Passed. MuZemike 15:05, 19 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review! :) BOZ (talk) 03:35, 21 May 2009 (UTC)