Talk:New Super Mario Bros./GA1

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

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
 * C. No original research:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. Major aspects:
 * B. Focused:
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Review by
 * "first original side-scrolling platform game starring" The -ing...-ing is annoying, as well as the awkward noun + -ing sentence construction.
 * "and the first game to be a part of the main Mario" Needs a verb, add is before "the".
 * "Video game critics were generally favorable towards the game" A person cannot be favorable, perhaps opinions? I would argue that "Video game" is unnecessary because of the context, but that is just me.
 * "89% at Metacritic." "at"-->from.
 * "Another three power-ups"-->Three more power-ups...
 * "Jumping on the opponent's character will make them lose one star, while performing a ground pound will lose them three." Clarify who "them" is. For me, I know video games well enough to understand that jumping on the other—or performing a "ground pound"—is good, but less knowlegeable people (in terms of video games) might not.
 * "New Super Mario Bros. contains 18 minigames for single players, and ten minigames for multiple players." Comparative quantities should be written out the same.
 * "New Super Mario Bros.'s plot is similar to the original Super Mario Bros. and other side-scrolling Mario games" Is the plot similar to the games? No, try "New Super Mario Bros.'s plot is similar to that (those?) of the original Super Mario Bros. and other side-scrolling Mario games."
 * For ref 4 would it be too much trouble to link to the specific pages rather than the introduction page?
 * "it causes the bridge underneath Bowser to collapse, causing him to fall into the lava pit below and seemingly kill him.[4]" And then? Not necessarily an incomplete thought, but "seemingly" implies that what actually happens is contrary to what readers think will happen.
 * "New Super Mario Bros. was successful in Japan" I hate to be a "POV nut", but what gauges whether a title is successful or not?
 * "several which noted "-->several of which noted...
 * "Despite including new features such as a versus mode, remaking a 1983 game " What do you mean by "remaking"?
 * What makes http://www.mobygames.com/game/nintendo-ds/new-super-mario-bros/credits a reliable source?
 * Check for overlinking: Super Mario Bros. is linked at least four times in the article. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:04, 31 December 2008 (UTC)


 * All done. For the IGN game guide reference, I used the PDF as my source; unfortunately, I cannot link to that since only members can access it, but in any case, I'd rather not link to the specific pages, because for one thing, some of the information is found on more than one page in the same sentence, etc. MobyGames is reliable per WP:VG/RS, which was recently added in this edit. Gary King  ( talk ) 01:20, 31 December 2008 (UTC)
 * OK, passing. Dabomb87 (talk) 01:30, 31 December 2008 (UTC)