Talk:Ninja Theory/GA1

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

Reviewer: Anarchyte (talk · contribs) 09:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

I'll do this.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  09:41, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Lead

 * Given there are multiple places called Cambridge, perhaps writing "Cambridge, England" (or United Kingdom, as done in #History) would be better.
 * The project was not a commercial success → The game failed to be a commercial success. This way we don't have "project" being repeated within 2 words.
 * You mention the success (or lack thereof) of every game mentioned besides DmC. How about and DmC: Devil May Cry, a [successful/unsuccessful/well received/etc] game whose design was highly controversial...

History

 * Tameem Antoniades is linked in the caption but nowhere else. His article redirects back here, so the link should be removed.
 * Write "United Kingdom" instead of "UK".
 * had three staff but had no money → had three staff but no money
 * highly stylized. What does this mean? Does this mean gamers preferred realistic games over magic or sci-fi? I'm not quite sure.
 * licensed version of Unreal Engine. Do we need to say it was licensed? Without their own technology, the team used Unreal Engine
 * unprofitable, the team needed. "the team" is used quite often. Change this instance to "they" or "Ninja Theory".
 * small budget, the team did not and mental illness and psychosis, the team consulted professional. Same as above.

Philosophy

 * less risky. Not sure about this phrase. Is it possible to reword it?
 * Merge the last two sentences of the first paragraph. They discuss the same idea.
 * helped enhance the game as an experience → helped enhance the experience

Games developed

 * I went ahead and capitalised "as" here.
 * I'm not sure if the company names should be in italics. Neither names are ever in italics anywhere else.

Miscellaneous comments

 * I've left a message on the talk page of the admin who protected the page with a request to unprotect it. However, they haven't edited in a month so if I don't get a response I may unprotect it myself to see if any vandalism follows. This will have no bearing on the GA review, just thought I'd let the lead contributor know.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  09:50, 23 June 2018 (UTC)

Overall review
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Fantastic work with this article. I managed to find a few errors, which I've pointed out above. Once those are fixed I see no reason to not pass this.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  07:39, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. Has an appropriate reference section:
 * B. Citation to 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 tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: (Passed)
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * No edit wars, etc:
 * 1) Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: (Passed)
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail: (Passed)
 * Pass or Fail: (Passed)
 * - Thanks for the review! I think I have fixed most of the issues you have raised. Let me know if I have missed any. I will archive the sources when I have time later. AdrianGamer (talk) 07:58, 24 June 2018 (UTC)
 * Great! I went through and changed American English to British English (per the talk). As having references archived is not an actual criterion, there is no reason to not pass this now. I will add the publisher parameters myself in just a moment.  Anarchyte ( work  &#124;  talk )  08:05, 24 June 2018 (UTC)