Talk:Nookazon/GA1

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

Reviewer: Namcokid47 (talk · contribs) 22:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)

This has been hanging around the backlog for a while, so I thought I'd take a look. Sorry, but I'm gonna have to fail this. There's simply way too many issues present for it to be a GA, and I do not think it meets the criteria: If I'm not mistaken, this appears to be your first GAN. I understand it's frustrating to have your first try be failed (heck, I sure had a hard time with that), but there's just way too many issues here. This feels like a C-class at best and will need a lot of work if you really want it to become a GA. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 22:08, 9 October 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) I'm very skeptical of the amount of non-free images used here, there's no way something like this needs that many. Even more so is that a lot of these are marked as "public domain" when they clearly shouldn't, which I'd definitely consider a copyright violation.
 * 2) Many, many dubious sources litter the page. Discord posts, Twitter blogs, Google Docs, "guruobserver.com", The Gamer, "NYLON SINGAPORE", and several others. Lots of these are primary or are even listed as unreliable on the reliable sources noticeboard or WP:VG/S.
 * 3) The writing is poor in several areas, and a lot of it feels like I'm reading a press release. Some of the more egregious examples include: "Former moderators of the Discord server complained of a "corporate" culture modeled on Amazon that focused on meeting moderation quotas and productivity targets", As Animal Crossing players became more rich with Bells, Nookazon looked to other forms of currency in order to keep a stable economy", and "One of the challenges Luu faced when creating Nookazon involved categorizing the many items of furniture and clothing within Animal Crossing. Animal Crossing: New Horizons contains thousands of individual items, all of which had to be cataloged with various colours in order to be listed on the website."
 * 4) I don't like the block quotes. They take up a lot of space and feel very unnecessary. I'm not seeing how the info in those quotes can't be displayed in ordinary text; quotes are fine for short dev comments or from reviewers, but half of the article is like this.
 * 5) I also dislike the large amount of free-floating sentences that linger about, they should be merged into other articles.
 * 6) The lead is really short. There's a lot of info in this article, yet the lead is a paragraph and a few extra sentences.