Talk:Pac-Attack/GA1

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 08:15, 10 October 2019 (UTC)

Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the ✅ tag to state when something is addressed.  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

 * It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
 * It contains copyright infringements -
 * It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include,, or large numbers of , , or similar tags. (See also ). -
 * It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -

Lede

 * Could we combine the notes? I don't think we need two here. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Not really sure what you mean here? Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 21:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Pac-Attack also known as Pac-Panic, or similar. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:51, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Expand SNES - not the console name.Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:08, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there a reason the release date isn't in the lede? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:12, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * The year is listed in the first sentence. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 21:21, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Surely the actual release date of the game is lede-worthy, rather than a rough year? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 16:51, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Considering we are talking about a game " In the game" isn't necessary. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:13, 10 November 2019 (UTC)

General

 * Pac-Attack is a falling tile puzzle game, - I know you link this in the lede, but "falling tile puzzle" isn't exactly regular speech. Needs a second wikilink Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Pac-Attack is a falling tile puzzle game, often being compared to games such as Tetris and Columns.
 * playfield is gargon, so needs a link to a glossary or equivilent. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Alongside a standard single-player mode, - "standard" borders on WP:EDITORIALISING. I suggest removing the word altogether. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Some European and Japanese releases were titled Pac-Panic - feels kinda packed on at the end - Could this be added to the first sentence in this section? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Pac-Man: Special Color Edition - for what it's worth, it was also released as Pac-Man: Special Colour Edition in PAL. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski  (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * An iOS “demake” - who says this, it's not in the citation offered. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * We don't usually put scores in the reception section when they also appear in the table. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * as a 66%.[14][13] - not strictly speaking in the GAN partition, but, we should change the reforder around. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Any ideas who said these things in the reviews? Magazines don't talk (Also with associated authors for the refs)/ Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Lots of repetition of the word "game" Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Overall, the reception is a bit poor, probably the biggest thing keeping it from being a GA. I'd take a look at WP:RECEPTION.Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:05, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

Notes & References

 * Some publishers are linked, some aren't? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * One ref is clearly in Japanese, it'll need to be stated in cite web. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:07, 12 November 2019 (UTC)

GA Review

 * GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)


 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable.
 * a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources):  c (OR):  d (copyvio and plagiarism):
 * 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
 * a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:

Comments
Haven't heard back on this in a while. Do you still plan to review this? Namcokid 47  (Contribs) 03:38, 10 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs)
 * Sorry about the delay on this one - had meant to finish it before the honeymoon. Now I'm back I'll take a look as soon as I can. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 18:25, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * No worries. Take as much time as you need. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 21:05, 25 October 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry for the delay. I've worked my way through it now. Looks like there is a few things - mostly the reception section - that need work. I'll place on hold. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:08, 12 November 2019 (UTC)
 * Hi, did you see the posted review? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 22:05, 26 November 2019 (UTC)
 * I have very little interest in this game right now and very little motivation to fix it. I think an automatic fail would be a better idea. Namcokid  47  (Contribs) 22:34, 26 November 2019 (UTC)