Talk:Pokémon FireRed and LeafGreen/GA1

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

Quick-fail criteria:
1. The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.

2. The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.

3. There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including, , , or large numbers of , , or similar tags.

4. The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.

5. The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

1. Well-written:
(a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Factually accurate and verifiable:
(a) it provides references to all sources of information in the section(s) dedicated to the attribution of these sources according to the guide to layout;

(b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; and

(c) it contains no original research.

3. Broad in its coverage:
(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:
(a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Written Review:
A very nice article, good writing, and in good form, in my opinion. Statements have good references from reliable sources, including the quotes in the Reception section. It covered all the important aspects of an article about a video game, without unnecessary information or a huge section about the plot. The images were good, although one or two more images would be nice to help describe the game more if you ever decide to try for Featured Article status. All in all, a very interesting and informative article. Keep up the good work! Epass (talk) 19:39, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure if any more images would be appropriate. What type of images do you think the article needs? Anyways, thanks for your time in reviewing the article. Cheers,  Artichoker [ talk  ] 19:42, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Maybe the cover of LeafGreen or a picture of the main character? I don't really know... perhaps a screenshot? Epass (talk) 20:07, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Well the cover of LeafGreen is a copyrighted image, and since it really doesn't add much to the article that isn't already put forth by FireRed, I don't see how adding it would significantly enhance the reader's understanding of the subject. We had a picture of the main characters a while back, but I also removed that, because once again I'm not sure how it is significant to the article. A screenshot would probably be the only possiblity; what aspect of gameplay do you think needs to be displayed?  Artichoker [ talk  ] 20:12, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * Just a suggestion on my part, but what about a screenshot of the Fame Checker (I think thta's mentioned in the article) since these are the only games it has appeared in (to my knowledge)? MelicansMatkin (talk) 20:15, 29 June 2009 (UTC)
 * The Fame Checker isn't mentioned in the article, and only comprises a very minimal, unnecessary aspect of the game.  Artichoker [ talk  ] 20:17, 29 June 2009 (UTC)