Talk:SSX 3/GA1

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

I'll finish this one by tomorrow. Thanks, ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 22:46, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


 * 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:
 * 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:
 * B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

 * "SSX 3 (Snowboard Super Cross 3) is an extreme snowboard racing game" - why extreme here? Is extreme the actual name of the sport or is it a category? It would breach formality if it wasn't
 * "It is the third installment in the SSX series, and is THX approved" - is it the first instalment in the series (or any video game, as I think THX was introduced not long before this release) that is THX approved? Might be worth noting
 * The real concern here is the lack of broadness in the lead section - at the moment there is nothing on the development or reception mentioned in the lead section. In order to comply per WP:LEAD the lead must summarise all sections of the article. This shouldn't be too hard to achieve
 * "Events fall under two categories: Race and freestyle" - should 'freestyle' be capitalised too?
 * NBA Street Vol. 2 is liked twice in Development
 * "after the release of the previous title in the series, SSX Tricky" - no link for this?
 * I would strongly recommend cutting down the list in the Soundtrack section (the prose at the bottom) as it is slightly overlinked and list-y which goes against the GA criteria. The section is also unreferenced
 * "Metacritic, which assigns a normalized rating in the 0-100 range" - I wouldn't think there's any need to explain that Metacritic gives a score between 0-100, assuming that the reader already knows this
 * "Eurogamer's Tom Bramwell called the new "super-uber" tricks " - Tom Bramwell of Eurogamer is already introduced above

On hold
With some work this article could have a chance of passing this GAN. I'll leave this on hold for the standard seven days, please let me know when you have all. Thanks! ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 23:02, 25 February 2015 (UTC)

Close - promoted
The article has improved sigificantly thanks to your edits, and also thanks to you letting me know on my talk page (for clarification), this article now meets the GA criteria. It is broad, well written, comprehensive and all the references are in working order. Everything here complies per VG standards and the GA criteria, so I'll promote this. Good luck if you ever plan on FACing. ☯ Jag  uar  ☯ 17:51, 26 February 2015 (UTC)