Talk:Secret Weapons of the Luftwaffe

Assessment
It has a stub template, so I automatically rated it a stub. However, I'm also here to give a more broad view, so here goes: I hope my assessment helped! Cheers, haha169 (talk) 05:28, 22 May 2008 (UTC)
 * Lead - Requires huge expansion. (It is an intro, so naturally, you can copy elements from the main article and put it here, using different terms)
 * The Game - Change name to "Gameplay". Campaign Battles are useless, and WP:MoS needs to be followed here.
 * Videos and Quality / The Myth of SWOTL - See above
 * Sources - See WP:REF for citing templates and WP:V for verifiability guidelines. The current list there seems like a list of External Links. This article has zero sources, and needs them to establish notability.
 * Images - THREE non-free images on such a short article. Surely a violation of fair-use claims.

Thank you for your assessment! I'll do my best to improve this article! However, about Sources, well... I'm not sure what you intend for "verifiability guidelines" and "zero sources". According to me, SWOTL is just a videogame, and I don't know what souces shoud be cited... I think that the verifiability is in the Game itself: everyone can buy a copy of SWOTL, play it and read its Manual (if you can still find a copy of SWOTL in Commerce or Second-Hand). On the other side, I play SWOTL since 1991: I am one of the SWOTL Veteran Fans, and I think that I know SWOTL better than any other journalist than can write an article on it. Even now, a copy of SWOTL is on my Hard Drive and I usually play it with Dos Box. So, just for me, citing a Source for this article "verifiability" makes me laugh... may be, with the only eception of INTERWIEVS to SWOTL Developers... but, not easy to find out. I'll try to find some interwiews.... then, the SWOTL Website is an external link... of course, but is also the Main Site about SWOTL.

So, I thank you very much for your suggestions, but simply I don't know what Sources could I cite to "write with verifiability" about SWOTL... perhaps some interwievs to its developers? Cheers, TheMachinist75 (talk) 15:48, 30 May 2008 (UTC)