Talk:Slither.io/GA1

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

Reviewer: P*h3i (talk · contribs) 10:26, 5 August 2017 (UTC)

This is a good article review of Slither.io, based on the six Wikipedia good article criteria.

After these issues are fixed, I feel that this article could become an article of GA status. Thus, I'll put Slither.io's good article review on hold. Judging by the nominator's user contributions, I deem the nominator as very active so I will give a week as the on-hold period. ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  10:26, 5 August 2017 (UTC)


 * Thanks for doing the GA review. I also have to thank Wumbolo for his edits, which I think resolved all of these issues you've brought up. epicgenius (talk) 00:59, 6 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I still have issues with the image caption. Image captions for gameplay screenshots should reflect what is happening in the screenshot rather than what the screenshot is. As the screenshot doesn't really have anything happening, I would suggest replacing it with a screenshot where, for example, a snake has just defeated another snake, and the pellets have appeared from it, with the caption "An example of gameplay in Slither.io. A snake had a collision with another snake's body, meaning the snake is defeated.", or where a snake is consuming a lot of pellets, in which the caption could be "An example of gameplay in Slither.io. A snake is consuming pellets to grow larger". What I'm trying to say here is use a screenshot that conveys the most about the game a single frame of the game possibly can. See also: PaRappa the Rapper.
 * I've uploaded a new image of a snake eating the remains of another snake. epicgenius (talk) 00:44, 8 August 2017 (UTC)
 * After second re-evaluation, I have realised that there is insufficient quantity of information about multiple things in the article -- here are some things that can be added:
 * More information about the mobile version (in Gameplay)
 * More information about the artificial intelligence of the mobile version(in Gameplay)
 * More information about the cultural impact of the game (in Reception)
 * Also, some other things -- the mentioning of AI should not be under the "Skins" subheading, "(IO Games had reached their peak)" is not referenced, has an unclear POV and is not grammatically formatted and the "Protocol" section is too small to be its own section. Also, a note -- I didn't realise there were so little proper critic reviews of the game -- the review template should be removed as it is too small. That is my mistake. ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  15:04, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * {| class="wikitable"
 * {| class="wikitable"

! Issue Description !! Location !! Criteria !! Suggestions
 * + Additionally...
 * Add more related categories || Category list || 3 || Category:Multiplayer-only video games, Catgeory:Casual games, Category:Social casual gaming
 * Replace primary sources (Refs. 9 and 10) || Gameplay > Protocol || 2 || Wikipedia prefers secondary sources; if not findable, leave primary source
 * Add note about pronunciation || Notes || 3 || See Agar.io
 * }
 * Add note about pronunciation || Notes || 3 || See Agar.io
 * }
 * }

Thanks for the further comments. I'll try to resolve them if I can. However, I don't know if I could find more information about certain details. epicgenius (talk) 20:19, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * The info about mobile version is already in the "Development" section. There isn't much else that I could add. epicgenius (talk) 20:30, 9 August 2017 (UTC)
 * Not true -- there is an absence of talk about the different gameplay control schemes, arguably a major exclusive feature of the mobile version in comparison to the browser version. The sentence about the AI and the old victory message mechanic in Gameplay should be joined together with a new sentence about control schemes, and put under a subheading called "Mobile version". ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  06:42, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I have placed the information under a new header. As the victory message is not exclusive the the mobile version, I don't want to put that under the new subheading. Otherwise, ✅. epicgenius (talk) 19:59, 11 August 2017 (UTC)
 * I was mistaken about the victory message. Apologies. ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  06:02, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

Please refer to the article talk page and contribute to the discussion titled "Regarding the title of this article". This should be the final step to get this article to a GA standard. ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  10:21, 12 August 2017 (UTC)

I see no reason to further prolong this review. I deem Slither.io to be of satisfactory standard of a good article, and thus it subsequently passes the criteria. Thank you Epicgenius for nominating the article and Epicgenius and Wumbolo for responding to the review in a timely matter.

The GA-giving process will now begin. ~ P*h3i   (talk to me)  02:56, 13 August 2017 (UTC)