Talk:Speed Dreams/GA1

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

Reviewer: Teancum (talk · contribs) 21:55, 17 May 2012 (UTC)

Criteria

 * GA review (see here for criteria)


 * 1) Is it reasonably well written?
 * A. Prose quality:
 * B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
 * 1) Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * A. References to sources:
 * B. Citation of 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 copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:
 * B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:

Comments

 * Is it reasonably well written?
 * Per WP:LEAD, the lead should summarize the article in an appropriate way according to the article size. Given the size of the article the lead is incredibly short
 * layout sections that are short should be merged to their parent, and short paragraphs should also be merged. There are several instances where there are one-paragraph sections and very short paragraphs


 * Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
 * While it is well sourced, there is no indication that most of these sources pass reliable sources guidelines. Many a primary sources which are directly related to the project, and thus cannot be used to establish facts and notability, only to support it. Several more third-party reliable sources are needed.


 * Is it broad in its coverage?
 * The article provides excessive details per WP:GAMETRIVIA. Please see Halo 3 for a good example on what content is appropriate and what is too excessive in detail.


 * Is it neutral?
 * It seems to largely promote the game. The amount of detail, the lack of any real criticism in the Reception section, etc.
 * For that matter, I couldn't find any reliable media outlets in the Reception games that had reviewed the game, and only one that is questionably reliable


 * Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
 * The amount of images given seems excessive. Again, the detail feels far too complex. Between the text and images it reads more like a technical document.
 * Have these images been checked by an admin on Commons? I couldn't find any confirmation that the proper permissions had been given to make them freely available.

Unfortunately given the number of issues I can't pass this as a good article.