Talk:Super Paper Mario/GA2

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

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 22:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)

I'll tackle this. ♦ jaguar  22:08, 1 March 2021 (UTC)


 * Lead
 * I feel the artwork caption is a tad superfluous - I'd remove the word 'packaging'
 * "Critics praised its gameplay, mainly its dimension-flipping mechanic, originality, and story" - remove this to improve flow, and link game mechanics
 * "critics have since regarded as one of the best" - missing 'it'
 * " Paper Mario: Sticker Star followed in 2012." - was this a sequel?
 * It seems as if every video game article has something like this, but I've improved the writing. ✅.
 * " Paper Mario: Sticker Star followed in 2012." - was this a sequel?
 * It seems as if every video game article has something like this, but I've improved the writing. ✅.
 * It seems as if every video game article has something like this, but I've improved the writing. ✅.


 * Gameplay
 * "overcoming linear platforming in theme of standard games in the Mario franchise" - would read better as overcoming linear platforming in like those of other games in the Mario franchise


 * Development
 * "which never materialized but was never officially canceled" - repetition, replace with 'not'


 * Reception
 * "The review aggregator website Metacritic reported that Super Paper Mario received "generally favorable reviews"" - this shouldn't be in past tense: According to the review aggregator website Metacritic, Super Paper Mario received "generally favorable reviews" with a score of 85 out of 100...
 * "calling it "slightly weaker" than most Mario platformers" - perhaps feeling it was "slightly weaker"
 * "calling it "slightly weaker" than most Mario platformers" - perhaps feeling it was "slightly weaker"

I think that's about it. This article is solid and GA-worthy - once all of the above nitpicks are out of the way then by all means this should be good to go. ♦ jaguar  22:35, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Well, that was easy. Concerns have been addressed. Thanks for picking this up, considering you just reviewed an article of mine. P  anini 🥪 23:25, 1 March 2021 (UTC)
 * It's fine, this was is good shape anyway. With all that out of the way - let's promote this. ♦  jaguar  11:24, 2 March 2021 (UTC)