Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/South Park: The Fractured but Whole/archive1

South Park: The Fractured but Whole

 * Nominator(s): Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

One of the only times FAC will stand for F******g Awesome Content dude, we have the South Park: The Fractured but Whole article. Comprehensive, well sourced, and open for review. Thanks. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:37, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Support from theJoebro64
Geez, it's been a year since I passed this at GAN? Time flies... anyway, reading it again I have no nitpicks, this looks FA quality. Nice work. JOE BRO  64  20:50, 7 February 2019 (UTC)

Comment from Zwerg Nase
Just one small thing I noticed: In "Critical response", there is a direct quote and the quotation marks are not right. "the truest, best adaptation" of South Park ever made". Where does the quote end? Zwerg Nase (talk) 18:48, 20 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Good eye, fixed that. Thanks. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 22:37, 20 February 2019 (UTC)

Support from Aoba47
Overall, wondering work on the article. Once my comments are addressed, I will be more than happy to support this. If you have the time, I would greatly appreciate any comments on my current FAC. Either way, have a wonderful rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 18:59, 27 February 2019 (UTC)
 * Make sure that the image have ALT text.
 * For this sentence (The Fractured but Whole retains the turn-based combat of the previous game in the series, South Park: The Stick of Truth.), I would add the year that the previous game was released.
 * For this part (Gender choices include male, female, and trigender.), I would a link to the trigender article be helpful?
 * For this part (find Yaoi art depicting intimate moments between the characters), I do not believe “yaoi” needs to be capitalized as it is not a proper noun.
 * For this sentence (Giant Bomb, GamesRadar+, and Shacknews said it was an improvement in nearly every way over The Stick of Truth, being deeper, longer, more surprising, and polished than its predecessor.), the citations need to numeric order. I have noticed a few instances of this in “Critical response” subsection, so I would advise looking through the whole article to make sure they are all in numeric order.
 * Done, thanks for your feedback, I didn't even realise trigender was a thing. I will be happy to take a look at your FA if I get time, I can't promise I will as I keep doing that to users and run out of time. But I will promise to try. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 20:55, 28 February 2019 (UTC)
 * I support the nomination. You have done a great job with the article. I honestly did not know trigender was a real thing until I googled it while doing this review lol. I completely understand. I always feel a little bad about asking for a review in return as I do not want to come across as selfish or rude. I enjoyed reading the article, and I hope you have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk)

Coord note
Not the level of commentary I would've hoped for by this stage (I'm sure DWB feels likewise!) so I'm listing at FAC urgents but if nothing much changes in the next week I'd expect to archive it. Cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 09:28, 9 March 2019 (UTC)

Comment Support from Lee Vilenski
is "New Kid" in the lead needed? I understand the plot needs to have some use in the lede, but could the article not use player character, or say "a new kid", rather than the character's name as "New Kid"? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 17:57, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure I understand? The player character is referred to as The New Kid or the less lead-friendly "douchebag". I find it easier to refer to them as New Kid as it remains consistent that way throughout the article. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:21, 9 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I think I misunderstood. This seems fine. I'll potentially support if I can't find more in the article worth mentioning. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:20, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * A few things: Images could do with ALT text. The captions on both seem a little wrong. The first one has a lot of text; is this fully neccasary? The second - does the hand puppet need a name in the caption? Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 14:26, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * The images all have Alt text, it just doesn't seem to show except on the infobox image. I don't know if you are on Chrome but I am and it doesn't work for me, but I've checked Alternative text for images and I'm doing it correctly. I cut a little bit from the first image, it's explanatory but probably too explanatory. The name of the hand puppet is there to explain who he is in relation to the plot. It sounds stupid if you haven't played it, but the hand puppet is a central character. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 19:42, 13 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Yeah, it is very odd. Alt text won't appear, it's generally for when images fail to load. I'm happy with the prose in this, so I'll support. Best Wishes,  Lee Vilenski (talk • contribs) 21:44, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

Source review
Got your Bat-Signal from WT:VG. I've supported on prose above but I'll also take the time to do a source review. From a quick glance everything looks OK, but I'll do a deeper look tomorrow. JOE BRO  64  21:48, 14 March 2019 (UTC)

OK, here's what stood out to me: That's all that stood out to me. IMO the only significant issue is the Metro sources, which can probably be replaced. JOE BRO  64  19:46, 15 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Be consistent about which parameter you use to list the work. It doesn't make sense to have Time and IGN in the publisher parameter when USgamer and EGM are in the website one. Publications like these should be in the website parameter and stuff like PlayStation Store and Metacritic should be in the publisher one.
 * References #22, 23: Link to Eurogamer
 * Reference #36, 95, 97: Metro is an unreliable source.
 * Reference #69: Are there any non-primary sources to replace the Nintendo ref? I feel coverage from a secondary one would be both better and pretty easy to find.
 * Reference #85: Add accessdate, link to Metacritic, and archive
 * (hope I'm not bothering you) I just wanted to double-check if you saw this? JOE BRO  64  00:34, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * I did but forgot to action it, thanks for reminding me Joe.Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 19:01, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Ok I think I got them all. I couldn't find replacements for the chart-related Metro sources so I had to delete them. Darkwarriorblake / SEXY ACTION TALK PAGE! 21:19, 20 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Looks good. Support on sources. JOE BRO  64  21:48, 20 March 2019 (UTC)

Comments from Laser brain
I'm concerned that this has come along this far without evidently a serious look at the use of sources in the article. The Reception section suffers from the "quotefarm" endemic that's so common in media articles (This source said this. This source called it this. Etc.) In the first full para of the Critical response section, I see direct copies of wording used in the cited articles without even proper quotation, which is plagiarism and a copyvio. I'm afraid I must firmly oppose until, at the very least, the Reception section is rewritten and the entire article audited for other plagiarism. -- Laser brain  (talk)  13:39, 27 March 2019 (UTC)

Closing note
This review is pushing two months long and it is a concern to see issues such as Laser brain raises at this stage. I'm therefore going to archive and ask that we pls audit and reword per his recommendations and then come back for another try after the usual two weeks. Tks/cheers, Ian Rose (talk) 22:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)

Ian Rose (talk) 22:31, 29 March 2019 (UTC)