Talk:Crystalis/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Result: speedy delisted by Kung Fu Man. MuZemike 17:33, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I feel that this article has multiple problems that, even though was suitable for GA status a year and a half ago, no longer makes this article in Good Article standing. Here are the noted problems:

Most of the article is based off of unreliable sources, such as the multitude of GameFAQs references (which has been determined to not be reliable per WP:VG/S with only one exception as listed; these are not said exception), rpgfan.com references, or fansites (fails all of criterion 2)
Most of the article is not written in accordance to Wikipedia's manual of style (fails criterion 1). For instance, the Plot Summary section seems to say the same thing as the Characters section.
Too many as well as improper use of fair use images, automatic failure of criterion 6 of the WP:GACR as well as the non-free content criteria, criteria 3, 8, and 10.

Again, I recommend that this article, in its current state, be demoted from Good Article status to B-Class or possibly C-Class. MuZemike 08:19, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Hmmm... this was an early review among mine, although not one of the earliest, so there shouldn't be a excuse for me to have passed a completely unacceptable article. Looking at the history, it hasn't changed that much, although it looks like some junk has been tossed in over the last year and a half. Also, WP:VG didn't have their guide as to what was acceptable for sourcing, so that has definitely become an issue (I'll have to review my own GA Video Games so that they make the cut). I'm not going to do a full commentary now because 1) I don't believing in defending something if the original nominator isn't interested in doing it either, so I'd like to see their comments first and 2) In order for me to make useful commentary, I need to review the article in depth, which I won't be able to until nearer to the weekend, so I suppose that works out. My one comment for now is that bullet #3 is easily solved: simply remove one or two of the pictures either through boldness or by discussing it with the original nominator. "Emperor Draygon's true form" can probably go, but the rest seem to meet the criteria (two game play shots, the box art and a piece of the manual directly related to one of the sections). I suppose it's bit subjective; an argument could be made to remove one of the game play shots I suppose, but they are showing different (and arguably important) aspects of the game. Cheers, CP 16:02, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
- The standards for GA, especially in regards to sourcing and images, have gone way up I think within the past two years. I honestly don't think it's anyone's fault. The MoS for video game articles have also greatly improved since. Even though I'm currently working on improving NES Zapper, I'll see what I can do to improve Crystalis, which is one of my personal favorite games on the NES and one of the best games IMO on the console. MuZemike 17:23, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]
Comment Just outright delisted it and downgraded it to Start: there readily would've be enough covered just here to keep the article afloat as it needs a major overhaul instead.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 16:07, 9 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]