GA Review[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Freikorp (talk · contribs) 11:13, 25 June 2018 (UTC)
- Any chance you can add information in Gameplay about what kinds of weapons are used, and also what the 'assigned tasks' are. Just saying they are "moving to a specific point on a map and carrying out an assigned task" is a bit vague. Also the ref order at the end of that sentence needs to be fixed.
- "Eurogamer's Tom Bramwell noted" - I'd replace 'noted' with said or something similar as per WP:WORDS
- "3DO showed first screenshots" - I feel like we're missing the word "the" after 'showed'
- The Development section mentions when the game was slated to be released, though not when it was, yet the game has release dates in the infobox. Are these dates sourced? And if so, can you add the information to the prose of the article.
- I don't feel it's necessary to include the GameRanking and Metacritic scores in the prose, as they are clearly given in the table also. I'd instead just say "The game received mixed reception, according to review aggregators Metacritic and GameRankings."
- A sentence opens "Although most critics felt that the game was an improvement over others in the Army Men series", then the very next sentence begins "Critics felt that the game was a better game than others in the Army Men series." - You don't need to repeat yourself.
- I'm not sure what the actually policy is on this, but I feel inclined to simplify 60.50% in the infobox to just 60.5%
- It's not a fail point, but it's interesting that two of your sources are archived but others aren't. I'd recommend archiving them all to prevent link rot
A little brief but that's to be expected from a smaller title such as this. Placing on hold until issues can be addressed. Freikorp (talk) 11:13, 25 June 2018 (UTC)