This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game articles
The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.
Does the article conform to the general standards of WP:VG articles including the WP:VG/MOS? Yes. This is an unreleased title so the usual structure of release and reception naturally don't really apply here.
Is the article generally well-written? Prose is as precise as ever. I didn't find any issues on a spell check.
Is the article broad enough in its coverage and contains reliable sourcing? This is certainly not an article found wanting for more source research or citations.
Do the sources cited verify the text in the article? Spot checking throughout the article hasn't led to any remarkable discrepancies.
Are media and links properly attributed and do not have copyright issues? The usual cover and screenshot are attributed correctly, and the Jaguar image appears to be licensed freely, so no issues here.
Any other personal opinions or miscellaneous feedback that may or may not be relevant to the nomination? See below:
Headline
MOS:LEADLENGTH indicates that this is slightly long for a lead on a short article, but this is not really issue, although it is more detailed than usual.
A demo was leaked online in 2000 and in 2002, publisher Songbird - suggest adding 'after' or separating the sentences to correct.
Lacking hardware knowledge, is it obvious that the Jaguar was powerful or is this a contemporary view conveyed by the developer that has been presented as a general fact?
I'd suggest wikilinking and decapitalising blitter and decapitalise displacement texture mapping. Generally, I'd give the section a run-through and see if any other technical jargon can be wikilinked in addition.
The last paragraph becomes a quite comprehensive and well-researched coda on the studio's history. If this is the only notable title the studio developed, it can't hurt to include this in the article as a proxy for coverage on the studio, I guess.
Release
Open platform means open-source, right? That could be wikilinked for clarity.
Sorry about that, been travelling interstate for the weekend. Have a four hour bus ride today to do a second read-through; if I find nothing else relevant to a high-level GA, I'll pass. Thanks for your patience! VRXCES (talk) 01:51, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, I don't see anything additional. Great work and high quality as ever. I always feel a bit bad about the pretty sparse feedback but a high quality article as-is shouldn't need a nitpick to prove it's a GA. VRXCES (talk) 08:40, 12 May 2024 (UTC)[reply]
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.