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.
Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.
If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)
I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.
Best of luck! you can also use the ((done)) tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs)
Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.
It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
It contains copyright infringements -
It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include((cleanup)), ((POV)), ((unreferenced)) or large numbers of ((citation needed)), ((clarify)), or similar tags. (See also ((QF-tags))). -
It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -
for the note, could we explicitly state what translation it is. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
(later Square Enix), seems a little irrelevant for the lede. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
The company has become famous - can we change this? "Famous" is relative. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:35, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Fantasy Earth moved away from its premise of a human-vampire war to a more traditional fantasy setting involving princesses - might be worth saying traditional... for a RPG. I don't think fantasy princesses is a traditional premise in everyday culture. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Production was completed in 2006, but Atlus delayed its release into the following year so as not to cannibalize the market for their other titles, particularly Persona 3. - I feel like this needs a citation as being the reason. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Ultimately, Dragon's Crown was a great success for Vanillaware - can we quantify why this was true? Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Could we get a source for the list under "games developed"? I realise it's implied from the rest of the text, but for a list, it's worth being explicit. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:44, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[reply]
Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definitely not mandatory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs)
Hi ProtoDrake. Article looks very good. I'll pass this one, as it clearly meets the requirements. I have a few comments that might be worth investigating. Great job. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski(talk • contribs) 21:46, 11 March 2020 (UTC)Reply[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.