Talk:Extrasolar

GA review

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.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Extrasolar/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Vrxces (talk · contribs) 04:02, 5 April 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Nub098765 (talk · contribs) 04:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I'll review this! nub :) 04:42, 16 April 2026 (UTC)

1a. prose

I have copyedited the article; please review it and revert anything you see needs to be reverted.

Otherwise, I have exactly one prose comment that I can't figure out how to resolve on my own:

• "Extrasolar was programmed in Python using JavaScript" — what does this mean? It was programmed in Python via JavaScript? Was JavaScript the vehicle by which they were able to program it in Python? Or is JavaScript another language that it was programmed in? If so, I'd suggest changing "using" to "and".

What a well-written article! nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Y Good pickup, the article is now clearer that most of the game was made using Python, and some of it using C++ and Javascript for different components. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:19, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

1b. layout and MoS

Yep. Fiction is appropriately described as such, the lead is adequately long, there aren't any words to watch, there are no lists, there is no excessive whitespace, et cetera, et cetera. Easy pass. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

2a. list of references

There is a list of references at the bottom of the article. Pass. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

2b. reliable sources

In an article with 21 references, I'd be surprised if any of them weren't reliable. But I will nonetheless check them against WP:VG/S, WP:RSP, and WP:NPPSG.

• Hardcore Gamer: reliable, per WP:VG/S#Valnet.
• NASA: reliable, per WP:NPPSG#Science and technology.
• Eurogamer: reliable, per WP:VG/S#General gaming.
• The Verge: reliable, per WP:THEVERGE.
• Game Developer (though, when the article was made, it was Gamasutra): reliable, per WP:VG/S#Games industry-related/academic/other.
• Destructoid (references 6 and 16 in the article): situational, per WP:VG/S#Situational sources. The author of these articles, Darren Nakamura, is labeled as a "contributor" on Destructoid. I do not know if that means he is subject to their editorial standards—Google AI tells me it does, but I don't know if we can really trust it—so I would like to hear your input.   Hmm, that's interesting, Destructoid hasn't been revisited in about a decade per the WP:VG/S talk page, but the 2017 discussion was about how the site no longer distinguishes editorial from blog staff. In 2014, Nakamura was listed as part of the main team of site contributors and has over 70 reviews logged per OpenCritic and 1200 news articles . His bio states he was a community member in 2006 and became a "front page contributor" in 2011. So if the site is situationally fine when attributed to a tenured contributor, Nakamura is probably fine too. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:15, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, that seems fine, then. nub :) 06:24, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

• CNET: reliable, per WP:VG/S#Situational sources, where CNET content produced "pre-November 2022" (like this article) is considered "generally reliable."
• Kill Screen: reliable, per WP:VG/S#Defunct.
• IGN: reliable, per WP:IGN.
• Rock Paper Shotgun: reliable, per WP:VG/S#Platform-specific.
• The A.V. Club: reliable, per WP:VG/S#General gaming.
• Independent Games Festival: a reliable primary source
• Games Industry.biz: reliable, per WP:VG/S#Games industry-related/academic/other.
• Polygon: reliable at the time the article was written, per WP:POLYGON.

Overall, a very well-reliable list of sources line the passages of this article. Good job! nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

2c. original research

To make sure this article contains no original research, I will now conduct a spotcheck of its citations.

This table lists 20 random passages from throughout the article (40.0% of 50 total passages). These passages contain 29 inline citations (39.7% of 73 in the article). Generated with the Veracity user script. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Y I've moved some things around and changed the wording where flagged so that the citations properly reflect the text and vice-versa. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 06:22, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Reference #	Letter	Source	Archive	Status	Notes
Gameplay
Players assumed the role of a volunteer remotely operating a mars rover operated by the Exoplanetary Research Institute (XRI), a fictional organisation who have crowdsourced operation of the mission to players.
1	a	hardcoregamer.com			Yep.
2	a	asd.gsfc.nasa.gov	web.archive.org		—
Mission objectives and updates to the game were shared to the player in the form of emails, recorded video calls and documents shared to a fictional in-game inbox.
6	a	destructoid.com	web.archive.org		Yep.
7	a	cnet.com	web.archive.org		Yep.
who warns the player not to trust the organisation.
8	a	killscreen.com	web.archive.org		It says "[kryptex81's] message claimed that the XRI wasn’t telling me everything; that I should be careful.", but I guess you could find that logic.
The map also tracked the journey of the rover and points where photos were taken for future reference.
3	f	eurogamer.net	web.archive.org		Yes.
The game featured to a day and night cycle, requiring the player to use flash or infrared to see objects if shots were taken in the darkness.
1	c	hardcoregamer.com			Yep.
6	b	destructoid.com	web.archive.org		Yep, though as far as I can tell, this only corroborates the first part ("The game featured a day and night cycle").
Players could also pay a larger fee to continue playing the game following completion of all the missions to extend the end of the game.
1	e	hardcoregamer.com			Mhm.
Development
lead artist Brendan Mauro and software designer Jon Le Plastrier.
10	a	gamedeveloper.com	web.archive.org		Yepperino.
Development of the game commenced in April 2010, with Jagnow conceiving of an online space exploration game as a method of showcasing high-quality rendering techniques to a general audience.
9	b	gamedeveloper.com			Yeah.
3	j	eurogamer.net	web.archive.org		Yes.
The concept of interacting with a distant mars rover following a delay supported the game's anticipated limitations of providing players with one high-resolution photo every hour.
2	c	asd.gsfc.nasa.gov	web.archive.org		Reasonable.
The landscape on Epsilon Prime was inspired by Jagnow's experiences travelling with his father, a geologist, and Socotra, an island off the coast of East Africa.
2	e	asd.gsfc.nasa.gov	web.archive.org		Yep.
with the developers entering preproduction for a second and third season of content.
2	f	asd.gsfc.nasa.gov	web.archive.org		Yeah.
The game was not commercially successful, with developers stating that whilst "a few" players paid a fee to upgrade their accounts, revenue was "nowhere near enough to fund development of new content" and was "barely enough to keep [the game] up and running".
12	a	rockpapershotgun.com	web.archive.org		"Quite a few", not "a few", which is, I think, a pretty substantial difference.
The campaign was unsuccessful.
7	c	cnet.com	web.archive.org		Might be my imperfect eyes, but I don't see that anywhere.
13	a	avclub.com			This one corroborates it, though.
Reception
and an alternate reality game,
13	c	avclub.com			Yep.
14	a	rockpapershotgun.com	web.archive.org		Mhm.
Holly Green of The A.V. Club stating the presentation of its fictional ecosystems were "educational and interesting",
13	d	avclub.com			"Educational but interesting."
Listing the game as one of the best of 2014,
16		destructoid.com	web.archive.org		Yep.
Critics were generally positive about the passive gameplay and delays, and the game was seen as ideal to play in short bursts of time.
1	f	hardcoregamer.com			Corroborates the second part.
3	m	eurogamer.net	web.archive.org		Corroborates the first part.
Both Dan Whitehead of Eurogamer and Chris Priestman of Kill Screen considered the countdown mechanic built the player's anticipation,
8	c	killscreen.com	web.archive.org		Yep, though, amusingly, the article calls the countdown mechanic "wait timers".
3	n	eurogamer.net	web.archive.org		Yep.
In 2014, Extrasolar received a nomination for the Nuovo Award at the Independent Games Festival,
17		igf.com			Yeah.
9	d	gamedeveloper.com			Mhm.
It was also shortlisted for the Gamer's Voice award at the SXSW Gaming Awards.
19		polygon.com	web.archive.org		And yep.

2d. copyright violations

According to Earwig, a copyright violation is "unlikely", with the most similar piece of text being the CNET article at 13% similarity, consisting of one quote and a list of ways the player gets information. Easy pass. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

3a. main topics

This article covers the main topics of the subject. A cursory Google search revealed no broad strokes left unpainted, though, of course, some minutiae is omitted (which is permitted per WP:UNDUE). Either way, the main topics are readily covered. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

3b. focusedness

At 1229 words, covering a lead section, a gameplay section, a development section, and a reception section, I don't think it's possible for this article to go into unnecessary detail. Each sentence provides a distinct, verifiable fact, and no one detail is given undue weight. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

4. neutral

Very neutral. As noted above, I see no words to watch. Any evaluative commentary is surrounded by quotes and attributed to a specific individual from a specific outlet. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

5. stable

I think expecting this article to not be stable at this point would be giving too much credit to the game. It was created over a decade ago, became defunct in 2018, and has barely been interacted with since (except, of course, by our nominator Vrxces). It is way past its prime—or, should I say, Epsilon Prime. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

6a. correctly tagged media

The infobox image, which is the game's logo/cover art, is correctly tagged as fair use, as is the screenshot of the game. Fair-use rationales are long, detailed, and adequately explain why non-free images were required in both cases. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

6b. relevant media

The two images present in this article are both relevant. The infobox image directly identifies the subject by its title. As it is in the infobox, a caption is not needed (and would, in fact, be cumbersome for a reader to trudge through with their eyes, as the image conveys all that needs to be conveyed). The screenshot directly identifies the way the game looks as one plays it, which is, contrary to popular belief, relevant. The caption directly describes what the entity in the image is—Extrasolar's UI—and why it was designed the way it was. An adequate caption. nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Overall

Overall, this is a fantastic article with which I have five small quibbles, many of which are nitpicks that could be resolved in five seconds...collectively. I don't feel comfortable immediately passing this article, but the moment these are fixed (or at least responded to), I will surely pass it. Amazing, amazing job, and I look forward to your response, @Vrxces. Thanksya! nub :) 05:51, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

Alrighty! I think everything is adequately addressed. If you (Vrxces) have nothing else to say, I think I can comfortably say that this article passes the GA criteria. Thank you for such an interesting read (really an interesting concept for a video game, and presented so nicely), and I wish you luck on your future Wikipedia endeavors. Thanksya! nub :) 06:28, 22 April 2026 (UTC)

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.