Talk:Fallout Online/GA1

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Famous Hobo (talk · contribs) 19:58, 14 May 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: Vacant0 (talk · contribs) 10:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Hello! I'll be reviewing this article as part of the ongoing GAN backlog drive. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 10:19, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
It is reasonably well written. a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists): It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check. a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism): It is broad in its coverage. a (major aspects): b (focused): It follows the neutral point of view policy. Fair representation without bias: It is stable. No edit wars, etc.: It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate. a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall: Pass/Fail:
· · ·

Initial comments

• It is possible that there is copyright violation in the article. Earwig's Copyvio Detector has reported 48% in similarity. Will analyse this in depth later in the review. See below.
• There are no cleanup banners, such as those listed at WP:QF, in the article.
• The article is stable.
• No previous GA reviews.

General comments

• Prose, spelling, and grammar checking.
  • No issues were found in the lede.
  • The rest of the article also looks good. I did not find any grammar errors.
• Checking whether the article complies with MOS.
  • Add alt texts to the images in the article.
  • The lede could be shortened to just two paragraphs, per MOS:LEADLENGTH. It meets the rest of the MOS:LEDE guideline.
  • The article complies with the MOS:LAYOUT, MOS:WTW, and MOS:WAF guidelines. There are no embedded lists within the article, so I am skipping MOS:EMBED.
• Checking refs, verifiability, and whether there is original research.
  • References section with a {{reflist}} template is present in the article.
  • No referencing issues.
  • Listed references are reliable. Good job on archiving the refs.
  • Spotchecked Ref 2, 3, 6, 8, 10, 13, 19, 23–all verify the cited content. AGF on other citations.
  • Checking potential copyvio.
    • Seems to be a false positive. It picked up the quotes that are in text.
• Checking whether the article is broad in its coverage.
  • For a cancelled game, this is a well-researched article.
  • When was Interplay acquired by Titus Interactive?
  • The article stays on the topic.
• Checking whether the article is presented from an NPOV standpoint.
  • The article meets the criteria and is written in encyclopedic language.
• Checking whether the article is stable.
  • As noted in the initial comments, the article has been stable.
• Checking images.
  • All looks to be good.

Final comments

@Famous Hobo: There are only a couple of minor issues that need to be addressed. Other than that, the article is in a good shape. I'll put the review on hold for a week. Once the issues get addressed, I'll promote the article. --Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 13:05, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

@Vacant0: Hi there! Thank you for taking on this review. I added alt text to the four images and provided the year when Titus acquired Interplay. Regarding the lede, I combined the second and third paragraphs and cut out the bit about Bethesda amending the lawsuit to preclude the use of any materials from the Fallout series. I wasn't sure if that part was necessary to mention in the lede. Famous Hobo (talk) 05:57, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Looks good now. Promoting. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 09:34, 4 July 2024 (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.