# Talk:Gasketball

{{Did you know nominations/Mikengreg, Solipskier, Gasketball}} czar ♔ 16:13, 13 July 2014 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Gasketball/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 21:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)

Will do this one tomorrow. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 21:36, 6 August 2014 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it reasonably well written?
A. Prose quality: 

B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists: 

Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
A. References to sources: 

B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary: 

C. No original research: 

Is it broad in its coverage?
A. Major aspects: 

B. Focused: 

Is it neutral?
Fair representation without bias: 

Is it stable?
No edit wars, etc: 

Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales: 

B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions: 

Overall:
Pass or Fail: 


### Initial comments
#### Lead
"Towards the end of their development, they ran out of money and lived on the couches of friends." - don't like this phrasing so much, "lived on the couches of friends" doesn't seem too literate! I don't know how to specifically say this but in terms of video game development running out of money doesn't denote living off couches! This is also mentioned in the Development section, but I'll leave it up to you if you want to keep it in that section.
Other than that I don't see any problems here, the prose and length is good so this meets the GA criteria.


#### Development
"Even though Solipskier was successful, the duo did not have a following" - how about "fan following" to describe this clearly?
"and thus felt like their external pressure was low. Instead, their pressure was internal" - what is 'pressure' referring to?


#### References
All the references check out fine, and also the citations are in the correct places so this qualifies the GA criteria.


### On hold
This is a compact article so there were very little prose problems here. The article is generally written well, if not that broad but it is definitely GA worthy. The only concern I have is the slight informality in the lead and the couple copy editing issues in the Development section. Only those issues block Gasketball's chance of becoming GA! Czar, I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days but I will be off-Wiki for some time soon. If you can address those issues (which are minor) this article should become GA. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:34, 7 August 2014 (UTC)

@Jaguar, thanks for the review. I know the sleeping on couches seems extreme, but that's not embellished and in fact direct from the source. Several articles covered it, so I felt it was important for the lede. "Following" should imply "fan following", no? Fixed the pressure part. czar ♔ 22:06, 7 August 2014 (UTC)


### Close - promoted
You're right, maybe I was being too cautious! Following does imply "fan following" and concerning the couches, if it is in the source then it should be in the article. Despite the short review the article meets the GA criteria. Well done! ☠ Jaguar ☠ 10:06, 8 August 2014 (UTC)