# Talk:Thank Goodness You're Here!

Currently expanding the article.  Game is notable as it has been published by a well-known publisher and has already received several awards.–DMartin  19:13, 29 July 2024 (UTC)

Right now the article is linking to game stores that sell the game (Steam, Nintendo, and Playstation stores) and also not linking other stores that sell it (MacOS, Epic). I don't think we should link any stores. Looking at the examples of video game articles that are featured (Wikipedia:Featured articles#Video gaming), none that I looked at links the game's store page. Most link the game's own website, which is fine per WP:ELMINOFFICIAL. But we shouldn't be providing a directory of places to buy, and in particular we mustn't be cherrypicking which stores to list. -- Finlay McWalter··–·Talk 19:04, 1 August 2024 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Thank Goodness You're Here!/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Nominator: PresN (talk · contribs) 20:58, 4 September 2025 (UTC)
Reviewer: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 19:36, 7 September 2025 (UTC)

Will be taking this on in the coming days. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 19:36, 7 September 2025 (UTC)
@PresN:


### Six GA Criteria
1. Article is well-written. Very minimal mistakes if any at all.
2. No OR, all info is cited in the article.
3. Coverage is broad in depth and focus. Shows multiple aspects of the game.
4. Article appears neutral, and does not appear to hold a significantly negative nor positive stance on the subject.
5. Article appears stable. Does not appear to have had any major vandalism occur.
6. Article uses two fair use images with proper rationale. 


### Overall
Just gonna be blunt here; I can't see any major problems with this article. All that's there are minor typos or linking issues, which I've addressed. The proseline is good, and the spotcheck checks out well. Only issues are:
-"At the end of the game, the salesman is overwhelmed by the residents' demands for help and returns to the mayor's office, only to find out the mayor wants his help with an errand as well." (This is uncited)
-I feel when game outlets are brought up again after the initial mention in Reception, author names should be used instead of the outlet name, but I'm not sure if there's a particular policy for this one way or another. 
Let me know once the above are addressed and I'll pass this. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 01:50, 14 September 2025 (UTC)

@Pokelego999: Thanks for the edits! The last sentence of that section is plot, which is why it's not cited; the game doesn't have enough of a plot to justify its own section, but the normal rules still apply. There isn't a rule on using names vs outlets in reception; I used to use names, but I got some pushback at FAC about it as being less useful to readers so now I stick with outlet names. --PresN 14:16, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
@PresN I have no issues then. Happy to pass.  Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:38, 15 September 2025 (UTC)
Oh, just realized I forgot to mention: spotcheck turned out with no issues.  Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 18:38, 15 September 2025 (UTC)