# Talk:Serious Sam: The Second Encounter

This review is transcluded from Talk:Serious Sam: The Second Encounter/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Reviewer: XTheBedrockX (talk · contribs) 19:03, 11 November 2023 (UTC)
This article looks promising. Planning to give this a review.

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.
a (reference section):  b (inline 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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):  b (appropriate use with suitable captions): 

Overall:
Pass/Fail: 


### Conclusion
After a review of this article, I believe it meets all the criteria required for a GA-level article. Congratulations on making a quality page! — Preceding unsigned comment added by XTheBedrockX (talk • contribs) 08:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)

Thank you for the review, @XTheBedrockX! I see you made a few edits to the article. They were largely pretty solid, though a few mistakes also seem to have slipped in (particularly regarding apostrophes). I fixed these just now and am happy that we brought the article into a decent state. Kind regards, IceWelder [✉] 11:56, 12 November 2023 (UTC)
You’re very welcome! XTheBedrockX (talk) 12:22, 12 November 2023 (UTC)