Talk:Pelé!

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Nehme1499 (talk · contribs) 11:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

This seems like an interesting article: I'll take care of the review. Nehme₁₄₉₉ 11:28, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Comments

Lead

• in modes of play such as exhibitions, tournaments and seasons: I'm not sure the average reader will know what an "exhibition" is; I'd change it to "exhibition games" (in line with the article we have on Wikipedia), or "friendly games" (though, I'm not sure which of the two is more popular in NA).
• Regarding NA: just to be clear, is the article using Canadian English, US English, or UK English? I just want to know for consistency.
  • Since the game was developed in Canada, the article ought to be using Canadian English, but since I mentally committed it as "North American" (i.e. US) English during editing, there might be an error here or there. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
• by former New York Cosmos forward Pelé: a couple of issues. Firstly, is there any specific reason why you preferred to represent him as a NYC player, rather than a Santos one (given that he played in Brazil for almost 20 years, compared to his three seasons in the US)? I'd personally change it to by former Brazilian footballer Pelé (also to avoid MOS:SEAOFBLUE).
  • That's just the team that was mentioned in Electronic Games's blurb covering the licensing deal, so I went with it. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
• Is Pelé II: World Tournament Soccer a potentially notable article? If so, I'd wikilink it as to encourage page creation. Otherwise, ignore this.
  • That article was redirected to this one due to a determined insufficient amount of sources for an individual page. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
• I would divide the paragraph starting from "Pelé! received mixed reviews from critics", and probably add a sentence or two about the cancelled SNES + Australia releases.

Gameplay

• one of 40 international teams: by "international team", do you mean national teams (such as Brazil or Italy), or clubs worldwide? If it's the former, I'd change it to "national teams", if it's the latter, to "teams worldwide".
• I would divide the paragraph starting from "The usual rules of the sport apply".
• Can players receive yellow/red cards?
  • Hadn't seen any reviewers mention that outright, but going by the presence of a penalty box (as pointed out by GamePro), I can only assume that's the case. Mind you, I'm not a soccer player, so the assumption might be misguided. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Development

• Link to Accolade (company).
• Change New York Cosmos forward Pelé to "Brazilian footballer Pelé".
• Change St. Louis Blues right winger Brett Hull to "ice hockey player Brett Hull".
• Link to Radical Entertainment.

Reception

• I would divide the paragraph starting from "Deniz Ahmet".

Sequel

• Same thing here: what are "international" teams?

Other comments

• Try to be consistent with the use of the Oxford comma, as you use it with "or" ("can chip, shoot, or pass"), also with "fouls, corners, and offside" or example, but not with "exhibitions, tournaments and seasons".
• Everything else seems good. If these minor concerns can be dealt with, I'm happy to promote the article to GA.
  • Alright, all points ought to have been dealt with. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:12, 18 March 2022 (UTC)
    • Great! Btw, I've also nominated A.C. Monza for GA, if you're interested in reviewing an article (admittedly, it's a bit long though, so don't feel obligated). Nehme₁₄₉₉ 19:30, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

Assessment

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. 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):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail: