Talk:Sandrone (Genshin Impact)/GA1
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
GA review
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Nominator: Gommeh (talk · contribs) 16:21, 26 August 2026 (UTC)
Reviewer: Shapeyness (talk · contribs) 11:22, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
I will review this one for GARC circle 123, I won't be able to add comments over the next few days but will try to review next week. Shapeyness (talk) 11:22, 27 August 2026 (UTC)
- @Shapeyness: Reminder ping. Z1720 (talk) 04:04, 3 September 2026 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reminder! I meant to get to this earlier but have been busy irl, I will put comments I have so far below (just evaluating sources so far). Shapeyness (talk) 13:46, 3 September 2026 (UTC)
| Rate | Attribute | Review Comment |
|---|---|---|
| 1. Well-written: | ||
 |
1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct. | Once comments/queries on sources are addressed, I will do a prose review |
 |
1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. | Article complies with relevant parts of the MoS |
| 2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check: | ||
|
2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline. | A full list of references is included |
 |
2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose). | All statements are cited inline. I have added some comments/queries on sources below. |
|
2c. it contains no original research. | I will include a spotcheck later |
|
2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism. | Earwig shows low likelihood of copyvio, I will include a spotcheck later |
| 3. Broad in its coverage: | ||
|
3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic. | The article includes sections on development/design, story appearances and gameplay, release and promotion, and reception, covering all major aspects I would expect and similar to other GAs on game characters - I will do a more thorough check of sources later to make sure nothing major is missing |
|
3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). | I will address this as part of the prose review later |
|
4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each. | I will address this as part of the prose review later |
|
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. | The article is stable and free from edit wars |
| 6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: | ||
|
6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content. | The infobox image has a valid fair use rationale, I would suggest adding alt text |
|
6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. | |
|
7. Overall assessment. | |
Sources
- Pro Game Guides - I would replace this if you can find an alternative source, I think it is ok to keep if you can't find anything though
- What makes Nadianshi an RS? (this may be my own ignorance)
- What makes the Qian 2026 source an RS? Also, is it available directly from the source website rather than a Weixin post?
- Gamedaily.com is listed as unreliable at WP:VGRS from 2025 onwards
- The Yahoo News source actually seems to be syndicated content - what makes the underlying source an RS?
- Everything else looks ok