Talk:Brawl Stars/GA1

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: X4VIER.OneTap (talk · contribs) 14:47, 10 March 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: NegativeMP1 (talk · contribs) 15:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

I would've just removed the banner again because of how apparent these issues are, but I figured it would be better to write down why exactly this article does not meet the good-article criteria, and furthermore, what is expected out of good articles for video games on Wikipedia.

• The prose needs substantial work. The Gameplay section is way too long and goes into unnecessary detail. The gamemodes section is also excessive and formatted in a very poor way, rather than written into actual proper paragraphs.
• The lead is not an adequate summary of the articles contents. There are citations in it for content that should be verified in the article prose (MOS:CITELEAD), and it doesn't actually cover many of the things in the article. Not that most of the content in the article at present should be kept or even summarized in the lead, but I digress.
• The reception section needs more work. Right now it only has 2 critic reviews and they are each given their own paragraph. Generally, reception sections should summarize reviewers thoughts on the discussed work in question and give each paragraph a specific topic. And there are at least two reviews that need to be used in this article that aren't used at present, this review by the South China Morning Post and this one by Polygon. See this essay on writing better reception sections.
• The articles sourcing is not acceptable. Over half of it is cited to the support pages for Supercell or Brawl Stars, which are primary sources and generally should be avoided whenever possible. The article also cites Droid Gamers, which WP:VG/S declares as an unreliable source. Newsweek is also used, which has very iffy reliability. Also, what makes Android Community, Daily Esports, Brawl Stats, and Brawlify reliable sources? Please see WP:VG/S for a list of reliable, secondary sources for writing video game related articles. It isn't a fully concrete list, but it is a good starting point.
• There is an active citation needed tag in the article.

As a result of the issues I have posted above, and the fact that this article will likely need to be completely rewritten, I am failing this nomination at present. I recommend taking a look at some of our video game good articles to use as a reference for restructuring this article. λ NegativeMP1 15:57, 11 March 2025 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.