Talk:CarnEvil/GA1

GA review

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

Nominator: Cat's Tuxedo (talk · contribs) 02:48, 2 September 2025 (UTC)

Reviewer: CooperCool23 (talk · contribs) 17:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

This thing has been sitting on the back burner of articles needing GA review attention for almost a month. I'll handle the duties for this one, just to get one sheep out of the pasture, and you can expect comments from me, at the latest, starting next week. COOPER COOL 23 user page 17:42, 28 September 2025 (UTC)

Well, i'm ready to get this thing started. This first wave of suggestions is based off my quick glance overview of the article, so don't expect something like source spot checks or in-depth text changes just yet...

Review (Part 1)

• = Regular suggestions: need to be done, or at the very least taken seriously

- = Nitpick suggestions: don't need to happen or could be implemented for additional article polish or a future FA nom

Lead

• I understand that you have already expanded the lead to a decent degree, but my general consensus reads that it could be expanded and rewritten further (currently seems like the text rushes through gameplay in particular. I know it's a glorified shooting gallery but still).
• "North American arcade flyer". The game was only released in North America, so I don't really see the point in making a regional distinction.
• "...1998 light-gun shooter arcade game..." --> "...1998 arcade light-gun shooter game..."
• "...released by Midway Games." --> "...developed and published by Midway Games."

Gameplay

• Gameplay image should be moved to the righthand side to avoid text sandwiching.

• The image description could also be tweaked. Something along the lines of "The player aiming their gun at an elf in the Rickty Town level" works (if my example is changed, as its more of a rough idea of the description if anything)

- Could the sources be stretched out (as in "uno.[1] dos.[1] tres.[1]" compared to "uno. dos. tres.[1])? It feels a bit like it could be done with sources 1 and 2 in particular.

- It might also be worthwhile to see if there are any other sources that can be used, either to strength the text or to potently lessen the load that S1 and S2 share.

Plot

- This section might work better as a part of the Gameplay section. Considering that the plot isn't really the focus and said plot is fairly simplistic, in my opinion it would work better as a diced up part of the gameplay section (something like a premise summary works best if this is implemented)

Development and release

• "...The Avengers..." --> "...The Avengers..."
• "CarnEvil was conceptualized by Jack Haeger in 1988 when he was working on the video game Narc." --> "The game was conceived by games designer Jack Haeger in 1988 while working on the run and gun game Narc."

Reception and legacy

• Where is the reception box?

Since only one publication gave it a score, I deemed it unnecessary, especially since per MOS:VGREC it is not required. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 08:19, 2 October 2025 (UTC)

- An image of the arcade cabinet's shotgun might be useful to understand the reviewers praise of the physical gun being comfortable to hold.

Other

• Add a portal bar: its something that most people forget to add (if this is implemented in normal form put it under the Wiki Quotes box; if bar then on top of the categories)

That's all the suggestions I have for now. I'll try and get back to this later in the week and finish the review up. COOPER COOL 23 user page 16:25, 30 September 2025 (UTC)

@CooperCool23: Pinging since more or less all points have been addressed and it's been a week since the review's last update. Cat's Tuxedo (talk) 17:13, 9 October 2025 (UTC)

Sorry for the week long absence. I got caught up in something else and wasn't able to get around to this (also doesn't help that I haven't got much rest as of recent). While I can't get into final text edit suggestions quite yet, I have done a source spot check with Earwig and this is what popped up:

• Ref 1: 51% Similarity (Makes sense, considering how much its used in the body)

• Ref 10: 5.7% Similarity

• And the rest of the references turned up a 0%

That's all I have for now. I'll try to make it a priority to get this done next weekend when I get some proper rest. COOPER COOL 23 user page 19:28, 12 October 2025 (UTC)

I'm back, and as promised i'll finally finish this up. I looked through the article thoroughly in order to check if it passed GA standards and I can say now that yeah, definitely does. I know I was trying to haggle in some more suggestions (cause in Wikipedian logic i'm a perfectionist) but i'm not going to drag this out for longer than it should be, considering its been almost two months since you brought it up for review. Congrats on yet another good article and hope that the review for Crash N. Sane gets start by someone soon! COOPER COOL 23 user page 18:51, 19 October 2025 (UTC)