Talk:Mario & Luigi/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: Squitor (talk · contribs) 01:52, 11 April 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: Norellia.sh (talk · contribs) 04:29, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I'm excited to be reviewing this article for GA status! Please note that this is my first ever review, so if anyone has any comments on my reviewing, please feel free to help me out :)「Norellia.sh」Formally NuggFrog (talk) 04:29, 24 May 2026 (UTC)

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) 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);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Notes

Review

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	I found that all prose presented was efficient and effective. There was nothing contained within the prose that jumped out to me as an issue.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	The article has no major MoS issues that I was able to spot. The one small little thing I did see was left in the comments to be reviewed by the nominator.	Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	Page is sufficiently referenced, and all information is supported.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	All research used passes reliability guidelines.	Pass
(c) (original research)	No original research was used in this article.	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	There is no copyvio or usage of close paraphrasing.	Pass

Spot check can be found at Talk:Mario & Luigi/GA1/Veracity Spot Check

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	Article hits all points that I'd expect a video game article to hit.	Pass
(b) (focused)	All details added are within scope and don't add unnecessary prose. I think that the article has a good amount of detail, without going too in depth on any specific section. All sections are well built out and include a good amount of information.	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
Article passed WP:NPOV. I couldn't find any places where I questioned the neutrality of the article. The reception section was well written in a way that it remains encyclopedic. All opinions in the article were properly cited to their sources, and at no point in my review did I question the neutrality of the prose.	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Comment	Result
Within the articles history, I could find no evidence of an edit war or content dispute.	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All images are tagged properly and the images used have proper fair use rationale.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	All captions properly describe the image, and the captions used pass WP:CAP.	Pass

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	I don't see any major issues. Congrats on the GA!

Discussion

• Please note, I'm very much going part by part within my review, so I apologize if my feedback comes back very segmented.

MOS Check

In the Development section, watch instances of MOS:SAID. For example, in the 2000-2003 section, in the second paragraph, In an interview, he noted how one inspiration, could be seen to go against that guideline. 「Norellia.sh」Formally NuggFrog (talk) 12:19, 28 May 2026 (UTC)

Nice review. Surprisingly, it seems that there are no issues with the article. My only recommendation to the nominator is to expand the lede. One small paragraph does not really summarise the entire article. It should have two to three. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:37, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Am I good to go ahead and pass the article, or should I wait for the lead expansion? 「Norellia.sh」 (talk) 20:55, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Wait for the lede to be expanded. Vacant0 (talk • contribs) 20:56, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Pinging @Squitor since it's been a bit since this GA review opened. Might not be on their radar. 「Norellia.sh」 (talk) 05:16, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

@Norellia.sh Whoops, thanks for the ping! I didn't realise the second opinion request had been responded to; I apologise for the delay. I believe I've addressed all concerns, and I've made some extra required fixes that I noticed along the way.

There was another instance of 'noted' in § 2024: Nintendo Switch era, but I left it because I think it still complies with MOS:SAID, as it was an objective statement (it came from Nintendo themselves after all). Do let me know if there's anything else you need before passing! Squitor!!! (say hi, i won't bite) 13:49, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

Pinging @Norellia.sh again since it's been a small while. Squitor!!! (say hi, i won't bite) 15:14, 16 June 2026 (UTC)

This looks awesome! Congrats :) 「Norellia.sh」 (talk) 04:00, 17 June 2026 (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.