This article was reviewed by member(s) of WikiProject Articles for creation. The project works to allow users to contribute quality articles and media files to the encyclopedia and track their progress as they are developed. To participate, please visit the project page for more information.Articles for creationWikipedia:WikiProject Articles for creationTemplate:WikiProject Articles for creationAfC
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Pinball, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Pinball and Pinball-related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.PinballWikipedia:WikiProject PinballTemplate:WikiProject PinballPinball
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Video games, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of video games on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Video gamesWikipedia:WikiProject Video gamesTemplate:WikiProject Video gamesvideo game
Comment: Currently not in a state to enter mainspace as it broadly doesn't conform to the manual of style and may not be notable. Happy to provide more specific feedback, but the key things that stand out are that: (1) the article lacks significant coverage, particularly review coverage, from reliable video game sources, given the two reviews cited are considered unreliable; (2) there's a fairly high-amount of references to and citations from user-generated coverage, such as YouTube interviews, reviews and features, and Steam player review scores, which are generally not considered reliable coverage, at least not to substantiate notability; (3) there's a smidge of non-neutral writing and promotional tone to this that suggests authorship from someone affiliated with the game or very, very keen on it, namely the sheer amount of unnecessary details about the game and tables and; (4) generally a lack of citations for large aspects of the article. Happy to chat more about this on my talk page if you need guidance. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Comment: Currently not in a state to enter mainspace as it broadly doesn't conform to the manual of style and may not be notable. Happy to provide more specific feedback, but the key things that stand out are that: (1) the article lacks significant coverage, particularly review coverage, from reliable video game sources, given the two reviews cited are considered unreliable; (2) there's a fairly high-amount of references to and citations from user-generated coverage, such as YouTube interviews, reviews and features, and Steam player review scores, which are generally not considered reliable coverage, at least not to substantiate notability; (3) there's a smidge of non-neutral writing and promotional tone to this that suggests authorship from someone affiliated with the game or very, very keen on it, namely the sheer amount of unnecessary details about the game and tables and; (4) generally a lack of citations for large aspects of the article. Happy to chat more about this on my talk page if you need guidance. ＶＲＸＣＥＳ (talk) 05:02, 29 December 2024 (UTC)