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

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 21:27, 10 May 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: TappyTurtle (talk · contribs) 05:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

Hey! I'm planning to review this by tomorrow (EDT) or so. As part of the current GAN backlog drive, this will be my first GA review so I will have an experienced reviewer check my review. TappyTurtle 05:46, 2 July 2024 (UTC)

@TappyTurtle just checking in since it's been a few days since your intended review time. If you need more time before the review because of busyness in real-life or something else, that's fine by me, but I do just want to just make sure of everything just in case. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 22:46, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

@Pokelego999 apologies, i'm getting it done today, it's just that time hasn't totally been on my side lol. So far it's just a few prose concerns anyway. TappyTurtle 22:55, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

@TappyTurtle Fair enough, best of luck with the review. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:04, 4 July 2024 (UTC)

Good Article review progress box Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV () 3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant () Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

• The lead is a bit too short; there should be some (small) description of Sobble's design and personality, and it should mention Sobble's popularity like in the body (something like While popular among fans, critical response was mixed, with some reviewers praising Sobble's design and personality, while some were confused as to why Sobble cries, calling it "annoying".)
• For clarity, the first mention of Pokémon Sword and Shield in the body should be in full and linked, like in the lead; The designers noted that the trio of starter Pokémon in Pokémon Sword and Shield are more distinct than previous generations... (though, this may just be my opinion)
• The "Promotion and reception" section feels a little mistitled; there's little info about promotion outside of one official poll which in my opinion barely qualifies as promotional
• "Other writers for The Gamer felt differently. In a discussion with the website's staff examining the franchise's most often hated Pokémon..." Nothing states that they're quite looking at the most-hated Pokémon, just that they're pointing out the least-hateable (from each staff member's perspective)

That's about it, otherwise, it looks good. these are simple enough issues so I will put the review on a 7-day hold.

Note: I made a few minor grammatical edits to the article.

TappyTurtle 04:07, 5 July 2024 (UTC)

@TappyTurtle I've made some edits per your comments. The lead has been expanded, and I've added some promotion information to Reception (Admittedly brief but it's there now, can't believe I missed that initially). I've hyperlinked the game (Good catch) and I've removed that text from the Reception that I missed when doing my edits on this article. Let me know if anything else needs to be done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 04:28, 5 July 2024 (UTC)