Talk:John Madden Football '93

Page contents not supported in other languages.
Source: Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia.
Good topic candidate
Promoted
Current status: Good article

Reference material

Reviews

  • Weekend Warrior (December 1992). "John Madden '93: Bigger and Better". GamePro (41): 141, 142.
  • Weekend Warrior (December 1992). "Madden Pulls Out an SNES Winner". GamePro (41): 142, 144.
  • Mellerick, Paul (December 1992). "John Madden Football '93". Mega (3): 32–35.
  • Staff (December 1992). "John Madden Football '93". Mean Machines Sega (3): 102–104.
  • Rowley, Carl; Rice, Chris (February 1993). "John Madden Football '93". N-Force (8): 40–42.
  • Staff (January 1993). "John Madden Football '93 Scores Big". Nintendo Power (44): 30, 31.

Previews and other material

Orphaned references in John Madden Football '93

I check pages listed in Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of John Madden Football '93's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.

Reference named "gamepro":

I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not. AnomieBOT 19:57, 24 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Championship Edition

What about mentioning Championship Edition in the article? Allgame has some stuff on it: http://www.allgame.com/game.php?id=12647 --Mika1h (talk) 15:41, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • That works. I didn't know there was any material on it. Thanks. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 16:16, 25 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is . The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

I'll be reviewing the article over the next few days. Below you will find the standard GAN criteria, along with a list of issues I have found. As criteria pass, a or will be replaced with a . Below the criteria you'll see a list of issues I've found. Feel free to work on them at any time. I will notify you when I'm done checking over the article. At that time I'll allow the standard one week for fixes to be made.

Criteria

here
for criteria)
  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:
    B.
    lists
    :
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A.
    References to sources
    :
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:
    C. No original research:
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused:
  4. Is it
    neutral
    ?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have
    fair use rationales
    :
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with
    suitable captions
    :
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Issues found

I found only one issue. Please ensure that all inline references appear in order. For example: [4][1][12] should be [1][4][12]. Once that's done reply here and it'll be an easy pass. Nice work!


Reviewer: Teancum (talk · contribs) 14:38, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks for the review. I could have sworn there was a bot to do ref ordering, but I couldn't remember its name. I just went ahead and did it manually. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:24, 7 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Passed! --Teancum (talk) 13:53, 8 December 2012 (UTC)[reply]

But, Wait...

Wasn't Looking Glass Studios always Looking Glass Studios?--2601:194:480:C790:506D:E9B9:FBF0:1676 (talk) 20:35, 29 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

They were Blue Sky Productions until they merged with Lerner Research (developer of
Sek-2 (talk) 00:15, 30 September 2019 (UTC)[reply
]