The article was promoted by User:SandyGeorgia 00:54, 10 September 2008 [1].
Basically, I feel that this meets the criteria as it's well written, comprehensive and neutral. I realise that it's a relatively short article, but relevant points are covered in sufficient detail. The article has undergone peer review, which has hopefully ironed out any remaining issues. Any comments are appreciated. Thanks.
Ashnard
Talk
Contribs
18:18, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
reply
Okay, I think I've addressed the points adequately. For the second and third, I'm assuming you have a problem with some awkward wording and/or lack of clarity. I'm not exactly sure, so I've changed the wording into something that should be clearer and more straightforward. Specifically for the third, if you have a problem with the circumstances of the questioning, then the context is explained at the beginning of that paragraph. If I've misinterpreted how you wanted the sentence to be fixed, then please let me know. Thanks for the comments. Ashnard Talk Contribs 08:00, 6 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Comments from Giggy
That's about it. Nicely done. Giggy ( talk) 11:07, 6 September 2008 (UTC) reply
That's it. The Prince ( talk) 23:11, 6 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Comments Support - Nice little video game article. This was all that I found during a full reading.
Comments - sources look okay, links checked out with the link checker tool. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:49, 8 September 2008 (UTC) reply
Comments I'm not comfortable with the number of sections. Is there no information on its music, for instance? - A Link to the Past (talk) 19:50, 9 September 2008 (UTC) reply