The GA citing of content is only for 'direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons.' A thing to avoid is Asking for inline citations beyond those required by the criteria, in particular, asking for 'more' inline citations even though all statements in the required categories are already cited.If I've made some kind of error, please let me know. It seems to me that this would make the GAN a good candidate for immediate failure, but I'm inexperienced and would really value feedback from the nominator and contributor.ДЄlso, this page was listed as having a review, but it did not appear. I can provided a detailed breakdown of which citations work and which ones don't if asked, but bringing this page into compliance with citation policy might involve a lot of extra research or deleting large parts of the page. For instance, 7b and 10d do not list all of the factions listed in the sentence they seem to cite, which might be misleading. Further, there are are claims that are not sufficiently backed up by the sources. Some of the sources are also to very small news outlets whose opinions may not carry sufficient weight to be valid sources, or are more blogs than news outlets, such as Gamesauce or VG247. There are some links to what appear to be community pages, such as and. Bethesda sources are not 'third party,' and blogs are generally not allowed, using Bethesda's official page, their forums, or their blogs are (according to my understanding) not actually allowed. In addition, the quality of citations is also a factor. There are large blocks of the article, including the introduction, the story section of the main game and of the expansion packs, as well as much of the top info box, the game requirements table, and the game music list, that totally lack citations. The two big problems with this article are the tone and style in the 'story' sections of the article and citations. Much of the article also complies with Wikipedia style guidelines, and although there are some small errors, these can be corrected.

It is also neutral, stable, and seems to comply with copyrights, although I will admit I'm not a copyright expert and plan to examine this more closely.

This article is comprehensive, and has obviously been written with love. Ok, this is my first GAN review, so please bear with me.ДЇallout: New Vegas is a game I know and love, and though this article avoids all GAN quick-fails, there are still some serious problems with the article that are currently between it and approval.ДЇirst, what is right about the article. I think they put the power armor on 3 because they wanted to keep it like 1 and 2. Through the combination of her withered limbs (?) and your smashed chromosome : superior defective spawn ! No, it's clearly Bethesda that deserves the spotlight! You're right Macky! Now go back to fucking your cripple and producing hordes of retards. I just put it on thinking it was common sense What makes me laugh, is when I put Obsidian on the front of the cover, I wasn't trying to make a statement, I didn't even notice the official box art cover didn't have Obsidian on it until it was mentioned here. It's like, even those who trash Fallout 3 and onwards think that some of our Black Isle guys deserve this spotlight. I'm finding it inneresting how the thought of giving Obsidian credit on the front is common amungst these kinds of fallout communities (drunks and cigarette smokers) since the initial box art reveal. I like that one in the header simply because Obsidian's name is actually on it.ДЄgree with the above comments. The original one looks too much like Rainbow Six: Vegas for my liking. You saw the brotherhood dude the first time and then again and again and in the end he was on the cover. Same as with the power armor in Fallout 3. Getting the image into the heads of the people, so they will remember it later. The NCR soldier with the Vegas backdrop was interesting when it was first released, but it's been way overplayed.Д«ut I'll guess thats how it was planned. I think it's better than the one Bethesda has released if only for the fact that Bethesda has reused the same image millions of times already. ** (bonus points go to the covers that actually credit the correct developer, unlike the official box art) It shows that you don't really need to do much with the current New Vegas art to turn out a decent cover: A great deal of you were expecting something a bit less generic, so I'll put it to you:Д¬an you do any better? Show us what you've got. More info on Game: Fallout: New VegasДЄfter the recent reveal of the box art for Fallout: New Vegas, the intarwebs have come together to heave a collective sigh at how boring it is.

Fallout new vegas box art