Talk:Kamui Shiro/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: TeenAngels1234 (talk · contribs) 21:12, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Tintor2: Okay. I want to review this article. Let's start with the lead' incipit.

• "Kamui is a young esper who returns to Tokyo after a six-year absence to face his destiny".

The prose is too dry. What "to face his destiny" refers to, anyway?

• • Done.
• "Kamui must decide whether the world should be destroyed so it may be reborn without humanity or saved so humanity can continue to live in its current state".

This sentence doesn't even have a comma, and ties in badly with the previous one.

• • Revised
• "The character has been played by several voice actors."

Try removing "several" and listing them. If you fear that there are too many, add a simple "depending on the appearance", or something similar.

• • Done

@TeenAngels1234: Thanks for the quick review. I'll try following any advice.Tintor2 (talk) 22:25, 8 December 2020 (UTC)

@Tintor2: * "by voice actors" in the lead now still sounds bad. So, just try to write their names.

• Done
• "Her sister Tōru Shirō was intended to created it but committed suicide to delay the awakening of the Sacred Sword."

Confusing sentence. Does it matter, anyway?

• • Done.
• Appearances is good. Just a question. Why Appearence is placed before Concept and creation?--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 12:04, 9 December 2020 (UTC)
  • @TeenAngels1234: Rearranged. Not sure. Some other articles used to have this arrangements.Tintor2 (talk) 12:12, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

@TeenAngels1234: About the actors I just left them "()" to avoid repeated words. Tell me if you think there is a better solution. Sadly, I only know of Suzumura's impression of the character thanks to the TV series' dvds. I couldn't find commentary about the others.Tintor2 (talk) 21:48, 9 December 2020 (UTC)

• @Tintor2: That's okay. I move on.
• "which resulted in him using Kamui and Fūma"

Him? Who?

• "were old designs incorporated in new characters"

There's something wrong in the sentence, I guess.

• • Done
• "No models were used to create Kamui. Because Kamui"

Redundance here.

• • Done
• "According to Mokona, Kamui fits the manga's story."

Uhm? What does this mean? Sounds meaningless to me, or at lest tautologic/redundant.

• • Done.
• "The authors originally wanted to name the character from another character they created in another series but"

Delete one of the "another"s and add a comma after series.

• • Done
• " Ohkawa considers it common sense that people care about protecting the planet, it is more important to love friends and relatives"

You mean, "while considers it"?

• • Done.
• "the latter is voiced by Sakamoto"

"Since the latter" maybe fits better.--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 00:06, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

• • Done.

@TeenAngels1234: I hope it works.Tintor2 (talk) 00:29, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

@Tintor2: That's fine. Reception looks fine, too. Now, be patient, I'm kinda busy in RL, but I'd like to read the whole article maximum tomorrow, and eventually pass this.TeenAngels1234 (talk) 14:01, 10 December 2020 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it well written?

   A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it verifiable with no original research?

   A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:

   B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those 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—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

   Brief summa. Good sources, good prose. After some minor change, it clearly meets all the criteriæ. Well done.