| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because it's been almost a year and a half since the last one. Since then, it was promoted to Good Article status in December last year. Right now, I want me and other users to work on the article to help it reach Featured Article status in the future. In my opinion, the foundations are there: it has well-developed Development and Reception sections, and the plot section is fairly comprehensive for a series of its length. Anyway, what parts of the article need to be improved for it to have a chance of passing a Featured Article nomination?
Thanks, Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:04, 22 November 2015 (UTC)
Hey, I didn't take a huge look at this article, but I thought I'd point out a few things:
- It might be a good idea to add what language the title is in. To my eye, it looks Latin (puella and magica are both Latin words). I dunno if there's a source for this.
- Something's broken in a couple of the sources; I'm seeing a red warning noting that parameter has been busted.
I hope these few points help. This is a pretty darn good article.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 02:19, 7 December 2015 (UTC)
- Hi Gen. Quon, thanks for your comments. I fixed the ref issues. As for the title, you're right that it is Latin, however I wasn't able to find a reliable source that states this outright. And I appreciate your praise; it always makes me happy when people compliment articles that I spent such a large amount of time writing and improving. Artichoker[talk] 01:40, 8 December 2015 (UTC)