Talk:Higurashi When They Cry/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 05:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   References not following a consistent format. Infoboxes need cleaning up - the manga box is a mess trying to cover so much in the box. Not sure if the best solution is splitting or just leaving the specific details on which magazine which was in and who illustrate to the text, but something needs done. Considering fixed, but might want to put in BRs or something for the lists  Fixed Article could use a fresh copy editing, has a few grammatical issues. Thinks like "Higurashi no Naku Koro ni takes place during June 1983" should be "Higurashi no Naku Koro ni takes place in June 1983" Not fixed

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

   Some unsourced statements, including some release dates in the plot section, the comparisons in the Gameplay section, the first paragraph in the development section, half of the release history section, the last bit of Drama CDs, half the manga section, the entire novel section, some statements in the anime section, and most of the music section.

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The reception section is far too brief and seems to only be about the game. Needs significant expansion and should include other major media of the franchise, including anime, manga, and novels if possible. Meanwhile, the plot section is just plain out insane! It should be a summary not such excessive details of every last media format and not constituting half the article. Would recommend killing the entire "Arc" formatting and just summarizing the primary plot from the game arcs. The PS2 and DS exclusive arcs are excessive and should be dropped. The manga and anime are overly detailed and, at best, should be summarized in a few brief sentences in their respective media sections.

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

   Image of the city seems fairly decorative even if free. If its going to be used, then a similar shot of the game city showing the comparison (with appropriate FUR) would be more useful. File:Higurashi original doujin game.jpg needs to be resized down a notch and could use a spiffed up FUR, but otherwise is fine.

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   If the issues noted have not been corrected and the article has not been brought back to Good Article status by June 28, 2009, and if there is no significant work being done to address the issues, it will be delisted.-- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 05:20, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

Discussion

I really would have to disagree on your opinion of the plot. This series' basis is in its arc format, and it's the main thing this series is known for. Not to mention that each of the 8 arcs from the original series all have different plots, so its impossible to "summarize the primary plot from the game arcs" all in one summary; as it stands, the primary plot points from all the games are summarized the best they could be without going into anything excessive, and it wouldn't make sense to merge them all together when all the stories are inherently different (albeit using the same characters and setting). Also, the PS2 and DS arcs are just as notable as the original series, and I see no reason to remove them when they serve to expand on the original story past the original 8 games, which is stated in the lead. This is just a rather unique series, and I doubt there'd be a similar example in all WP:ANIME or WP:VG (minus Umineko), so it's not exactly easy to apply regular convention to an irregular organization of a series.--十八 06:06, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

From the article itself, the answer arcs just repeat the question arcs from a different perspective, so how can they not be combined? And if its all the same characters and settings, why can't they be combined. Right now, any reader who isn't already a fan isn't going to try to sort all that out, its too confusing and inaccessible. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 06:13, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

It's not the problem with the organization; the series itself is inherently confusing and inaccessible. Seriously, everyone I talked to was totally confused throughout most of the first anime season, for one. Plus, the answer arcs may give answers to the mysteries given in the question arcs, but they aren't just "repeats of the question arcs from a different perspective", at least not all of them; that's only in the most general sense. Specifically, the first arc (Onikakushi-hen) has it's answer arc pertaining to arc 6 (Tsumihoroboshi-hen), but in no way are those arcs simply the same story told in different perspectives. As I said, it's rather confusing to anyone unfamiliar to the series. And as I said, these are all different stories that just use the same characters and setting. In some stories, characters even change their personalities drastically, or may not even be there, or (like in arc 4) be primarily told as a flashback of the past. I might agree with you if this was a regular, linear plot line, but it is anything but that. As it is, the article tries to explain the series is set up (and released) as a series of different games. Therefore it'd make sense to explain each game individually, especially since they all have different stories to tell and different mysteries to give and answer. Not to mention that the additional game arcs from Rei, Matsuri or Kizuna don't fit in to the original 8 arcs, making the organization of the plot even more convoluted.

To use an example, think of it in terms of all the games in the The Legend of Zelda series. Each game uses Link as the primary character, and other characters like Ganandorf or Zelda herself also appear, along with other characters that reoccur or not. All of the games in that series also have different stories, and you could in no way merge them all together into a singer overarching plot line. This article merely tries to place all the games in a single place, instead of having them in separate articles. In that sense, it's very much like how it's laid out at The Legend of Zelda (series)#Games.--十八 07:21, 21 June 2009 (UTC)

At the very least, the anime and mange exclusive arcs should be moved to their respective sections. We do that for other media that has adaptive works based on it.陣内_Jinnai 05:11, 27 June 2009 (UTC)

I would still have to disagree. Having all the arcs in one place just makes more sense to me. Normally series aren't organized like this, so you can't really say "oh, we do this for other works" since those works are the "norm" and this series is most definitely one the edge of what normal is.--十八 05:08, 29 June 2009 (UTC)

Per notes above, article has been delisted. Even discounting the disagreement over the plot, the only issue addressed was the infobox notes. Work appears to have stopped and no extension was requested. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 01:26, 29 June 2009 (UTC)