Talk:Doraemon/GA2
GA Review
[edit]GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Link20XX (talk · contribs) 15:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
Per your request at my talk page, I will review this article. Just keep in mind that it may take several days since this is a long article. Anyway, I have one small question before I start, are you associated with Atlantis77177 (the previous GA nominator) in any way? Link20XX (talk) 15:23, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- @Link20XX: I'm not associated with that user at all; to make it clear, Atlantis77177 was inactive since the beginning of May, a few weeks before my major rewrite and expansion. (I joined in 2016 and mainly active in Vietnamese Wikipedia.) Thuyhung2112 (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Preliminary comments
[edit]@Thuyhung2112: While I review it, here are some preliminary comments I have:
- Checked via WP:EARWIG for copyvio, and the highest is about 38%, which is acceptable.
Regarding Images:
- The cover of Doraemon has two information boxes, and the fair use rationale is for a comic strip, not a book cover. I would recommend removing one of the two information boxes and changing the rationale to be the rationale used for a book cover. The image File:Heart of Thomas Moto Hagio.jpg is a good example on how to do this.
- Done --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
- The image of the comic strip Doraemon first appears in should have an information box, I would recommend making it look something like File:Alex cartoon (Alex calls the shots, 1993).resize.png this one. Link20XX (talk) 17:31, 30 May 2021 (UTC)
- Done --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 15:03, 31 May 2021 (UTC)
Full Review
[edit]@Thuyhung2112: At long last, I have completed my full review. On this read-over, the improvements you made are clear. It reads much better, and is much better sourced than when I last looked at it back in March. Just a few things and I will promote it.
Checklist
[edit]- 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:
- A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
- 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:
- A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
- 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):
- A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
- Is it neutral?
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
- Is it stable?
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
- 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:
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
Comments
[edit]Creation:
- The IGN source doesn't actually give their real names of the authors.
- I've found that only Fujiko F. Fujio is credited in the cover, and Schilling (2004, p. 39) wrote: "Doraemon's creator was Hiroshi Fujimoto, a member of the most prolific and successful creative duo in manga history ...", so I changed to "Doraemon is written and illustrated by Fujiko F. Fujio, whose real name is Hiroshi Fujimoto." --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 09:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- Kejut doesn't appear to be a reliable source. Is there a reason you believe it is?
- Removed --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 09:58, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Media:
- "In addition, as of 2016, four volumes of the manga has been published in English in print by Shogakukan Asia, using the same translation as the manga available on Amazon Kindle. Unlike the Amazon Kindle releases, these volumes are in black and white instead of color" is not stated in source 47.
- I trimmed to just "In addition, as of 2016, four volumes of the manga have been published in English in print by Shogakukan Asia." Is it acceptable? Thuyhung2112 (talk) 10:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- I don't think People's Daily is a reliable source. According to Wikipedia:Mirrors and forks/PQR, they have copied text from Wikipedia without providing the proper attribution.
- Removed --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 10:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Confirmed cast member of the new American adaptation include veteran anime voice actress Mona Marshall of South Park fame in the title role of Doraemon and Johnny Yong Bosch of Power Rangers and Bleach fame as Noby. The English dub is produced by Bang Zoom! Entertainment" is not stated in source 72.
- Removed --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 10:44, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- I am not sure this is a reliable source. It appears like anyone can edit it.
- After some searching of Dora-chan (1980) by Craul Denshi, all I could find were blogs, fan-sites, ... or something like these, so I removed it. I assume that very little was known about this game. Thuyhung2112 (talk) 13:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- "Doraemon can also be seen in Namco's Taiko no Tatsujin rhythm game series like Taiko no Tatsujin (11 – 14 only), Metcha! Taiko no Tatsujin DS: Nanatsu no Shima no Daibouken, Taiko no Tatsujin Wii, Taiko no Tatsujin Plus, and Taiko no Tatsujin DS: Dororon! Yokai Daikessen!!" is not stated in source 125.
- Trimmed to "Doraemon can also be seen in Namco's Taiko no Tatsujin rhythm game series, such as in Taiko no Tatsujin: Sesson de Dodon ga Don! (2017)." with a Gematsu source. Thuyhung2112 (talk) 13:21, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Reception:
- "and $1.8 billion at the box office" is not cited. Per WP:USERG, a wikilink is not a reliable source.
- Removed and reworded --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
- I checked source 187, and "Legal notices were served against several Indian companies, targeting Doraemon and Crayon Shin-chan, as having an adverse effect on children" doesn't appear to be stated in it. I can't find anything in it about legal situations against companies, just them asking for a ban on the series.
- Replaced by an Anime News Network source. Thuyhung2112 (talk) 14:02, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
Cultural impact and legacy:
- Since you are using two images in a row, they should be placed in Template:Multiple image.
- Done --Thuyhung2112 (talk) 14:12, 3 June 2021 (UTC)
That is all. Address them and I will pass it. Link20XX (talk) 17:52, 2 June 2021 (UTC)
- @Thuyhung2112: The changes are sufficient. I am closing this review as Pass. Congratulations! If you want to nominate a fact from this article to appear on the main page, you can find out how to do so at WP:DYK. Link20XX (talk) 15:28, 3 June 2021 (UTC)