Talk:Sekai wa Sore demo Kawari wa Shinai/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Grnrchst (talk · contribs) 16:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I'll be taking this on to review as part of Women in Green's 5th Edit-a-thon. Apologies it took so long for a review to materialise. As per my usual manner, I'll start with section-by-section comments, followed by checking the article against the GA criteria.

Comments

Themes and background

The song sample should ideally be aligned right and just underneath the infobox.

Moved it to the right but kept it in the composition section since many other GAs seems to do the same.

"was conceived by Kamiki as she was watching the news" Swap out "as" for "while".

Done

"The song was chosen amongst several" What does "amongst several" mean? Amongst several others? Isn't it the only main theme song? Or does it mean it was chosen from a list of several songs and was the one that was picked? Might need a wee rewrite for clarity.

Changed to "selected over others"; hope this should clarify.

"disagreeance" Not a word. Should say "disagreement".

Done

Release and reception

Is the catalogue number necessary to mention? It's not something I see in most articles about singles.

From my experience, catalogue numbers seems to be more valued in Japan. I could remove it if necessary, but I figured it might perhaps be useful for people wanting to search for the song on retailers (though the code is already in release history.)

"and also" The "also" here is redundant. It can just say "and".

Done

Spotcheck: [9] Verified.
I've noticed that Richardson's review for RPGFan is the only English language source on here. Do you know if there are any others potentially out there that could be cited in here? This would just make verification a little bit easier.

I do not believe so. There are passing mentions of Kamiki - though not really the song itself - in game reviews, but that is about it. This is probably owed to the fact that 428 was not released in the West until recently, so the song never received any marketing here.

"the song sold 3,117 units" Shouldn't this say "the single" rather than "the song"?

Done. Believe this was in before I rewrote the section with the RPGFan review, which is the only source that really covers the single instead of song.

"before disappearing" Should probably clarify that it disappeared from the charts, not in general. :P

Done Haha. Changed to "leaving the 200 spots".

Promotion

"featuring a cut-down video of Kamiki's discography" What does this mean exactly?

Done Changed to "a video showcasing Kamiki's discography"

", for example" Don't think this is necessary to say. It should be clear that this sentence is exemplary of the previous one.

Done

Might be worth linking to Shibuya in this section.

Done

"Double design posters" What does "Double design" mean here?

Changed to "Posters illustrating the song and 428"

"and also" Again, just "and" is fine.

Done

"surprise live" Is this supposed to say "surprise live show" or "surprise live performance"?

Borrowed this from Japanese to avoid repeating "performance", but now realize it isn't proper English. Changed to to "live performance".

Personnel

No notes.

Track listing

Is there a source that can be cited for this section?

I don't believe this is necessary for track listing sections. I could easily just use the primary sources from the release history section if it is, though.

Charts

How come its position on Billboard Japan charts isn't also mentioned here?

I believe that charts titled with "Sales" aren't usually included. I have now added it, however.

Release history

No notes.

Lead and infobox

Is it necessary to provide the Hepburn romanization when that's what's already being used for the title? It's just repetitive, is all.

Removed. I was thinking that users who can not read the Japanese may not understand that the article's title is Hepburn romanization, but I suppose it is farily obvious.

"Alongisde" Spelling correction: "Alongside".

Done. Oops.

There should probably be a short caption for the cover.

It doesn't seem like most other music articles have cover captions. I also think a caption would be redundant since it would basically just state "The single's cover, featuring Aya Kamiki", which is what would be assumed unless otherwise is stated.

Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

Is it well written?
A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
~~All good for the most part, but there are some minor spelling mistakes and grammatical issues that still need fixing, and some cases where the text could be a bit clearer.~~

B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
Well structured and no red flags on words to watch.
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:
All references are well-formatted and presented.

B. Reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose):
Every part of the prose has an inline citation, ~~but the track listing section is currently unsourced. This should be an easy fix.~~

C. It contains no original research:
None that I can find, although the article's reliance on Japanese language sources interferes with ease of reliability. It may be worth asking another editor more familiar with the language to do some spotchecks on these sources.

D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
Earwig only flags direct quotes from the RPGfan source.[1] Assuming good faith on the Japanese sources.
Is it broad in its coverage?
A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
Article seems very complete.

B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
It only ever gives context when necessary, i.e. with the game.
Is it neutral?
It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
No obvious cases of non-neutral POV.
Is it stable?
It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
There have been quite a few changes since its GA nomination, but nothing major and almost all by the nominator. No reversions in the article history.
Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content:
Single cover and song sample have valid fair use rationale. Photo of Shibuya licensed under creative commons.

B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
The cover in the infobox could use a wee caption and the Shibuya photograph needs alt text, but otherwise all good.
Overall:
Pass or Fail:
Overall this is a very nicely put-together article. ~~There are some issues with unclear language, grammatical and spelling mistakes that need to be corrected before I can pass this, but they're relatively minor and easily fixed.~~ I'm also assuming good faith on the Japanese language sources, but would recommend asking an editor with familiarity in the language to spotcheck them. @IanTEB: Ping me when you feel you've addressed these issues and I'll give it another look before passing. --Grnrchst (talk) 16:16, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Grnrchst: that should be good! I added an alt to the Shibuya photograph but it is not displaying on my end; not quite sure how to fix that. In terms of sources, I have confidence that all listed are reliable, some due to their listing at WP:VGRS and others due to their good reputation and frequent use in Japan. The one exception could be Livedoor (cited here 3 times), which is slightly controversial, but the content supporting by those sources isn't anything significant and will be easy to remove, need be. IanTEB (talk) 18:37, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! Thanks for getting back on all this so quickly. Thanks also for elaborating on the reliability of the sources, but I would still recommend finding another editor familiar with the language to double check with you. (Might be worth asking over at WikiProject Japan?) It's always good to have another set of eyes to verify things. In any case, I'm happy to pass this now. Congrats! --Grnrchst (talk) 18:50, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Awesome, I'll send in a request in a minute. Thanks so much for the review, I am truly over the moon! IanTEB (talk) 18:56, 24 October 2023 (UTC)[reply]