Jump to content

Talk:Weathering with You/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 18:18, 15 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

[edit]
  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -
  • It contains copyright infringements -
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -
[edit]
  • Could you had some more details to these sources:

[1], [2], [3]

  • Could you be a little more consistent in either linking or not linking publishers (I usually just remove wholesale.)
  • ref 87 has Morrissy, Kim (July 24, 2019). "REVIEW: Weathering With You". Anime News Network. Anime News Network. Archived from the original on July 24, 2019. Retrieved July 24, 2019. - Two entries for Anime News Network.
     Fixed. Ainz Ooal Gown (talk) 14:01, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Prose

[edit]

Lede

[edit]
  • On rating aggregator websites like Rotten Tomatoes and Metacritic, the film generally been rated positively by critics. - OTT, we already said this in the sentence prior. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:37, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed to On the review aggregator website Rotten Tomatoes, the film has a 91% rating, with the critics' consensus saying; it is beautifully animated and narratively engaged. On Metacritic, the film scored 72 out of 100 showing generally favorable reaction. Do you think it's okay? Ainz Ooal Gown (talk) 17:50, 19 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Except we don't generally put the actual review scores in prose. On Metacritic, just use the actual words it uses. Otherwise fine. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 14:44, 20 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]

General

[edit]

GA Review

[edit]
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects): b (focused):
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:

Review meta comments

[edit]
  • I'll begin the review as soon as I can! If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA and FA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN and WP:FAC, respectively. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definitely not mandatory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)
I'm going to go ahead an pass this - I've added some additional fixes for the links to do at your leisure. If you wish to take this any further, I'd recommend less reliance on sources such twitter, youtube and forbes. However, good work on the article, and well done. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 07:06, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]
I would like to thank you those who contributed to this article, and Japanese wiki editors who helped me indirectly by finding sources, and expanding the article on Japanese Wikipedia. They are the reason I was able to get this article promoted to GA. This article still needs few improvements; I will take a look at them later when I have time. Ainz Ooal Gown (talk) 16:20, 22 July 2020 (UTC)[reply]