Wikipedia:Peer review/Shugo Chara!/archive1

Shugo Chara!

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get an idea of where the article stands. A lot of work has been put into this article to improve it an turn it from a fan-ish plot article into an encyclopedic article on a popular manga and anime franchise.

Things I would like to know are:

• Is the format and organization of the content logical and unambitious?
• Are there any obvious gaps that has not already been mentioned on the article's talk page?
• Are there any issues with the prose that needs to be corrected?
• Do the references properly support the information in the article?
• Are there any statements that could be challenged that do not have have a reference?
• Do the references comply with Wikipedia' policies and guidelines?
• Is there sufficient supporting material on the article? And if not, what additional supporting material could be added?
• What else needs to be done to this article before it should be nominated as a Good Article Candidate?

Thanks, Farix (Talk) 20:26, 28 July 2008 (UTC)

• The article requires a "production" section—per the article's talk page.
• "The first chapter was published in the February edition of Nakayoshi magazine[5] which when on sell on January 3, 2006."—please correct. Y
• "In 2007, Shugo Chara! was adapted into an anime television series of the same title."—sentence structure needs to be revised. Y
• "anime television series"→"anime series." It seems redundant to specify TV as well. N
• "Expected to consist of fifty-one episodes, the first episode, "Shugo Chara Born!" (しゅごキャラ誕生! Shugo Kyara Tanjō!?), aired on October 6, 2007 and the series continues to air today. "—sentence structure needs to be revised. Y
• "; episode twenty-seven on,"→"and from episode twenty-seven," (etc.) Y
• "The story is about an elementary school girl named Amu Hinamori whose "cool and spicy" exterior belies her introverted personality."—please clarify this sentence. Y
• "But when Amu wishes for the courage to be reborn as her "would-be self," she is surprised to find three colorful eggs the next morning, which hatch into three Guardian Characters"—Never start a sentence with "but"—remove it. Y
• "It won the 2008 Kodansha Manga Award for best children's manga."—is it possible to add more information, when, at which event?
• "ongoing"—add "as at..." N
• "With the Guardian Characters, Amu's life becomes much more complex as she now struggles to deal with her "would-be" selves and the Guardians—a special student council of Seiyo Elementary—who recruit Amu to search for, and seal, the X Eggs and X Characters, which are the corrupted forms of peoples' dreams."—restructure sentence. This sentence is too long. I cannot figure out what is meant by the part past "Guardians–". (Guardian Characters / Guardians?)
• Add citations to all quotes. (e.g. "cool and spicy.").
• Use logical citations—e.g. "cool and spicy."→"cool and spicy". Y
• The spaced en dash ( – ) is preferred to the em dash(—) (WP:DASH). N
• The character sections seems redundant to the plot section. Consider combining them (I am aware of the manual of style, but refer to Tokyo Mew Mew for an example). As WP:NOVELS points out, the "Characters" section can make an article feel like SparkNotes.
• The article requires a longer reception, plot, media, lead section.
• The article requires a copy-edit:
  • There are a lot of short paragraphs.
• I will add more items later. G.A.S 05:28, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

• Production section: I'm not sure that a production section can be written because the information isn't available. So far, I've been only able to find two concept drawings in the manga, but that isn't much to base an entire section on. I've made a request to the Japanese language Wikipedia for assistance in locating sources over a week ago, but there has been no response.

• Anime television series: It is important to clarify that a television series is being discussed as opposed to an anime OVA series. If you leave it as just "anime series", the reader may not know if you are referring to a television series or an OVA series.

• Guardian Characters / Guardians: Because Del Ray Manga has decided to translate Shugo Chara (しゅごキャラ) to "Guardian Characters", there is no way to further distinguish them from the other group, the Guardians.

• en dashes/em dashes: The use of em dashes are grammatically correct since they indicates an interruption, and replacing them with en dashes would be incorrect. WP:DASHconfirms this.

I'll look at the other grammar and spelling issues and see how to best fix them. --Farix (Talk) 11:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Update added:

• • Anime television series: No problem.
  • Production section: I have doubts as to how the article will attain good article status if it is incomplete (criteria 3b), but maybe that will not be seen as an issue.
  • Quotes: If you use wording from the source text, it should always be cited.
  • Dashes: WP:DASH – "Spaced en dashes – such as here – can be used instead of unspaced em dashes in all of the ways discussed above." This is optional in any case.
  • Characters section: Much of the information in here is repeated in the plot section. It might be better to combine these sections. Per WP Novels's style guidelines—"Instead, use a finely crafted plot summary to introduce the characters to the reader."
  • Dates: Refer to Wikipedia:MOS#Precise language.
  • Guardians: Use different sentences to explain this and consider adding the Japanese text to disambiguate.

G.A.S 15:07, 29 July 2008 (UTC)

Further comments:

• Expand upon the significance of the 3 guardians in the lead.
• Production: I will add some suggestions for this section on the article talk page, as they are outside of the scope of this peer review.

G.A.S 07:40, 30 July 2008 (UTC)

Now that I've finished rewriting the episode summaries to the point I can, I can focus on the main article. I still don't see how the plot and character sections are repetitive. Both contain different types of information from different preservatives. Both could be expanded with more detail since details are very limited in both. I also don't have a clue what you are talking about with the dates. I've looked though the text and don't see anything that isn't as precise as sources allow. --Farix (Talk) 00:18, 31 July 2008 (UTC)

The dates are not that big an issue; the only issue is to update the infobox the moment that the series is not "ongoing".

Re the characters and plot: I trust your judgement in this case.

Good luck with the article! G.A.S 04:51, 31 July 2008 (UTC)