Talk:Planetarian: The Reverie of a Little Planet/GA1

GA Reassessment

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

GA review (see here for criteria)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

   There several sections, notably plot and those relating to it, that could be condensed. Some hyphenated words and other words to avoid, most notably in the plot related sections.

   Since I wasn't clear, I'll mention the hyphenated word I was refering to: automatically-saved, short-lived, nearly-abandoned.

   Other problems have to due with stuff like in gameplay "Another option includes choosing to save at any time, but there are only five save slots available." which appears to make a judgment call on the number of save slots.

   Other problems are stuff like: The length of Planetarian's story is very short and is the shortest of Key's games.

   Finally not sure that referencing to the Isaac Asimov's 3 Laws is relevant unless their is some indication Yumemi was based around her in creation concept or her devotion is compared to it. I think it may be okay as a "see also" though given the strong tendancies of her.

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   While I realize visual-novels.net could be seen as a lexicon for information about various visual novel, I'm not certain the reviews qualify as RS material. Is there any reason to support the reviewer or the site itself being quoted for its reviews? Fixed - ref removed

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   The plot and characters section needs rework. The plot seems overly detailed given the length of the visual novel and there is no need to list minor characters in the character section; there info can be merged with the plot where they are notable. Fixed

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):

   The images are tagged, but the fair use rationale is very poor and does not even list the who the copyright holder is and why it's use in the article is relevant. Fixed See Popotan for good idea what a solid fair-use rationale is. Also there is no need for 2 screenshots shown as they are nearly identical. Given their similarity, one is enough to suffice to give an idea how the visual novel looks. Fixed

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

   There are some problems, but nothing here looks like it should be too hard to deal with so I'm putting this on hold.

• it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation

Discussion

I attempted to condense anything I thought overly detailed or superfluous from the character and story sections. I removed the review from visual-novels.net. I removed the extra screenshot, and updated the FURs in the other two fair-use images.--十八 02:08, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Noted the image and ref removal. Will check over the rest in a bit.陣内_Jinnai 02:35, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Added commentary in the section.陣内_Jinnai 03:05, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Okay, I copyedited per your suggestions.--十八 03:42, 7 September 2009 (UTC)

Did some edits myself. You should check them over, but I think they should mostly be fine. I'm going to pass this as if there is prose issues, they're minor.陣内_Jinnai 07:21, 7 September 2009 (UTC)