Wikipedia:Peer review/Kashimashi: Girl Meets Girl/archive1

Kashimashi: Girl Meets Girl

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

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 December 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I would like to get this article peer reviewed in order to prepare it for a future FA nomination. Any and all comments are welcome. I am concerned about the "series chronology" and "differences between media" sections for possibly have OR issues. I am aware that a general copyedit is needed. Thanks, 十八 11:14, 6 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Goodraise (talk · contribs)

FA? Well, lets see. You said yourself, that it fails #1a. If it meets #1b is something you, as the main contributor(?), can best answer yourself. Criteria #2a, #2b, #2c, #3, and #4 appear to be met. #1d and #1e don't seem to be an issue either, but I didn't look too deeply into these two. Where I am in doubt is #1c. What makes to following sources reliable?

"Famitsu Scores for the Week of 03/23/2006". GameBrink. 2006-03-22. Retrieved 2008-12-06.
- (Famitsu is considered reliable by WP:VG, but what about GameBrink?)
"Kashimashi ~Girl meets girl~ review". T.H.E.M. Anime Reviews. Retrieved 2007-04-07.
- (This appears to be an amateur review site.)
Friedman, Erica (2006-04-06). "Yuri Anime: Kashimashi Girl Meets Girl". Okazu. Retrieved 2007-04-07.
- (Blogs aren't exactly easy to pass of as reliable.)

Then there is this sentence: "The subtitle, "Girl Meets Girl", comes from the traditional English phrase "boy meets girl",[3] and is slightly altered to reflect the nature of the same-sex relationships that appear in the series." With [3] being: "Phrase Thesaurus: Women". World English. Retrieved 2008-12-06. - The reference seems reliable, but is only useful to cite the existence of the phrase: "boy meets girl", but not that the title is based on it. -- Goodraise (talk) 23:51, 18 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- Regarding THEM Anime Reviews, reviews from them have been used in the past in FLs like List of Naruto characters (several cites) and the recently-FAed Tokyo Mew Mew (cite 58), so I believe the website is reliable enough for an FA.
- Erica Friedman, the writer of the Okazu blog, is a prominent figure in the yuri anime and manga scene, she being the president of the yuri-oriented Yuricon and founder of ALC Publishing, a publishing house dedicated to yuri (as stated in the article). Her opinions on yuri series could therefore be seen as reliable considering her background in yuri.
- I thought the Gamebrink thing might come up; I had replaced a forum cite with it. I did find a cite of it at Gamesarefun.com, and that was used in Kingdom Hearts II (cite 58); would that be sufficient?
  - I guess it would be sufficient, but it would be best, if you could cite the Famitsu issue directly. (Using: Template:Cite journal.) -- Goodraise (talk) 02:16, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
    - Okay, done.--十八 06:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- As for the subtitle attribution, I guess I'd have to remove it.

--十八 01:14, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement.

In general, if a ref is used for several sentences in a row, the ref can be just once at the end of the sentences. Exceptions would be direct quotes or extraordinary claims, which would need their own quotes. so fix things like The book, which is the same size as a manga bound volume, is printed in full-color for the first forty-eight pages which consists of a compilation of promotional art from the separate media types, character profiles with original sketches and comments on the characters, plus interviews from the voice actors of Hazumu, Yasuna, Tomari, Ayuki, and Jan Pu, and lastly original concept drawings of the school uniforms in the series.[1] The middle of the book, which is printed in black-and-white, contains a brief overview of the first twenty-one chapters of the manga, and interviews from the manga author and illustrator, anime director and scenario writer, and the light novel author.[1] There is also a brief explanation of the PlayStation 2 visual novel, of two figurines of Hazumu, and of three audio CDs for the anime version.[1] The last sixteen pages are again in full-color and consist of the anime's first episode in manga format.[1]
Article needs more references, for example the last paragraph in Visual novel has no refs. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
The Visual novel looks more like a video game - could this be explained a bit more?

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:07, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- The first two points were dealt with. Regarding the sources, every paragraph now has at least one cite except for the plot and lead, which both don't have cites in the recently promoted Tokyo Mew Mew, hence why I didn't see a reason to add in the cites here either. And on the last point, a visual novel is a specific type of video game. What more would you want me to explain?--十八 05:48, 19 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]
  - Just saying something like a visual novel, a type of video game would help. I was thinking more along the lines of a graphic novel. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:55, 31 December 2008 (UTC)[reply]