This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
Latest comment: 7 years ago3 comments2 people in discussion
So I just received my issue of OtakuUSA (August 2016} hoping there would be a review for this series and sure enough there was. After reading the review though which was very negative I saw that the reviewer had also disliked Omamori Himari for the same reasons being the artwork. There was almost nothing in the review that talked about storyline just him bashing the artwork. For this reason I am a bit hesitant to include the review based on what I feel is a bit of bias (also WP:UNDUE). It would have been better in my opinion if they had a reviewer who was not familiar with the other series do the review. Sean Gaffney (his review is included in the article) for example gives no indication that he had prior knowledge of the author's works/artwork in his review. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 19:00, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
@Knowledgekid87: I don't see any reason not to include a review just because it was negative. The article is significantly lacking in reception content anyway, so best to add this one. If the reviewer's bias is significant, make a note of the fact that they disliked the author's previous series. G S Palmer (talk • contribs) 23:07, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
The one bit where the reviewer does go into storyline reception is calling the love triangle unoriginal as well as the Christian references. I know that most romantic comedies have love triangles in them so it isn't really in depth to call the idea un-original. I will include the review though as it is better than nothing. - Knowledgekid87 (talk) 23:28, 23 May 2016 (UTC)Reply
