Talk:Mukuro Rokudo/GA1
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Midnightdreary in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This is a decent article; thanks for putting in significant work! I made some minor touch-up edits but I also have a few comments:
- Quick question: is he being referred by his first name throughout? Is that too informal for an encyclopedia article? Or is this just how he is commonly known as a character? Not a major concern, just curious.
- He is commonly referred as Mukuro in the series.Tintor2 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- In the lead, the second paragraph is a bit unclear and possibly repetitive in the first and last sentence: Mukuro's character has been well-received since his introduction, ranking as one of the most popular characters in every official Shonen Jump poll of the series... He has received positive reviews, describing him as a good villain praising his personality and techniques.[7] I think the text is trying to distinguish between the fan reaction and critical reaction but this is not clearly stated.
- Fixed.Tintor2 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- The problem remains. Who has received the character well? And who has given him positive reviews? Are these two separate audiences? --Midnightdreary (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Under "Personality": Despite often being seen with a playful smile, Mukuro is seemingly apathetic to the suffering of others. I don't see the logical connection between "despite" smiling he is apathetic to suffering. Why not just "Mukuro is often seen with a playful smile and seems apathetic to the suffering of others."
-
- Fixed.Tintor2 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Under "Weapons and abilities": Known as someone who has driven both the Mafia and police into the most dangerous and desperate of situations... I don't think it's safe to say they are "the most dangerous and desperate", unless this is a quote. If it is, say so.
- Fixed.Tintor2 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- I think you misunderstood. A simpler fix would have been "Known as someone who has driven both the Mafia and police into desperate and dangerous situations..." It was just "the most" that was a problem. --Midnightdreary (talk) 20:14, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- In that same section: When using his skills, a Japanese numeral, corresponding to the realm he has entered, appears in his right eye. The skills granted from the individual paths varies from enhancing his physical and mind-controlling abilities, as well as his power of his illusions, to enabling him to control and summon animals.[18][19][11][20] Do all four of those citations really all say the exact same thing? If so, is the info that controversial that is needs to be backed up with four sources? This might be over-citation.
- Fixed.Tintor2 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- "Reception": Like the similar info in the lead, I think this section is a bit disjointed and may not flow logically. Take a look at it, read it out loud, and see if you agree.
- Fixed.Tintor2 (talk) 17:16, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- My assumption is the edit warring is long over (as seen on talk page and in edit history) but I wanted to note that I believe the article as it stands is a decent length (if anything, it could afford being longer, though not in the plot-related areas necessarily), and same thing goes for the lead (if anything, it could afford to be a tiny bit longer).
I'll put this article on hold to see what you think of these suggestions before passing/failing. --Midnightdreary (talk) 15:13, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
A couple other things I noticed: decide how you want to present the term "keychains"/"key-chains"/"key chains" (I'd go with the last). Also, not sure if you need to link to merchandise sources in the lead; citations in the lead really should only be for potentially disputed or controversial facts. I doubt anyone is going to argue that key chains of the character exist. --Midnightdreary (talk) 20:12, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- I don't mean to be pedantic (you're doing great at accepting my suggestions!), but I'm not sure you've given a good read-through of the full reception section. Case in point: In some publications for manga and anime reviews, Mukuro's concept has mostly received praise and acclaim. "In some... mostly received"? I think "some" and "mostly" will cancel each other out into incoherence. Leroy Douresseaux of comicbookbin.com views him as a "slippery and formidable villain" and also mentions why is he attacking Tsuna and his friends. How is mentioning why the character is attacking Tsuna and his friends supportive of the previous statement? In other words, how is that plot detail showing the character is being praised? Here's another one: He also praises Akira Amano for the originality of Mukuro's techniques, viewing it as "one of the most interesting ideas I've [they've] seen. Who is "they"? --Midnightdreary (talk)
- Fixed. Sorry for this.Tintor2 (talk) 22:32, 13 December 2008 (UTC)
- Don't be sorry. This is some great work. I will pass the article - see my final breakdown below.
- 1. Well written?: PASS
- 2. Factually accurate?: Seems accurate. PASS
- 3. Broad in coverage?: Reasonably thorough for a GA. PASS
- 4. Neutral point of view?: No problem here, unless there is negative criticism of the character available. PASS
- 5. Article stability? Edit war seems to have solved itself. PASS
- 6. Images?: All images have good fair use summaries. PASS
Overall: 
Pass. Well done! --Midnightdreary (talk) 22:50, 13 December 2008 (UTC)