Talk:My Dress-Up Darling

Latest comment: 1 year ago by BlankpopsiclesilviaASHs4 in topic Credibility of specific sources? (DualShockers)

Notability as an orphan/the production section? edit

In the 'Production' section, is it notable that the creator set him as an orphan? It's rarely if at all mentioned, and he lives with his grandfather. Just wondering if I should move/remove the information. thx! Realtent (talk) 16:06, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

I think it's fine as is, but I would not be able to say for sure without reading the source myself, which I can't do. I would say that for the time being it should be left alone so that someone who is able to read the interview and place the information in proper context can make an informed decision as to its inclusion when improving the section. That's just my opinion, however. ostensibly singular userpage (inquire within) 16:10, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
Alright then, so if I were to go expand the 'production' section, what would be credible/wikipedia-accepted sources to use? I can find some at a search, but I don't know which are usable Realtent (talk) 16:17, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply
There's a list of topic-relevant reliable sources at WP:A&M/RS; I'd recommend using that as a starting point. ostensibly singular userpage (inquire within) 16:18, 7 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

Credibility of specific sources? (DualShockers) edit

While trying to expand the 'Production' section in a fashion similar to other pages like One Punch Man, I was trying to find a source with the creation date of the manga, because there's not a source for it. I found an article on a website called DualShockers with the manga publication date. Would it be fine to put it in here? Any other sources that say the same would be great. thx. Realtent (talk) 15:39, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply

There is actually already a source cited in the page saying when the manga's run began, so an additional source for that probably isn't needed. I don't know for certain about DualShockers, but they seem potentially fine as a source for opinions and uncontroversial claims. I wouldn't use them to demonstrate notability or base any article primarily on their coverage, however. If you want to get a more complete opinion on their reliability you might be best off asking other editors at WT:ANIME. ostensibly singular userpage (inquire within) 15:51, 8 September 2022 (UTC)Reply