Talk:Vivi Ornitier

Latest comment: 2 years ago by 2003:D0:DF02:FA00:993D:F10C:3265:77DD in topic How did the character's name change?

GA Review

edit

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.



This review is transcluded from Talk:Vivi Ornitier/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Lee Vilenski (talk · contribs) 08:21, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply


Hello, I am planning on reviewing this article for GA Status, over the next couple of days. Thank you for nominating the article for GA status. I hope I will learn some new information, and that my feedback is helpful.

If nominators or editors could refrain from updating the particular section that I am updating until it is complete, I would appreciate it to remove a edit conflict. Please address concerns in the section that has been completed above (If I've raised concerns up to references, feel free to comment on things like the lede.)

I generally provide an overview of things I read through the article on a first glance. Then do a thorough sweep of the article after the feedback is addressed. After this, I will present the pass/failure. I will use strikethrough tags when concerns are met. Even if something is obvious why my concern is met, please leave a message as courtesy.

Best of luck! you can also use the {{done}} tag to state when something is addressed. Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)

Please let me know after the review is done, if you were happy with the review! Obviously this is regarding the article's quality, however, I want to be happy and civil to all, so let me know if I have done a good job, regardless of the article's outcome.

Immediate Failures

edit
  • It is a long way from meeting any one of the six good article criteria -   Done
  • It contains copyright infringements -   Done
  • It has, or needs, cleanup banners that are unquestionably still valid. These include{{cleanup}}, {{POV}}, {{unreferenced}} or large numbers of {{citation needed}}, {{clarify}}, or similar tags. (See also {{QF-tags}}). -   Done
  • It is not stable due to edit warring on the page. -   Done
edit

Prose

edit

Lede

edit

Rest of article

edit

Notes & References

edit

GA Review

edit
GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):   b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):  
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.
    a (reference section):   b (citations to reliable sources):   c (OR):   d (copyvio and plagiarism):  
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):   b (focused):  
  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 and other media, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales):   b (appropriate use with suitable captions):  
  7. Overall:
    Pass/Fail:  

Comments

edit
  • Automated note - If you fancy returning the favour, I have outstanding GA nominations that require reviewing at WP:GAN. I'd be very grateful if you were to complete one of these, however it's definately not manditory. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs)
    • I do feel there are a few things missing from this one. The Creation section needs a little expansion, and the lede is very small. See other GA Squall Leonhart for some tips on how this should probably be expanded. There's also a few things above for the prose. I'll place on hold. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 13:50, 13 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
      • I think I've addressed most if not all issues. Let me know if anything was missed or if new issues arise please @Lee Vilenski:. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 01:24, 14 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
        • I still would like more info for an expansion in the appearances, but I don't think it's something that should fail a GAN on, just would be nice to have a few more sentences regarding the appearances outside of FFIX, but I'll pass for now. Congrats. I think I have another one of your open, so I'll check that out probably tomorrow. Best Wishes, Lee Vilenski (talkcontribs) 18:41, 15 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
          • Thank you. I'll try to get some more non-FF9 appearance info as I can, I just want to be careful not to have too much, you know? And AFAIK, outside of KH2 and WoFF there's not much substantial in terms of Vivi's appearances. I guess I could elaborate his crossover into Puzzle & Dragons was a part of an event. Also, yeah you have Fran open, I'm trying to preempt issues you may have with it that you had here so that your review will be a little easier. - Bryn (talk) (contributions) 20:26, 15 September 2019 (UTC)Reply
The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

How did the character's name change?

edit

From the article: "Vivi Ornitier was created for the video game Final Fantasy IX. His name in English was originally Vivi Ornitier in the Final Fantasy IX manual, though this changed in the Greatest Hits re-release." It is not quite clear what the different naming variants are. This bit has been added to the article as such, and is not a result of copyediting later on. -- 2003:D0:DF02:FA00:993D:F10C:3265:77DD (talk) 12:40, 15 October 2021 (UTC)Reply