Wikipedia:Peer review/School Rumble/archive2

School Rumble edit

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because before bringing this up as a FAC I would like it looked over for prose, specifically one aspect is how to deal with the long paragraph in the anime review section. However some general help with cleanup and copyediting would be helpful.

Thanks, 陣内 _Jinnai 18:39, 3 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I apologize in advance that I can't offer any direct copyediting help, but I will say that it definitely won't pass FAC without major work. The lead, which is all that most 1a-focused reviewers read, contains digressions, redundancies, unnecessary stub sentences, hard-to-follow structures, improper punctuation and other errors. I recommend that you shop this peer review around to interested parties, or even uninterested parties, and get a group of 2-3 copyeditors to work through the whole article. I'm making this ( fairly unhelpful) comment because I too often see extremely flawed articles go through peer reviews with flying colors, only to be shot down during FAC. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 23:08, 5 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

- Anywhere you suggest? I know the two wikiprojects this is linked to, WP:ANIME and WP:VG don't really have the copyediting ability and it's been up on Wikipedia:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests for 2 months as that project seems dead.陣内_Jinnai 00:29, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
  - Guild of Copyeditors has never been and will never be useful, unfortunately. Even when someone takes your article on, the job is subpar, in my experience. While it is true that those WikiProjects are not known for quality copyediting, I have had success with WPVG copyeditors in the past. I recommend posting a link to this peer review on the WPVG talk page, since the topic is connected, and asking specifically for copyediting help. This page can also be helpful for locating copyeditors, but your results may vary. Contact anyone who looks promising and hope for the best. Another method is to dig through recently-promoted (or older) FAs and see who copyedited them, or if the main editor passed 1a solo. That one saved me on a previous FAC. VG FAs would be where to look first, since they get featured all the time. If that fails, look around through other projects and see if a non-VG copyeditor might help you out. Just contact anyone who copyedited those articles and seems remotely competent. Using this method, I just discovered that User:Jappalang, an accomplished editor, did impressive copyediting work on Giants: Citizen Kabuto, on which he was a major force in its promotion to FA. Start with him. I recommend trying all of these methods at once, though, because of the amount of copyeditors you'll need. That, and they take a long time to respond. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:50, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]
    - I can post a request on WP:VG, but I won't hold my breath. It's connected with the project, aye, but only somwewhat. I've posted on MILHIST though due to it being a part of the project.陣内 _Jinnai 08:39, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Question. Should the "Impact" section have its own section? It might look better im the "Reception and Sales" section. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:36, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not "reception" or "sales" of the anime. It's citing the impact it had on the fansubbing debate.陣内 _Jinnai 00:43, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's still too short to be its own section. They hate stubby sections at FAC, so I suggest that you fix it somehow. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 06:53, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

It's not reception though, definatly not sales and it would be lost if it were just "merged" with a renamed reception, sales and impact. as it would be in the already longest section of the article. It really has no other place unless I merge it into the lead.陣内 _Jinnai 08:35, 6 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]