Talk:Aniplex of America/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: Tintor2 (talk · contribs) 13:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Hello, I'll be reviewing this article but it will start probably after Christmas. Looking forward to it. I only worked in two different companies article but this one seems well. Merry Christmas.Tintor2 (talk) 13:47, 23 December 2020 (UTC)

Merry Christmas. I let the archive and citation bots check the sources of this article. Everything seems well written and sourced but there are some issues that might help to make GA:
 * Infobox
 * The 15 years ago seems unnecessary. Either remove it or simply write like "(15 years ago)" similar to real people's ages.
 * Lead
 * For the lead. While it might be unavoidable, I would suggest reducing the times we repeat the Aniplex word in the first paragraph. Try replacing some instances with "company" or "distribution enterprise".
 * Try mentioning in the lead one of the key people behind Aniplex. Maybe Asa Suehira seems the most appropiate.
 * Body
 * "At this point, Aniplex of America licensed its titles through other distributors, such as Funimation, Bandai Visual, Geneon, ADV Films, NIS America, and Media Blasters." Seems to be lacking a citation. Was it removed accidentally?
 * Similarly, avoid repeating the company's names. For example, in the second sentence from the first paragraph you can simply replace it with "It" or "They"
 * Catalog
 * English is quite a common wikilink so there is no need to have it.

Other than that, I think this article is in good state. Solve this issues, ping me and I'll check it again to pass it. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 01:25, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

I took the feedback given and used it to improve the article. It is now ready to be reassessed whenever you get the chance. Thanks for doing this review! I promise to hold my end of the deal. Link20XX (talk) 04:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)

On a second read, the article looks much better. I thought it would take longer but the prose is not that big while the free image passes the crtieria.

Tintor2 (talk) 12:51, 26 December 2020 (UTC)
 * 1) Is it well written?
 * A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:
 * B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:
 * 1) Is it verifiable with no original research?
 * A. It contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline:
 * B. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons&mdash;science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:
 * C. It contains no original research:
 * D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:
 * 1) Is it broad in its coverage?
 * A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:
 * B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):
 * 1) Is it neutral?
 * It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:
 * 1) Is it stable?
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:
 * 1) Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?
 * A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
 * B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass or Fail:
 * Pass or Fail: