Talk:Darker than Black: Shikkoku no Hana/GA1

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

Reviewer: Takipoint123 (talk · contribs) 05:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

I will take up the review for this article.--Takipoint123 (talk) 05:14, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have placed the article on hold, and it will be placed on hold for a week for improvements.--Takipoint123 (talk) 07:56, 11 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Revised everything from plot section.


 * JournalduJapon seems to be careful with such article about the handling of reviews and copyrighted information.
 * Oricon sadly did not release information about the first volume of the manga involving sales.
 * The chapter titles are rough translations from Japanese scans. I'll remove them if you want it.Tintor2 (talk) 16:11, 11 June 2022 (UTC)
 * I have looked at your improvements and added additional suggestions.--Takipoint123 (talk) 21:51, 11 June 2022 (UTC)

Thanks for being patient with my issues. I tried revising more per your comments but could you pinpoint at least through a tag or hidden message which part of the article has that sentence that should be removed? Can't find it.Tintor2 (talk) 23:11, 11 June 2022 (UTC)


 * Sorry for being unclear with the location of the improvements, but it seems like they've been resolved. I've made a few revisions to the article, including a change in the plot and the volume list.
 * I think the article should be tidied up to be a GA, although I do feel a bit wary about its coverage. Takipoint123 (talk) 03:48, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * The author barely talked about the series sadly so I can't anything about its creation.Tintor2 (talk) 04:17, 12 June 2022 (UTC)
 * That's sad, and I'm not the cruel reviewer to require information that doesn't exist :) . I think the coverage should be fine in that case as the related articles to this topic seems to be good quality articles. Great work, and I'll pass the review but before that wait a few days just to make sure someone else can leave comments if they would like. Takipoint123 (talk) 06:00, 12 June 2022 (UTC)


 * All significant issues have been resolved as listed above, and the original review could be found at here. The article is passed, and great work! --Takipoint123 (talk) 01:27, 14 June 2022 (UTC)