Talk:Earl Cain/GA1

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

Starting review, checking quick fail criteria. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)

Quick fail criteria assessment ✅ no problems there. Extremepro (talk) 09:20, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) The article completely lacks reliable sources – see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
 * 2) The topic is treated in an obviously non-neutral way – see Wikipedia:Neutral point of view.
 * 3) There are cleanup banners that are obviously still valid, including cleanup, wikify, NPOV, unreferenced or large numbers of fact, clarifyme, or similar tags.
 * 4) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 5) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article is or has been the subject of ongoing or recent, unresolved edit wars.
 * 2) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.
 * 1) The article specifically concerns a rapidly unfolding current event with a definite endpoint.

Checking against GA criteria

 * 1) It is reasonably well written.
 * a (prose):
 * Lead: ✅
 * Plot: ✅
 * Production: ✅
 * Manga: ✅
 * Drama CDs: It is a bit short compared to other sections. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * Reception:✅
 * b (MoS):
 * Ok. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is factually accurate and verifiable
 * a (references):
 * The article appears to be well referenced. However, Reference 16 has "COMICS" in all caps. Consider "赤い羊の刻印 (2) (花とゆめComics―伯爵カインシリーズ)". Also (コミック) (comics) is redundant at the end of the Amazon title.
 * Personal choice: wikilink Reference 45: --> Manga: The Complete Guide
 * b (citations to reliable sources):
 * I'm not sure if reference 23, ICv2 is a reliable source. Correct me if I'm wrong.
 * c (OR):
 * No problems here. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is broad in its scope.
 * a (major aspects):
 * The article is suitably broad in scope
 * b (focused):
 * The article remains focused. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It follows the neutral point of view policy.
 * Fair representation without bias:
 * Article adheres to WP:NPOV
 * 1) It is stable.
 * No edit wars etc.:
 * The article appears stable, obviously new material is added. No evidence of edit-warring. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
 * The article only has one image apart from the one in the infobox. More pictures are needed. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
 * b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
 * All images used have appropriate captions . Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)
 * All non-free images used have a fair use rationale.
 * 1) Overall:
 * Pass/Fail:
 * Reference 16's name does not meet WP:MOSTITLE. I shall place the article on hold whilst the above concerns are addressed. Extremepro (talk) 09:19, 11 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Hi, Extremepro. Thank you for taking the time to look over this article. I have made the changes you suggested, except for adding another image. If Tokyo Mew Mew, a featured article, only needs one picture outside of the infobox, then I don't see why Earl Cain would need more than one picture outside of the infobox. :) (By the way, ICv2 is on the list of reliable sources. It's listed right before Popculture Shock.com) However, you say on your user page that you have edited significantly to this article before it was nominated and point two under number 1 in How to review an article states that reviewers who have contributed significantly to the article cannot review it. I'm not criticizing your review, which brought up some good points about the article. Despite your good intentions, the review may be unintentionally biased, because you have worked on it. Again, thank you for taking the time to review this article. :) I'm going to take this to the WP:GAN talkpage and see if anybody over there can resolve this. Thank you again for taking the time to review this article and I'm not criticizing your review. :) Kaguya-chan (talk) 19:44, 12 May 2009 (UTC)

CarpetCrawler's review
This article looks great, but I do have some concerns.

- Wikify "Kaori Yuki" in the lead.

- "However, Cain falls in love with a amnesiac fortuneteller named Meridiana; when Cain sets out to dig up Meridiana's supposed grave, Emeline follows him and is killed by Jack the Ripper, a hired murderer for Delilah who then uses the fresh organs and blood of the victims for its experiments" Could you maybe shorten this a little bit? It's a bit long and confusing when you read it out loud.

- "After discovering Emeline's death, Cain confronts the Ripper in his lair, bringing along Meridiana." How did Emeline die?

- Also, what kind of mysteries are being solved? Are they murder mysteries?

- I feel that the "Plot" section, as well as its subsection, "Godchild", is a little lengthy. I also got confused at some points, and had to re-read some things. Is there any way to trim it a little bit?

- Could you expand the "Drama CDs" section? Maybe you could expand on information, add basic plot info, and such?

Until my concerns have been addressed, I will place this article on hold. Please leave me a message on my talkpage if you have addressed the concerns, or if you have any questions. Good luck! Carpet Crawler message me  21:41, 20 May 2009 (UTC)

Hi, Carpet Crawler and thank you for taking the time to review this article. :) Thanks, Kaguya-chan (talk) 23:15, 20 May 2009 (UTC)
 * 1) She's killed by Jack the Ripper.
 * 2) They're murder mysteries. ✅
 * 3) The manga itself is confusing. No lie. :) Specifically, which points do you get confused at? (I'll do my best to fix the confusing points!)
 * 4) Do you mean like adding track listings?
 * 1) The manga itself is confusing. No lie. :) Specifically, which points do you get confused at? (I'll do my best to fix the confusing points!)
 * 2) Do you mean like adding track listings?

Interesting to know that it's a murder mytery manga! Are the murders as creative as in Detective Conan? :) And about the confuision, just in general I got confused. I think the problem is all of the names are used repeatedly, when "he" or "she" could also work. It looks like a LOT happens in such a short span... And about the last point... I had meant that maybe you could expand that section, as it looked a little stubby. No need to do track listings, just maybe some slight expansion? And your other corrections have been noted. :) Carpet Crawler  message me  08:03, 21 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Having never read Detective Conan, I can't compare the two. :) (But it sounds similar to Earl Cain, minus the crazy abusive father) Fixed the problem with the names and will add more to the drama CD section tomorrow. Kaguya-chan (talk) 20:31, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
 * OK, sounds like a plan. I guess Goodraise has taken over this review, so I will let them take over. Carpet Crawler  message me  07:15, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Expanded drama CD section. :) Kaguya-chan (talk) 20:26, 22 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Well, all of my concerns have been addressed. The bottom discussion about realiable sources is confusing to read, so I have no clue what the consensus is about the sources. If those bottom concerns have been addressed, I will be happy to pass this article. Carpet Crawler  message me  09:28, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * Looks like the sources were all reliable. :) Kaguya-chan (talk) 17:43, 23 May 2009 (UTC)


 * OK, I will pass this article. Great job! Carpet Crawler  message me  02:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC)