Talk:List of Kamen Rider Ex-Aid characters

January 2018 copy edit
I finished my first pass on the article, sorry it took a while. The list-article has some issues which are largely related to its size. WP:LENGTH recommends the maximum size of an article as 10,000 words, based on average reading speeds and attention spans (this article was more than 20,000 words). This isn't so crucial with a list that readers aren't likely to read from beginning to end, but there are some technical issues that also come into play with very large articles, which can be difficult to navigate and display (also see WP:SPLITSIZE). Some notes: I'll take another couple passes at the article and try to refine it a bit more. Please feel free to post here if you have any questions or comments. Thanks. – Reidgreg (talk) 21:37, 4 January 2018 (UTC)
 * I expanded the lead to better explain the list and give some definitions and context for terms used. Also italicized part of the title.
 * Trivia:
 * It seems as though the list goes well beyond the topic of a character list, with a large amount of information about fighting forms/transforms, weapons and fighting moves, and the sequences used to activate them. Remember that articles should be summaries and not cover every detail.  I personally don't think it is crucial character information to state the lever-button sequence for various transforms, and am tempted to trim such details.
 * Consider if there's a way to split some of the information into a separate list article. As an example Super Sentai / Power Rangers has a List of cast members and a separate List of Zords (mecha).
 * It would be good to provide reliable secondary sources for some of the information, both for verifiability and to establish notability.
 * There were a few cases where a section on one character diverges to talk about another character, either providing information already covered elsewhere or details on very minor characters that don't have their own section. This is how article size can grow out of control.  When providing a summary, it's generally better to be concise, to convey the information in as few words as possible without straying from the subject.
 * Italics:
 * Foreign loanwords not common in everyday English get italics, such as tokusatsu, chibi, tsundere, buyō, etc (see MOS:FOREIGNITALIC).
 * Titles of video games typically get italics as works of art. I italicized actual games referenced like Pac-Man, Galaxian, Xevious and Tekken but didn't italicize the fictional video games of the setting.  (Note that italics differentiate the video game Pac-Man from the character Pac-Man.)  Video game systems like WonderSwan do not get italics.
 * Removed a lot of excessive italics such as critical strike, etc.
 * Specialized characters: If the character Ⅱ is meant to represent the Roman numeral II, then II (two capital I characters) should be used instead.  It's more accessible and preferred as a matter of style.  (Similarly, curly quotes are discouraged by MOS.)
 * Tone:
 * Be careful with "in reality" since we're talking about a work of fiction. (eg: "In reality, Masamune had been using his son".)
 * It isn't encyclopedic tone to say something is ironic, fortunate, unfortunate, etc. Simply present the facts and let the reader decide (or provide the opinion from a reliable secondary source).
 * A few odd passages:
 * In the bullet point on The Vernier Bugster there is a sentence about the Gatton Bugster (the previous bullet point). Please check if this is a typo or the information was accidentally put in the wrong place.
 * OK, I undid some changes by IP user who provided no edit summaries.  (I went through the diff first and kept a couple small changes where the meaning was different.)  In addition to the reasons given above, I used shorter phrasing choices for conciseness in the article which is already way too long.  I would be happy to discuss my edits, and will continue working on the article. – Reidgreg (talk) 15:04, 5 January 2018 (UTC)