Talk:Yuri (genre)/GA1

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

Reviewer: Link20XX (talk · contribs) 00:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey I will be reviewing this article, though it may take a bit cause its a long article. Link20XX (talk) 00:54, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

I have completed my initial review. Just a few things before I can promote the article. I have made a few bold edits already.

Checklist
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:

Comments
Lead:
 * Link the article on "homoeroticism", as that's a word that is probably not known by the everyday person.
 * Done. Morgan695 (talk) 05:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

Terminology and etymology:
 * In the second paragraph, you shouldn't wikilink "rose", as that's something that most people know.
 * I think it's best to keep, as "rose" has several different meanings (the past tense of "rise", a color, a type of wine, etc.). It's useful to explicate that it's in reference to the flower, especially in contrast to "yuri" as "lily".
 * Unless I'm missing something, neither Lezhin nor Tappytoon use the term lily in the source provided.
 * Removed, as it's not supported by the source, or seemingly any other source. Morgan695 (talk) 05:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)

History:
 * Reference 35 appears to just redirect to the main site. Is this intentional?
 * Repaired the archive link.
 * Reference 37 has a "page needed" tag
 * Fixed.

That is all. Once they have all been addressed, ping me and I will pass it. Link20XX (talk) 03:46, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Edits have been implemented. Morgan695 (talk) 05:43, 6 March 2021 (UTC)


 * The changes implemented are enough. The result of this review is Pass. Congratulations and nice work! Link20XX (talk) 05:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * , Great, thank you! And thank you for your diligence in taking on so many of my GANs. Morgan695 (talk) 05:51, 6 March 2021 (UTC)
 * Don't mention it, I was just helping out. Anyway, I hope you nominate a fact from this article now that you can. Link20XX (talk) 06:02, 6 March 2021 (UTC)