Template:Did you know nominations/Given (manga)


 * The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as |this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by Yoninah (talk) 21:35, 30 April 2019 (UTC)

Given (manga)

 * ... that Given will be the first yaoi anime series to be broadcast on Noitamina? Source: Anime News Network, Crunchyroll
 * Reviewed: Abby Cubillo

Created by Morgan695 (talk). Self-nominated at 00:55, 16 March 2019 (UTC).


 * While I suppose this an okay hook, I think the hook as currently written might be too niche for most Wikipedia readers, who are likely not familiar with anime and have no idea what Noitamina is. Perhaps it could be rephrased? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 18:46, 26 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ALT1: ...that the manga series Given will be adapted into an anime in July? Source: Anime News Network
 * ALT2: ...that the manga series Given was adapted into an audio drama in 2016? Source: Natalie
 * I realize these are pretty dry, but there's not much more I can do with the somewhat limited English sources the subject material has. Morgan695 (talk) 01:30, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * Honestly, those are even more niche. Manga being adapted into audio dramas and manga is so common it's not even hooky anymore. The Noitamina hook actually has potential but there might need to be some clarification there, like mentioning that Noitamina is a television block. If you need Japanese sources, I can help you find some, if you want. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:57, 27 March 2019 (UTC)
 * ALT3: ...that Given will be the first yaoi anime series to be broadcast on Noitamina, Fuji TV's anime programming block? Source: Anime News Network, Crunchyroll
 * Reviewed: Abby Cubillo


 * Symbol question.svg The article meets DYK requirements and a QPQ has been provided. However, I still see a couple of sentences without references, particularly in the Media section (no references needed for the character section since it's assumed they're sourced to the work itself). As anime and manga is my main editing specialization, I'd like an outside opinion on which hook to be promoted (in particular, to see if ALT3 could work for non-anime fans). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:00, 14 April 2019 (UTC)
 * All sentences should now be cited. Morgan695 (talk) 15:43, 14 April 2019 (UTC)


 * Symbol redirect vote 4.svg I think this should be okay now on my end; will leave the review of ALT3 to another editor. I've also struck ALTs 0, 1 and 2 for lacking interest to general audiences. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 16:58, 18 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Approving hook ALT3 as much more hooky and interesting than the previous two and more clear than the original. -Bryanrutherford0 (talk) 17:46, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg Adding a tick for Bryan since it seems he forgot to add one. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 23:59, 22 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol possible vote.svg Hi, I came by to promote this, but at present the article is only 1322 characters long, excluding the plot section and list of characters. Perhaps reviews could be added to the Reception section. Yoninah (talk) 19:38, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Is there specific policy that excludes the Plot section of an article from the 1,500 character requirement? I'm not seeing anything under WP:DYK or WP:DYKSG. Morgan695 (talk) 21:50, 23 April 2019 (UTC)
 * As far as I know, there is no such rule, and in fact many articles on media that have plot sections have been allowed before (in such cases, it is usually presumed that the media itself is the source). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:56, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * In fact, the only rule about fiction that I'm aware of is that hooks about works of fiction need to involve the real world in some form, but nothing about discounting plot or character sections when counting article content. Could you please explain here why you made your comment above? Thanks. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:34, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Sorry I didn't make myself clear. At present, excluding the list of characters, the article has 2,503 characters, of which only 824 characters are sourced. This means that 68 percent of the article is unsourced text. It is basically top-heavy on plot and characters with very little else to make it a start-class article. If you added more to the production or reception of the manga, it would flesh out the article. Yoninah (talk) 09:53, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Again, I don't see any guidance around proportion of sourced material in WP:DYK or WP:DYKSG. Morgan695 (talk) 19:30, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * IMO this article does not satisfy WP:DYKSG. Anyone can write up the plot and characters and call it an article, but it is not suitable for appearance on the main page without more and sourced information. Yoninah (talk) 21:35, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * That seems like a very broad reading of WP:DYKSG, which appears to cover articles that are literally incomplete (section headers without content or with expand tags, etc.). I guess you could argue that the article is "insufficiently comprehensive," but again, there is no specific prohibition that excludes text used in plot and character sections (or information that is in the article but does not contribute to the character count, as in infoboxes) to judge the comprehensiveness of the article. The article presently contains 2,857 characters of copy (4,413 with the character section included), which I believe makes the article sufficiently comprehensive for a DYK. Morgan695 (talk) 22:33, 24 April 2019 (UTC)
 * I asked a more experienced editor for comment on this nomination; see her comment here. Yoninah (talk) 18:47, 29 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Aritcle now has 1992 characters of non-plot copy, 3301 characters with plot section, and 4851 characters with plot section and character section. Morgan695 (talk) 00:00, 30 April 2019 (UTC)
 * Symbol confirmed.svg	 Thank you. It does look start-class now. Restoring tick per Bryanrutherford0's review. Yoninah (talk) 21:34, 30 April 2019 (UTC)