User:Kanraru/sandbox

Article Evaluation


 * Is everything in the article relevant to the article topic? Is there anything that distracted you?
 * Everything to the article is relevant; there are few parts that have distracted me, such as the second paragraph on the introduction. It feels like it's more or less the summary of the reception section, and it doesn't seem quite the necessary comment to include in the introduction, perhaps leaving some readers biased towards a certain idea(although it tries hard to 'include' contrasting views).
 * Is any information out of date? Is anything missing that could be added?
 * The article is up to date, including an information that was just uploaded yesterday(the artist getting a trophy).
 * What else could be improved?
 * Perhaps a bit of the background could be moved over to reception...?


 * Is the article neutral? Are there any claims that appear heavily biased toward a particular position? / Are there viewpoints that are overrepresented, or underrepresented?
 * It tries hard to include many viewpoints by quoting multiple journal sources, but it seems to me that the negative view of sexualization of a character is more present within the article.


 * Check a few citations. Do the links work? Does the source support the claims in the article?
 * Not all of the links work, but that might be due to IP blocking on Japanese sites. However, in this case, they are archived so there is an alternate venue to access the site. Sources seem mostly in line with the article, except for some generalizations that the article may be making out of the source journal articles.
 * Is each fact referenced with an appropriate, reliable reference? Where does the information come from? Are these neutral sources? If biased, is that bias noted?
 * Information mostly comes from journals and news outlets, which contain very heavy biased information. Some of the websites are known for practicing yellow journalism, yet no note is made of it. It tries to make up for it with including as many viewpoints as possible.
 * It should be kept in mind that since this is an internet phenomenon that happened relatively recently, there are not enough reliable sources to build this article from


 * What kinds of conversations, if any, are going on behind the scenes about how to represent this topic?
 * It's mostly about how the article is reviwed as Good Article Nominee/Delisted Good Article, as there are still flaws with it, including its structure, sentence structure, etc.
 * How is the article rated? Is it a part of any WikiProjects?
 * It is currently rated Good Article. It's part of Video Games, Fictional Character, Japan, and Internet Culture WikiProject.