Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise/1

Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Royal_Space_Force:_The_Wings_of_Honn%C3%AAamise/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: No consensus to delist. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 22:34, 30 October 2023 (UTC)

With a readable prose size of ~23500, not counting 9,000+ words of notes, image captions, quotes, and tables, this article clearly violates criterion 3b) of the GACR. To remain a GA, this article needs to undergo a large amount of cleanup, with a particular emphasis on summary style. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 13:54, 13 July 2023 (UTC)


 * There has recently been concern expressed that the article in its current form is too long for readers, with the indication that its good article status will be placed at risk of revocation so I will work toward a plan of a.) editing the main Royal Space Force article so that sections are summarized to an acceptable overall length and b.) creating new articles on related topics based upon the previous versions of those sections. Iura Solntse (talk) 21:47, 13 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Looking at a comparison between the reviewed version and the current version, it seems like a huge amount of direct quotes have been added, particularly in the screenplay and themes sections (the latter completely new), quite possibly in violation of MOS:QUOTE ("Using too many quotes is incompatible with an encyclopedic writing style and may be a copyright infringement") and thus failing GA criterion 3b). I am additionally unsure why near-tripling the number of notes in the article was necessary—most seem to fall under WP:INDISCRIMINATE or WP:TRIVIA. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 21:57, 14 July 2023 (UTC)
 * So would it make more sense to revert it back to the reviewed version when it became a Good Article? GamerPro64  03:28, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Pretty much, yes, but I believe the initial nominator has below started transferring information, so we'll wait until they're finished and assess then. 15:07, 18 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I have begun a process of reducing the reading length of the article through the creation of a new sub-article Academic analysis of themes in Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise and the corresponding condensing of that section in the main article with the addition of further subheadings for easier reading. I'll continue the process with other sections in the main article. Iura Solntse (talk) 03:52, 17 July 2023 (UTC)
 * I've created a second new sub-article Critical response to Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise while condensing and adding further subheadings for ease in reading to the corresponding section in the main article. I’ll continue the process with other sections of the main article. Iura Solntse (talk) 22:37, 22 July 2023 (UTC)
 * DYK helper gives me 21112 words, 127400 characters at the moment. That's definitely an improvement but I'd say more trimming is needed. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 22:21, 25 July 2023 (UTC)
 * Instead of moving content to other articles (or 'sub-articles' as you've called them), I'd say it's a better idea to just trim down or delete parts of the article. It's important to remember that not everything belongs on Wikipedia and simply transferring content to another article just de-centralises content, making it harder for readers to follow, which seems contrary to the purpose of an encyclopedia. Willbb234 14:28, 1 August 2023 (UTC)
 * See the editing guideline summary style, . AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 08:36, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think that guideline just backs up my point. Only "major subtopics" should be split into other articles. We would need to assess if each subtopic that is split off is considered "major", otherwise it might not be appropriate to split off. See WP:NOPAGE - we need to use our "editorial judgement" here. Willbb234 09:32, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * If you feel that other articles are non-notable, feel free to take them to WP:AFD, . That is outside the purview of GAR, which only focuses on if the article accredited with GA status still meets it. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 11:13, 2 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've created a third new sub-article Marketing and release of Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise while condensing and adding further subheadings for ease in reading to the corresponding section in the main article. I’ll continue the process with other sections of the main article. Iura Solntse (talk) 03:37, 3 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've created a fourth new sub-article Music of Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise while condensing and adding further subheadings for ease in reading to the corresponding section in the main article. I’ll continue the process with other sections of the main article. Iura Solntse (talk) 23:00, 7 August 2023 (UTC)
 * You seem to be having trouble with the "condensing of the main article", . I am seeing little-to-no improvement in the article actually under discussion. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:29, 8 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've created a fifth new sub-article Voice acting in Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise while condensing and adding further subheadings for ease in reading to the corresponding section in the main article. I’ll continue the process with other sections of the main article. Iura Solntse (talk) 05:42, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I don't know why you felt the need to add further subheadings,, but the article now infringes upon MOS:OVERSECTION, so that's another thing to work on. AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 23:20, 13 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I think they took the boilerplate advice please consider splitting content into sub-articles, condensing it, or adding subheadings in the template literally. Charcoal feather (talk) 19:40, 15 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I've created a sixth new sub-article Cinematography of Royal Space Force: The Wings of Honnêamise while condensing the corresponding section in the main article. I’ll continue the process with other sections of the main article. Iura Solntse (talk) 06:34, 16 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm considering delisting based on the lack of significant improvement and the inability of to WP:ENGAGE meaningfully beyond copy-pastes. Thoughts?  AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 10:51, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I would delist at this point, simply because the article is still just too damn long, especially the massive notes section. I think the sub-articles are unnecessary and the material in question just needs to be made more concise, but that's neither here nor there as far as GAR is concerned. Trainsandotherthings (talk) 21:46, 21 August 2023 (UTC)
 * There has been a 7250-word / 31% reduction in size since the start of this GAR (not counting notes), which I think is reasonable and steady progress. Communication was suboptimal, but they evidently did listen to the feedback (subheadings improved once that was pointed out), and they have now started to engage. I see no need to delist at this time. Charcoal feather (talk) 10:38, 25 August 2023 (UTC)
 * Since I began the summarization process on July 17 I have reduced the length of the main article thus far by 125 KB. Regarding the notes I have thus far removed 63% of them from the main article. The summarization process is being done in reverse order (beginning with the last sub-sections of the main article and working backwards to the beginning) in order to reduce the likelihood of introducing errors into the citations and references so the changes to the article may not be readily apparent yet from its earlier sections. My goal is to reduce the main article size or at any rate its readable prose size to that it was when it first received the good article designation. As was pointed out the adding of subheadings was based on the suggestions of the "very long" tag that had been placed previously on the article however after these additions were criticized I did not employ subheadings on the most recent summarizations (the Cinematography and Animation sections). Iura Solntse (talk) 17:16, 22 August 2023 (UTC)
 * I have now reduced the length of the main article by 140K since the summarization process began with the latest edit of the art direction section and removing some of the subheadings criticized earlier. I’ll continue to work backwards towards the beginning of the article with further summarizations of additional sections. Iura Solntse (talk) 04:41, 3 September 2023 (UTC)
 * After having summarized the design section the main article is now nearly 151K shorter since the beginning of the process on July 17. As mentioned earlier I'll continue to work backwards towards the beginning of the article with further summarizations of additional sections. Iura Solntse (talk) 04:00, 18 September 2023 (UTC)
 * I have thus far removed 157K of length since the summarization process began including 74% of the notes section. As mentioned earlier my objective is to reduce the article length to that it had when it was originally appointed good article status and with the latest edit to the screenplay section 67% of that objective has now been reached. I’ll continue to to work backwards towards the beginning of the article with further summarizations of additional sections. Iura Solntse (talk) 10:03, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I have thus far removed 167K of length since the summarization process began including 78% of the notes section. As mentioned earlier my objective is to reduce the article length to that it had when it was originally appointed good article status and with the latest edit to the pilot film section 71% of that objective has now been reached. I’ll continue to to work backwards towards the beginning of the article with further summarizations of additional sections. Iura Solntse (talk) 22:52, 13 October 2023 (UTC)
 * This GAR has been open for three months, and thus the due date is upon us. I still do not feel that the article "stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail" (GA criterion 3b)). Pinging those involved in this discussion:  AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 19:49, 11 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Well if you believe that its still not up to GA standards you can always just delist it. I honestly don't know what else there is to do besides someone willing to comb through the entire article. GamerPro64  04:42, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * I cannot delist if that is not the consensus, . On that note, do you believe this article meets the Good Article criteria? AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 15:18, 12 October 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. The article has improved considerably during this GAR process and is still being trimmed. It's still not perfect, but I do believe it complies (perhaps barely) with GA criterion 3b. I also disagree that we have a due date. Per GAR instructions: reassessments should not be closed as delist while editors are making good-faith improvements to the article. Charcoal feather (talk) 14:43, 16 October 2023 (UTC)