Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Terra Branford/1

Terra Branford

 * • [//en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Good_article_reassessment/Terra_Branford/1&action=watch Watch article reassessment page] • Most recent review
 * Result: Most of the issues were met, and I took care of the rest myself. I feel satisfied with this outcome. Kung Fu Man (talk) 12:19, 15 June 2023 (UTC)

Article feels excessively detailed in terms of her appearance in Final Fantasy VI, and several paragraphs of the article are unsourced. Additionally the reception section feels extremely weak, with a few listicles and trivial mentions in there. Kung Fu Man (talk) 10:42, 10 June 2023 (UTC)


 * Delist per nom. The Reception section already looks flimsy. GlatorNator  (ᴛ) 11:03, 10 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Delist I'm pretty sure Terra can be improved significantly, but right now it doesn't meet modern-day standards. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 13:30, 11 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Keep. I restored the FFVI section to the version that passed GAN, which had since ballooned due to an overenthusiastic editor. No paragraphs are currently unsourced. Notability is not a GA criterion. The internet barely existed when this game was published so almost all internet-based coverage is necessarily retrospective. Japanese Culture Through Videogames (2019) is a published book that carries the section. Axem Titanium (talk) 14:44, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Notability isn't an issue, we both know she's notable. It's some of the material used i.e. Michael Rougeau of Complex barely saying anything, and Tom's Guide which is just being cited for her being on there. There isn't more than that or better sourcing?-- Kung Fu Man (talk) 14:51, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * The Complex article says that Terra paved the way for characters like Yuna and Aerith. The Tom's Guide article says she's an interesting protagonist because she isn't a natural-born leader but becomes one over time, and that her arc is a mark of the series' maturing storytelling. We agree that she's notable but she falls in a dead zone in terms of coverage because her main appearance came before the internet and people weren't really writing books about video game characters at the time. So we work with the best sources that are available. These are good sources relative to what's even possible (cf. WP:CONTEXTMATTERS). As long as they're from RS, Top X lists can be used and Complex is on WP:VG/S. Axem Titanium (talk) 15:16, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Top X lists can be used but if they're not saying anything meaningful. Simply being on a list isn't reception, we already went around that rabbit hole with quite a few other articles thanks to Niemti and trying to clean up the sheer mess he left behind. There's seriously nothing on Google Books, Scholar, even searching through wayback's magazines that discusses her? Not a single significant mention on any gaming website? Like I know there are sources to completely rewrite Kefka with a meaningful reception section, so there should be here. "It's from an old game" isn't really much of an excuse when it's one as popular and as re-released as this one.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:35, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * I'm just seeing this GAR today so I haven't spent any time looking for sources yet. On the first page of google books: ; from google scholar: . I don't have a huge amount of time today to do a thorough search but there's clearly stuff out there for such a well known character. Axem Titanium (talk) 20:34, 12 June 2023 (UTC)
 * Well take your time and build it up. I'm not going to rush this on you if you're actively working on it..--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:20, 13 June 2023 (UTC)