Wikipedia:Peer review/Anime/archive1

Anime

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because it is a core topic of WikiProject Anime and manga and it has been over two years since its last nomination for a Good Article. Would like to know what issues the article still has, what the article lacks, and how it can be improved so that it can obtain Featured Article status.


 * Featured articles
 * it:Anime
 * ka:Anime
 * ru:Anime

Thanks, Farix (Talk) 19:25, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

From someone that did not has English a native language and doesn't live in an English speaking country.
 * Chara design section: Indeed, through Ribbon no Kishi, Tezuka set a stylistic template that later shōjo artists tended to follow.
 * Not sourced, indeed and tended fell like loose screws, and by shōjo artists does it refers to manga artists or anime artists ? Blow this sentence if it cant be clarified and sourced.
 * Distribution section: Need some update to take account of the legal streaming and Download To Own (DoT) service. Most notably the Crunchyroll deals with Gonzo, TV Tokyo, Viz Media, etc... ANN doing anime streaming too. Funimation (DoT) service on itune.

That all from a first succinct reading. --KrebMarkt 20:44, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Well those neutrality and expert tags seem like the first things to fix..... Dandy Sephy (talk) 21:19, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Could be my slowness, but I was confused by the statement: Anime has become commercially profitable in western countries as early commercially successful western adaptations of anime, such as Astro Boy, have revealed. Maybe it can be slightly changed to Anime has become commercially profitable in western countries, as revealed by early commercially successful western adaptations of anime, such as Astro Boy. Or is that a bit clumsy? That's the only problem I've spotted so far. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 21:27, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * I'm no copyeditor, but the second 'commercially' just seems redundant. Although the entire sentence just seems completely wrong. Dandy Sephy (talk) 21:40, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * True. Another rewrite: Anime has become commercially profitable in western countries, as seen in the success of early western adaptations of anime like Astro Boy. ~ Itzjustdrama C  ? 21:58, 1 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Much better, although searching the reference used to back up the original text doesn't reveal a direct link between the two. Was Astro Boy a key product? Highly likely. Was it commercially successfull? This needs proving. Dandy Sephy (talk) 22:12, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

The available literature on anime needs to be re-surveyed, all references need to be checked for their reliability, and all the references from books need page numbers. The summary style of History of anime and the relevant section in this article need to be checked. It's difficult to be sure that the coverage is broad enough when you're dealing with a topic that by its nature is very broad. --Malkinann (talk) 23:17, 1 March 2009 (UTC)

Not sure what the expert tag is still requesting anymore even after reading the talk page...Just better selection of images? じん ない  22:26, 3 March 2009 (UTC)

Comments from
 * You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, and my first suggestion would be to get your references into order. A number of your website references lack publisher and/or last access dates, which are the bare minimum needed for WP:V. Books need publisher, author, and page number on top of title. When you've got those mostly straightened out, drop me a note on my talk page and I'll be glad to come back and look at the actual sources themselves, and see how they look in terms of reliability, like I would at FAC. 21:54, 7 March 2009 (UTC)


 * That is a tiny lead. Needs to be expanded to cover the scope of the article and I can't shake the feeling that this isn't close to comprehensive. This article really would benefit from an expert with an exhaustive store of literature on anime. Also, the "art example" images need to go. Although they're only in two images, they combine for sixteen pieces of fair use images, which is way, way too much for any article. Pick one, maybe two tops as your art choice and go with it. — sephiroth bcr  ( converse ) 07:01, 14 March 2009 (UTC)