Talk:Angel Sanctuary/GA1

GA Review[edit]

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Morgan695 (talk · contribs) 02:00, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi, I'll be taking this up. Full comments to follow. Morgan695 (talk) 02:00, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Basic GA criteria[edit]

Well written: the prose is clear and concise.
Well written: the spelling and grammar are correct.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for lead sections.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for article structure and layout.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for words to watch.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for writing about fiction
Complies with the MOS guidelines for list incorporation – not applicable.
Complies with the MOS guidelines for use of quotations – not applicable.
All statements are verifiable with inline citations provided.
All inline citations are from reliable sources, etc.
Contains a list of all references in accordance with the layout style guideline.
No original research.
No copyright violations or plagiarism.
Broad in its coverage but within scope and in summary style.
Neutral.
Stable.
Illustrated, if possible.
Images are at least fair use and do not breach copyright.

Earwigs pinged copyvio because a Goodreads review copy+pasted the plot summary wholesale, but the article copy precedes the review, so no worries there.
inspired by the book Nocturne needs context for what Nocturne is
To search for Sara's soul, sent to Hell for incest, Setsuna's body enters a near-death state, and his soul searches for hers, eventually learning that it has been taken to Heaven instead break into two sentences
In the second paragraph under "Audio drama", the continued use of "appeared" seems like a strange word choice

Overall, this is a very well written article that requires only a few changes. The over-reliance on primary sources is somewhat concerning, but acceptable by GA standards. Once you've made the changes above, I'll pass the article. Morgan695 (talk) 21:32, 5 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Also think the article and its subpages would benefit from a navbox, but because I didn't mention it in my initial review I decided to be bold and add it myself. Morgan695 (talk) 16:55, 6 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Hi and thank you for taking the time to review! It's so very appreciated. Re: the Goodreads review, that is so very embarrassing! I hope it wasn't a big thing. I have made the changes, with the exception of the context for Nocturne, which I don't have, regrettably. The interview only discusses the book title and a brief plot summary, so that's all the context I have. Thank you for adding the navbox; I was not aware of it! Best wishes, Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 19:56, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

@Rapunzel-bellflower: For Nocturne I think it literally just needs 2-4 words of context, like the Japanese fantasy novel Nocturne (if it is indeed Japanese and a fantasy novel, just using this as an example) or the novel Nocturne by [author], or something similar. Morgan695 (talk) 20:05, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Of course! I've added it now. Rapunzel-bellflower (talk) 20:14, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Passed for GA. Morgan695 (talk) 20:22, 7 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]