Jump to content

Talk:Meltan/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review

[edit]
GA toolbox
Reviewing

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

Nominator: Kung Fu Man (talk · contribs) 22:13, 24 September 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: Fathoms Below (talk · contribs) 20:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Hi Kung Fu Man and Pokelego999. I should be able to look at the article this week. Haven't reviewed a GA in a few months so might take some time to get back into things. Fathoms Below (talk) 20:20, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

GA review
(see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)
  1. It is reasonably well written.
    a (prose, spelling, and grammar):
    b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
  2. It is factually accurate and verifiable, as shown by a source spot-check.
    a (references):
    b (citations to reliable sources):
    c (OR):
    d (copyvio and plagiarism):
  3. It is broad in its coverage.
    a (major aspects):
    b (focused):
  4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. It is stable.
    No edit wars, etc.:
  6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.
    a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
    b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

Overall:
Pass/Fail:

· · ·

A couple initial comments

  • The contextual introduction to what a Pokémon is in the "Conception and development" section is consistent with similar character articles in this topic area. Check.
  • Earwig's doesn't show any issues with copyright, will do checks for close paraphrasing along with spot-checks.
  • Images are tagged with appropriate WP:FURs.

Fathoms Below (talk) 20:38, 15 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • There is a duplicate link to Pokémon Go in the lead
  • Fixed.
  • Maybe provide a link to the "mainline Pokemon titles" somewhere? I'm surprised that a link to Pokémon (video game series) or something similar isn't included.
  • Fixed. Linked to the video game list's main series section.
  • "Meltan was created for Pokémon Go, an augmented reality game mobile phone component of the Pokémon franchise where players to allow players to traverse the world around them and capture Pokémon at designated locations." This doesn’t seem quite right
  • Fixed.
  • and further stated that it had been "a lot of fun" What had been a lot of fun? Also full stop.
  • Fixed. Replaced with a summary about the fan art response being so quick as it adds more.
  • "Masuda stated that Meltan was created out of a "desire to build a bridge between the players of the core Pokémon series and players of Pokémon Go" wishing to satisfy both groups. Who wished to satisfy both groups?
  • Fixed.
Fathoms Below (talk) 15:39, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed everything mentioned.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:57, 16 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • No edit-warring in the page history, article is generally stable
  • Captions appear suitable, AGF on print source for the caption on Meltan's design. If one of you has a way to help me verify the information presented there that would be appreciated.
    • Upper right text explains how the eye remains in the head, text under images is a list of emotions/expressions, with the tail matching it. This can be verified to an extent with Google Lens, though it's a bit rough due to the image size.
  • Addresses the main aspects of the topic, design, appearances, and reception, similar to other Pokémon articles.
  • Some of the sources (such as Bleeding Cool) don't have wikilinks to their articles. What's up with that?
    • Should be fixed, just an oversight.

Fathoms Below (talk) 18:42, 17 October 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • I’m generally familiar with most of the sources used since they’re from the video game topic area. Checked WP:VG/S to make sure and I have a few comments on some of the choices.
  • Comic Book Resources is said to be generally unreliable from 2016 onward after its purchase by Valnet according to WP:VG/S. What’s up with that?
    • Valnet overall seems to be inconsistent in how it's regarded, and Comic Book Resources in particular has been brought up as an issue in the past as editors are confused why it's treated as completely unreliable. The article here is being cited for the author's opinion, and according to muckrack he has significant contributions to other publications.
  • What makes excite.co.jp a reliable source?
    • Excite is one of Japan's leading search engine's on par with Yahoo, serving a similar means in this case to Yahoo News. I have been able to cite them on other articles without issue.
    • (Mentioning here because one article was miscredited as from excite, ITMedia is a major japanese website and I have used it in other GANs without issue)
  • Consensus on the reliability of TechCrunch is inconclusive. Is there anything here that shows that it would be appropriate to include here?
    • According to muckrack, the author has written for multiple publications and none of the statements cited are controversial.
  • What makes actors access a reliable source?
    • According to its about page, actors access' information is provided to it by the actor's agent, and the wesite is managed by Breakdown Services, a large company that assists with casting.
  • The references to the Pokémon Deluxe Essential Handbook and the Pokémon: Let's Go, Pikachu! & Pokémon: Let's Go, Eevee!: Official Trainer's Guide & Pokédex appear to fall under WP:ABOUTSELF, which is appropriate I think.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:Meltan/GA1&oldid=1251729671"