Talk:Zero (Drakengard)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Zero (Drakengard)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Jaguar (talk · contribs) 20:39, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Should have this to you within 24 hours. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:39, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:

   B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:

2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. Has an appropriate reference section:

   B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

4. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

5. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

Initial comments

• "She also appeared in the prequel manga Drag-on Dragoon 3: Utahime Five" - Is this not an article? Surprising
• "she sets out to kill her "sisters", clones spawned by the flower to carry out its mission" - not grammatically clear. Sounds like the "sisters" and "clones" are too different beings.
• The lead summarises the article well, so this should pass.
• "His original design was meant to emulate her status as a god-like being and be similar to traditional video game protagonists" - how was this achieved? What is the "norm" for most video game protagonists?
• In the reception section, is there any information on how this character was received outside of Japan (ie. Western audiences)?
• "RPGamer's Michael A. Cunningham" - best remove the initial A. from his name
• "RPGFan's Derek Heemsbergen" - should this be italicised?

  I've taken care of all these. As to western reception of the character... I included everything I found. It's the perennial problem of the Drakengard series: not much attention in the west. --ProtoDrake (talk) 21:54, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

References

There are no dead links nor do any appear unreliable per WP:VG/RS. Looks like this meets the criteria.

On hold

A short review I know, but this is generally a well written article with very few issues. The only issues I found with it were a few minor prose issues which could be clarified, otherwise the article is looking near enough to be GA material. The references and stability also passes. I'll put this on hold for the standard seven days and if all of those issues have been addressed then this should have no problem passing the GAN. Regards ☠ Jaguar ☠ 20:53, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Close - promoted

Thanks for addressing them so quickly. This article now meets the GA criteria. ☠ Jaguar ☠ 22:45, 28 November 2014 (UTC)

Merge

Re: Talk:Luke_fon_Fabre#Notability—a common argument to avoid in deletion discussions is "other stuff exists", or that since another article exists, another one should follow the same suit. Each article is judged on its own merits and prior precedent rather than what has been constructed around it (obviously editors can only discuss one article at a time...) This said, I think this has the same issues as Luke fon Fabre. Zero was evidently instrumental in Drakengard 3 but all sources used are about the game itself, so making an article on Zero is analogous to writing an article on Forza Horizon driving mechanics, to borrow hahnchen's metaphor. There may be enough text to write about the character's development and her role in the story, but the sources do not highlight the character as some independently notable feature independent of the game itself. That's why articles like this should be merged into their parent game articles. As for the GA status, while it is a shame, GA reviews do not assess independent notability as part of their criteria, though we have a precedent of redirecting and merging GA and even FAs, as the notability standards of WP have changed over time.  czar 17:45, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

• Oppose merge - There is enough third party sourcing and content present to warrant a separate article. There is plenty of relevant and detailed content about the subject's creation and reception, focused specifically on the character, to warrant a standalone article. Sergecross73 msg me 18:41, 22 November 2016 (UTC)

  @Sergecross73: I know this is an extremely old merge discussion, but I am legitimately curious as to what the WP:THREE sources are that make this article stand alone notability-wise. I was thinking of starting one myself but happened upon this older never closed one. ᴢxᴄᴠʙɴᴍ (ᴛ) 17:57, 26 May 2023 (UTC)

  I think this article was not maintained and might be abandoned already by @ProtoDrake. I hope the reception section will be cleaned up and implement the sources from further reading section like the Yuna (Final Fantasy) article, thus avoiding GAR. GreenishPickle! (🔔) 13:13, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

  @Greenish Pickle!: As the article creator...I don't think this article holds up to modern character article standards as they're shaping. I might merge it myself. --ProtoDrake (talk) 13:47, 10 July 2023 (UTC)

  Counterargument: I feel the article actually does a pretty good job, and the reception section just needs a tidy (my hatred of quote boxes thanks to a certain you-know-who may also be speaking there in part not gonna lie...), but I feel it's informing the reader about her character and that there was a significant reaction to her. Additionally a cursory look at Scholar shows books and published papers also offering some character examination.

  I don't think it needs even a GAR, just a light dusting.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:01, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

  I'm inclined to agree with KFM on this matter, particularly based on my own research. - Cukie Gherkin (talk) 20:03, 19 July 2023 (UTC)

  Then someone should implement the sources from further reading section into article. 2001:4455:658:5000:904E:7725:C1B4:AAEF (talk) 12:33, 25 July 2023 (UTC)