Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/D.Gray-man/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was archived by Sarastro1 via FACBot (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2017 [1].

D.Gray-man

[edit]
Nominator(s): Tintor2 (talk) 20:35, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about the series D.Gray-man by Katsura Hoshino. After doing a peer review, following some advices by fellow users and requesting copy-edits, I think it is ready to become a feature article. This is the third time I am making a FA nomination. I modelled it after the GA Shaman King and the FA School Rumble. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 20:35, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Just tagging users who participated in the peer review. @Gabriel Yuji:, @Aoba47:, @ProtoDrake:, @IDV:, @DragonZero: and @Jaguar:.Tintor2 (talk) 20:43, 27 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]


Note: It looks like my computer is kind of breaking considering it has just turned off itself three times in a row so I would appreciate if I get comments earlier because I'm terrible at using my Tablet in wiki.Tintor2 (talk) 14:08, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Aoba47

[edit]

;Comments from Jaguar

[edit]
  • "...is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by Katsura Hoshino and set in the 19th century. It tells the story of young Allen Walker" - I think this construction can be moved to the next sentence, so it reads ...is a Japanese manga series written and illustrated by Katsura Hoshino. It is set in the 19th century and tells the story of young Allen Walker. Feel free to ignore if you disagree
  • "to combat the Millennium Earl" - is the Millennium Earl a single character? If so, why the 'the'?
  • "It resumed serialization on July 17, 2015 in a spin-off magazine of Jump SQ, Jump SQ.Crown" - may sound better as It resumed serialization on July 17, 2015 after the release of Jump SQ.Crown, a spin-off from the magazine Jump SQ or something to that effect, but feel free to ignore or change
  • "They were created from the souls of dead people by the Millennium Earl" - 'the' again
  • "The author visited New York to research the series, and believes that the city has greatly influenced her work. Hoshino visited cemeteries for research" - just to clarify; is Hoshino the author?
  • "Ground zero at the World Trade Center (left after the September 11 attacks) and her guides' comments impressed her deeply" - change to She was deeply impressed by her guides' comments at Ground zero of the World Trade Center (left after the September 11 attacks)
  • "and she said that she would like to spend more time in New York" - is this relevant to the production section? It sounds too future-tense
  • "Hoshino considered continuing to use the name Zone and also considered naming the series Dolls or Black Noah" - repetition of 'considered'. Try changing one of them to "contemplated" for variety
  • The Ground Zero image caption doesn't need attribution if it's already mention in the photo's rationale (remove "(photo by Robert Swanson, www.internet-esq.com)")
  • "Despite being a sequel, Hoshino referred to it as "a completely new D.Gray-man anime"" - I think the quote marks can be lost so it just reads a new D.Gray-man anime
  • " most of Funimation's English-language cast" - remove hyphen
  • The image of Katsura Hoshino should be shifted to the left and the photo of Ground Zero to the right, so both don't obstruct the text underneath the infobox

Those were all of the minor issues I could raise, but other than that I think this article is overall solid and comprehensive enough to satisfy the FA criteria. Once all of those are clarified, I'll take another look and will likely support. JAGUAR  20:14, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jaguar: Thanks to your comments. I tried addressing all in the article. Also, the Millennium Earl is a single person but I thought in English we have to use "the" for these names like Batman's "Joker" who is always called "The Joker" (his real name is still a bit of a mystery). Feel free to comment more.Tintor2 (talk) 20:19, 28 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You're right; I wasn't sure if Midnight Earl was the actual name of one of the characters, so "the" seems to be correct. Sorry about that. Anyway, I've taken another look through and am happy that this meets the FA criteria, so I'll lend my support. Well done! I've got a video game FAC (nominated two hours before this one), if interested. JAGUAR  18:01, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by 1989

[edit]

Comments by Narutolovehinata5

[edit]
  • I see only one minor issue with the article: Jump SQ.Crown is a red-link in the lead but it's a blue link in the infobox and the manga section. Could this be fixed? Otherwise, this is an easy support for me. As an aside, should this pass, this could be nominated for TFA for either May 31 (the manga's premiere date) or April 21 (Hoshino's birthday); the date is up to you, of course. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 00:39, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Fixed. Still I don't think I can request this article to be promoted considering that while it has three supports, it still hasn't given a source or image review.Tintor2 (talk) 12:00, 1 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Lingzhi

[edit]
@Lingzhi: No. This is actually the first time I hear about tools. You mean some references lack somethings?Tintor2 (talk) 02:21, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
First, your ping didn't work. That's because pings don't work if you add them to your comment after saving, UNLESS you erase the old time stamp and make a new one. So if you want to add a ping to an earlier comment, you'd have to erase the "[[User:Tintor2|Tintor2]] ([[User talk:Tintor2|talk]]) 02:21, 2 March 2017 (UTC) and replace it with a new sig. Second, I glanced at the refs and thought there might be something odd about them, but I may be wrong. I will look carefully.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 02:29, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Lingzhi:, I see. I don't know why but the Citation bot changed the state of an amazon reference leaving it with a problem. Should I revert it?Tintor2 (talk) 02:51, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Leave it alone for now. I'm thinking. I may need to think for a couple days. Just ignore me for a while.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 05:11, 2 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Oppose, per guidelines at WP:ELNO, esp. 5 & 15, and per WP:SPAM. And perhaps WP:OR.... First, any time you have a BOOK that cited as {{cite web}}, it's in violation of those guidelines. I have more bad news–after you fix this one, you'll also have to fix School Rumble. I'll wait one month before I take it to WP:FAR, unless you fix it... So here in this article are.. the same books cited twice, once as a book and once as a web page? I mean, I see ref #3 as [Hoshino, Katsura (2006). D.Gray-man, Volume 1. Viz Media. p. 61. ISBN 1-4215-0623-8.] a {{cite book}}, but then I see ref #35 is [ "D.Gray-man, Volume 1". Amazon.com. Archived from the original on January 29, 2017. Retrieved November 20, 2016.] a {{cite web}}. The second one is in violation of the guidelines I mentioned, but are those the same book? If they are, then that actually makes it easier to fix because you already have a {{cite book}} version... but then about WP:OR: For example, for the ref#3 that I meantioned above you have the assertion:"Although Allen Walker is based on the previous comic's female protagonist, Hoshino made him look more masculine". You cited that assertion to the actual anime/manga, which in this case is a primary source. So.. did that book actually explicitly state that "Allen Walker is based on a female character, but more masculine", or did you just look at the picture and decide for yourself that's true? If it's the latter, then that's WP:OR.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 14:53, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Lingzhi: Changed the part about Allen being based on the female character. Originally, all of the amazon.com urls were Viz media's sites. However, the site removed the original release dates (to the point webarchives didn't have them) of each volume so I had to changed them to Amazon in order to reference the release date. I don't really understand your issues with "Hoshino, Katsura (2006). D.Gray-man, Volume 1. Viz Media. p. 61. ISBN 1-4215-0623-8." is a page in that book where Hoshino talks about the making of the series.Tintor2 (talk) 15:30, 4 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Tintor asked me to comment on this issue (I was his mentor for his last FAC); it looks like y'all are mostly in agreement now, but I had a few comments:
  • ELNO does not cover citations, only external links. It's explicit about that.
  • Anytime you cite a book using {{cite web}}, you're misusing that template. That's... about it. You're not violating any guidelines, because there are no strict guidelines governing how you format your citations (though FAC reviewers may still call it out, as it is quite wrong). So, citing an Amazon detail page doesn't violate anything that you listed there.
  • Though as Tintor pointed out, he's not- he's citing webpages with cite web. Because he's citing the release date, which is not printed in the book.
  • Lingzhi is right about using primary book cites for subjective information, but if it's actually an author's note it's primary but not subjective. Just to clear it up, though, @Tintor2: can you quote what exactly you're citing with that reference? Both here and in the "|quote=" field in the reference. --PresN 01:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
You mean adding quotes? I can with some volumes that were translated but not with Japanese guidebooks.Tintor2 (talk) 02:35, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Oppose stands. Three reasons: 1) Ref formatting is inconsistent anyhow. I disregard your argument that "It's substandard, but it doesn't break the rules." That is pure laziness. But even if we can't object to laziness (but I do and will), the refs are inconsistently formatted anyhow (as described above; books are sometimes "cite book" and sometimes "cite web.") Format the book refs correctly. 2) FACs are our best work. Substandard work is by definition not our best work. Articles full of WP:OR and spam are substandard work. 3) I found WP:OR at first glance. More OR anywhere? Who knows? This article inspires zero trust, since its nominator has not yet learned the meaning of WP:OR. Apparently you need to do more mentoring.  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 10:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • You can oppose for whatever reason you want, and citation formatting is a perfectly valid one. I was only commenting that it wasn't violating the guidelines that you clearly didn't read, given that ELNO says as the top in bold that it doesn't apply to citations.
  • "I found OR at first glance" - except you didn't, apparently, since it was citing an author's explicit comment, not the fictional work itself.
  • "It's shit", "shitty work" - I'm perpetually bemused how you haven't gotten blocked for this nonsense on either of your accounts
  • "Apparently you need to do more mentoring" - I was unaware that signing up to be an FAC mentor meant that I was responsible for making sure every future nomination never get opposed? Thought is was just about teaching enough to get the first nomination to be more likely to pass. Perhaps that's in some guideline you must have read in-depth. --PresN 12:58, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • here's the link to the book in questionthe book. If you can find text that says the author based the character on a female but made it more masculine, I'll withdraw my Oppose, apologize to everyone, and do any sort of copyediting or whatever you wish. I'll give anyone any barnstar you wish. If you cannot, I'll take a barnstar with the text, "Well, you were right." Is that a deal?  Lingzhi ♦ (talk) 13:10, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Quote from D.Gray-man vol. 1="Allen is based on the main character of Zone-my debut manga-but that was a girl." also "I debated if Allen should be more masculine".
Also from D.Gray-man Official Fanbook
Gray Ark =When comparing the Allen and Robin, Hoshino notes that Allen is a "different kind of boy".

Image review

[edit]

Alrights, been inactive for a while in this business:

Images have good ALT text. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 09:54, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the image review. Still, what image do you think should be removed?Tintor2 (talk) 13:29, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Moved Hoshino's image. Do you think one image needs to be removed?Tintor2 (talk) 15:28, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I think that File:D.Gray-manfirstissue.jpg does not seem to "significantly enhance the understanding of the article topic". It may need either deletion or much more material to support its importance. File:World Trade Center site 2004.jpg may also need removal if its source info cannot be improved. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 16:22, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: Done.Tintor2 (talk) 17:20, 5 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: As both Hoshino's and the cosplayer's images clashed, I moved the former one to production and changed the caption. Do you think it's okay?Tintor2 (talk) 01:24, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Seems OK to me. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 15:47, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. Guess I'll remove the image review request.Tintor2 (talk) 16:34, 7 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Source Review by ProtoDrake

[edit]

Having looked through the article, run it through Checklinks, and checked citation style and link validity overall, I think I'll give this article a Pass on source review. --ProtoDrake (talk) 14:26, 8 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Coordinator comment: This has three supports, but I'm not yet convinced that we have the depth of review that we need for promotion. I'd really like some in-depth commentary on the prose and content before this is promoted. Sarastro1 (talk) 21:10, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I am in trouble. My computer broke so I cant easily edit wiki. Can @PresN: or somebody else give me a hand? Still, there is time for the tfa.Tintor2 (talk) 21:19, 18 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by JDC808

[edit]

Support - I just went over the prose and did some copy-editing. Aside from the copy-editing, the prose was done very well and easily understandable. A lot of work has been put into this article and it shows. --JDC808 ♫ 17:07, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Mike Christie

[edit]

I'm copyediting as I go; please revert if I screw anything up.

  • I'm not clear from the plot section whether this is the plot of the books to date, or if it includes the plot of the other formats -- the anime series, or the spin-off novel series. It doesn't appear to; shouldn't that be covered too, if the article includes those formats? Or do you expect to have different articles for the series and the novels?
    The manga. Also, the novels' plot are explained in books. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    It appears from the anime sections that the plot there mirrors the books, so I'll strike this. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 11:56, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • Judging from the ending of the plot section, this is still a story in progress; I think the plot section needs an "As of the March 2017 episode" or something similar to make it clear that the plot only describes the story to a certain point.
    Still ongoing. Last chapter was released in January. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, the draft received a positive response from Shueisha and the staff asked Hoshino to write the series": a bit stiffly worded. How about "However, Shueisha liked the draft and the staff asked Hoshino to go ahead with the series". Was she offered a contract at this point? Or was it just "we like it and will look at it again when you finish it"?
    That seems better. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I made the wording change for you. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:02, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After conceiving the Ark's role in the series, Hoshino decided to write a song when Allen is rebuilding." I don't understand this sentence -- what does "rebuilding" refer to?
    By playing a certain song, the Ark was rebuilt. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • The first paragraph of the Production section has no flow; it jumps from development to inspiration to a comment about the Ark to a comment about a song. What's the goal of this paragraph? What is it supposed to cover?
    Kind of like how she was first inspired from horror and next to science ficción. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    On rereading I think this is OK, so struck. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:02, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "where the Akuma, the exorcists, and the Millennium Earl's plan to end the world": why "Earl's"? Is "plan" a verb or a noun here?
    The Millennium Earl has that plan. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    I fixed the grammar -- "Millennium Earl's plan" makes no sense since "plan" is a verb here. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Lavi is based on the protagonist of Hoshino's planned series, Book-man": D.Gray-man has been around for 13 years, now, so presumably Book-man is either no longer planned or has actually happened.
    It was never published. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    Then I would say so, with an "as of" date. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Hoshino visited cemeteries, and was deeply impressed by her guides' comments at Ground zero of the World Trade Center (left after the September 11 attacks)." Do you know when the visit happened? Ground Zero looked very different ten years ago than it does today, so an approximate date would be good.
    Judging from the guidebook, it was around 2011. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • 'She chose "D.Gray-man" for its several meanings, most referring to the state of Allen and the other main characters. Although the title's meaning was not completely explained, Hoshino said that the "D" stands for "dear".' I don't think this is well-put -- it sounds like she had several reasons for the title but has not made them explicit; is that correct? If so I'd suggest something like 'To Hoshino the title "D.Gray-man" has several meanings, though she has not explained them beyond saying that most refer to the state of Allen and the other main characters. She has also said that the "D" stands for "dear".' Though I'm not quite sure what you mean by "state of Allen" -- mental state?
    Sounds better but Hoshino didnt explain Allens state. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    If we can't explain it I think it should be cut. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The story arc involving Alma Karma, featuring several characters, was difficult for the author; as a result, the arc in which Allen leaves the Black Order contained fewer characters per chapter." Seems like a non sequitur; can you explain?
    In a single arc, a lot of characters appeared in many chapters. In the next arc, there were les characters per chapter. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    But why "as a result"? Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • In one or two places I saw a phrase like "recent story arcs"; be careful with words like "recent", which will age and no longer be accurate. If you can't drop "recent", put a date on Hoshino's comments.
  • "After D.Gray-man's dark narrative, Hoshino plans to write more lighthearted series in the future": are there any indications of when she plans to end the series?
    Actually, she is still unsure when to finish it. Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
    If we can cite that, I think we should say it. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 12:08, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

-- More to come. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 18:23, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Could you make those changes I made into the article? My tablet does not allow me to jump between the articles.Tintor2 (talk) 19:25, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Still cant edit well here.Tintor2 (talk) 20:43, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

I've taken the liberty of adding your signature to your comments, since you're editing on a tablet, and indenting them; yes, I'd be fine with making changes for your once we've agreed on them, but I want to finish reading and commenting before going back and editing. I'm afraid I'm thinking about opposing on prose grounds at the moment, but I want to read the rest before deciding. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 22:35, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. I really owe you.Tintor2 (talk) 22:58, 19 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More comments -- I'll go back through the above, but I want to finish a pass first.

  • "Early in production, Hoshino was given an early version of the first opening theme": two "early"s in quick succession; and what does "given" mean here? Do you just mean she listened to it?
  • "with Allen moving for the first time": what does this mean?
  • "Hoshino began to cry while the staff laughed": not enough context. I assume this doesn't mean she cried because she hated it, and staff laughed because they hated her, but I think we should get a bit more of a pointer: "cried with delight" or "with emotion", or whatever the source will support.
  • "wrapped" might be a bit jargony for some readers.
  • What could we use then? I am lost hereTintor2 (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Although it is a sequel, Hoshino called it a completely new D.Gray-man anime": a bit more clarification here would be useful, if there's more information in the source -- if everyone agrees it's clearly a sequel, is there some reason Hoshino considers it not a sequel?
  • I don't think you need to say the series went on hiatus twice, and then list them; just give the details of each one in turn -- and in any case you say it went on hiatus twice but list three hiatuses.
  • "was again serialized on July 17, 2015": "serialized" really refers to something appearing multiple times, so it's odd to give a single date. Do you mean just one episode appeared? Or that serialization began on this date?
  • The publication sequence is quite hard to follow -- have you considered presenting it as a table, with columns like date range, published in, # episodes?
  • "The first complete volume was published on October 9, 2004, followed with 24 more by June 3, 2016": suggest "The first complete volume was published on October 9, 2004, and the 25th volume, and last of 2017, appeared on June 3, 2016".
  • I definitely wouldn't oppose over this, but you might consider reducing the list of foreign licensees to just the names of the countries, or perhaps turning that into a short table. I think including it in some way is worth while, but it's a bit listy as it stands; not a big deal though.
  • I'm not familiar with other similar articles, so perhaps this is standard, but it seems that some of the information in the "Anime adaptations" section would fit in with the "Adaptation" section higher up. What's the reason for splitting the adaptation information between these two sections? What is supposed to go in each one?
  • "but the second season was not licensed since Funimation did not dub it": I don't follow this. Do you mean that because they didn't license it, it wasn't dubbed? That seems too obvious to mention, but the reverse -- that because they didn't dub it, they didn't license it -- is also odd, because they could have dubbed it if they'd wanted to. What's the point this is trying to make?
  • "Hoshino called the new series a sequel of the first anime, rather than a reboot" but above you say "Although it is a sequel, Hoshino called it a completely new D.Gray-man anime"; isn't that a contradiction?

I'm down to the Merchandise section; sorry about the slow progress, but I'm a bit busier this week than usual. Will try to get more done in the next day or two. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 01:27, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. Thanks for the comments.Tintor2 (talk) 02:26, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

By the way Mike I am interested in your ideas of reorganizing the article since the anime and manga project havent got a fa in a long time. Since my computer is still broken and if I am lucky it might come back in Friday, be bold.Tintor2 (talk) 23:15, 21 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

User:Mike Christie I went ahead and removed nonEnglish publishers from the sección publication. Any more suggestions?Tintor2 (talk) 02:00, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
Sorry, have been busy with TFA on-wiki and with other things in real life. I should have more time to come back to this tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 03:13, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

More comments.

  • Why do we only get descriptions of the contents of the first two chapters of the third volume of the light novel?
  • "They were followed by an illustrated book, D.Gray-man Illustrations Noche, on February 4, 2010. Noche was published by Viz Media on December 6, 2011." Since you've said earlier that Viz Media is the US publisher, I assume that the first sentence refers to Japanese publication, and the second to US publication, but this should be explicit.
  • "Manga author Katsura Hoshino grateful to the editors assisting her, said that she owes the series' success to them": needs to be rephrased.
    • Done.
  • The Critical reception/Manga section is in fairly good shape, although I think it would be possible to drop some of the quote attribution and paraphrase a bit more. A couple of specific points: "female manga artists arising from the late-1980s and early-1990s dōjinshi subculture": "emerging" would be a bit more natural than "arising"; and 'He wrote, "Walker is a solid hero with a dark past, the Millennium Earl is a menacing villain you'll love to hate", and the supporting cast had potential future interest.': it needs to be something like "and added that the supporting cast...", since the the second half of the sentence is not attributed to the reviewer's voice.
  • The "Anime" section has more problems. Just in the first paragraph, we get "praised" four times in four sentences; "similar to Douglass" (grammatically should be "similarly", though I'd suggest rephrasing); and "due to how it inspired".

Oppose. I know Tintor2 has made some changes in response to the points I've made over the last week; I will go back through later today and strike what I can, but as it stands I don't think the prose is FA quality. Tintor2, am I right in thinking you're not a native English speaker? I ask because of your use of "publicaciones" in a response above. If so, your English is very fluent, but I would recommend getting a co-nominator who is a native speaker -- even the most fluent non-natives are going to have a hard time getting prose to the level needed for FA. Copyeditors can help, but it would be even better to find someone who can engage with both the content and prose. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 13:34, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I tried addressing al your issues. Sadly, I am still writing from my tablet that has the habit of changing most words to Spanish.Tintor2 (talk) 15:00, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

@Mike Christie: I've done my best to address a few points in the prose you raised above. --ProtoDrake (talk) 20:28, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
OK, I'll take another look. If I don't get to it today it should be some time tomorrow. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 20:46, 25 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]
I've struck some points, but I think the prose needs more work to meet FA standards. Mike Christie (talk - contribs - library) 19:01, 26 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Closing comment: Despite the supports above, Mike has raised some fairly big prose concerns. Given that I asked for deeper prose feedback, the fact that there are several issues despite the supports make me suspect that the article was not quite ready for FAC. I would advise doing what Mike recommends and finding someone to go over the prose away from FAC, maybe a co-nominator, and returning after the 2-week waiting period when the issues above have been addressed. I appreciate that this might be frustrating, but I think working away from FAC may be better for the article in the long run. Finally, I think this is a perfect example of why drive-by or quick supports are not always a help to the article or the nominator as they can mask deeper issues. Sarastro1 (talk) 22:04, 27 March 2017 (UTC)[reply]

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/D.Gray-man/archive1&oldid=1141923647"