Wikipedia:Featured list removal candidates/Characters of God of War/archive1

Characters of God of War

Featured list candidates/Characters of God of War/archive1

Featured list removal candidates/Characters of God of War/archive1

Notified: JDC808, WikiProject video games

There are visible issues in the article. The lead should be updated + there are tons of unsourced statements for this to remain on the featured list + italicize game and film titles in the citation titles per MOS:CONFORMTITLE. The reception should be expanded/rewritten and the websites should be italicized. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 05:36, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Before I dive in further, you said the lead should be updated. In what way? The only thing I can maybe see is the very last paragraph. --JDC808 ♫ 05:48, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Yep, the last paragraph. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 05:51, 31 December 2024 (UTC)[reply]
- Here in the next couple of days, I'm going to try and sit aside some time to dig into this article and get it into shape. --JDC808 ♫ 00:00, 2 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Keep. Nominator's concerns are entirely superficial and incredibly easy to fix editorially. There's nothing here that cannot be solved by one editor, as the bulk of the content meets the FL standard already. Putting editors on unnecessary time constraints because of easily fixable issues does not seem necessary when the nom could fix the issues themselves, or request the help of other editors to do so (Such as at Wikipedia:VGCHAR or Wikipedia:VG). Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 00:30, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Assume WP:Goodfaith. I don't think this is "easily fixable" where there are several unsourced statements, PlayStation Universe is not reliable and should be removed, italicize game or film titles in the citation titles per MOS:CONFORMTITLE , and possibly some of the description/plot should be trimmed down a bit. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 00:53, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I never said nor implied I believed bad faith, and I apologize if it came off that way. Regardless, I do believe this can be fixed rather easily, and you reiterating your exact statements from the nom do not change my mind on the fact.

-PlayStation Universe is used once. This is a simple removal and doesn't impact the article given the wealth of other sources used in the article.

-CONFORMTITLE is a factor, sure, but that's just basic legwork. An article shouldn't be sent to a demotion process when an editor can just italicize titles in a process that takes twenty minutes at most.

-Glancing over the article, I see a few spots without cites, but they seem to be in the minority of statements. Plot statements do not need citations (Though preferred), and the few missing voice actor cites can be added or removed depending on the availability of sourcing.

-If plot should be trimmed, then there's nothing stopping you or any other editor from being Wikipedia:BOLD and trimming down the content to more manageable levels. If you're uncertain on what should be cut due to unfamiliarity, that's a process that can be discussed in venues like those I mentioned above. A lengthy demotion process like this does not need to be involved in this kind of content discussion, and the plot expansion is not so vast that it is unmanageable by just one or two editors.

I would make these changes myself, but JDC seems to be on it already above. I'll leave it in their capable hands, but this task is something easily performed, and for which a venue like this is unnecessary. Articles should only be sent to reviews or removal forums if their content is so far gone that it cannot merely be resolved through simple edits. This article does not fall under that case. Magneton Considerer: Pokelego999 (Talk) (Contribs) 03:06, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Left the issues at talk page, but hasn't resolved yet; so I nomed it into here (FL has the same quality as GA, not FA). It would be more disappointing if the article was sent to featured list review, and the author possibly retired already in the future. I should have expected that it would be fairly "easy" for an editor who is very active despite the article has several unsourced statements and other stuff. I would like to apologize also if this was sent abruptly, but it doesn't need to be rushed anyway. 🍕BP!🍕 (🔔) 03:50, 3 January 2025 (UTC)[reply]