This peer review discussion has been closed.
We've listed this article for peer review because we would like to see where it stands and what additional work may be needed before doing a GAN or FAC.
Thanks, -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 18:52, 1 June 2008 (UTC) (and User:Tintor2)[reply]
Ruhrfisch comments: I found the description of this manga very interesting and found no major errors. Here are some suggestions for improvement, mostly nitpicky:
- Spell out OVA before using it as an abbreviation - see WP:JARGON
- I think I would explain the full plot of the manga before going on to the anime, since it started as a manga and seems to be larger and more popular in that format.
- Since the Ishval Civil War comes up several times later in the article, I would include it in the plot section too.
- I am not sure why I thought this, but I somehow assumed there was one State Alchemist per state. Perhaps a rough idea of the number of them could be given?
- A model article is often useful for ideas - I tried to find a manga FA, but did not. I did find Wikipedia:Manual of Style (anime- and manga-related articles) which does not seem to have a terminology section. I do not write or usually read manga articles, so you should ask someone more experienced that I about this, but the list-y nature of Terminology raises alarms for me for FAC and it seems as if much of the material there could be integrated into the plot and characters section.
More later, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:37, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Article could use a copyedit - one example of rough prose (from a rough section): As commented by Hiromu Arakawa in an interview, she became attracted by the idea of using the alchemy in the manga after reading about the Philosopher's stone. Could be something like In an interview, Hiromu Arakawa said that she became attracted by the idea of using the alchemy in the manga after reading about the Philosopher's stone.
- Second paragraph of production needs a reference
- I am not sure what this means: ... and so she decided to change some scenes, therefore, some draws of the faces of the characters were improvised. I think it means she had to change how she drew some characters as they aged within the context of the plot?
- I laways think it is better to attribute to a name, so which critics felt this: Though the initial volumes were felt to be formulaic, critics noted that the series grows in complexity as it progresses.?
- After a long first paragraph of awards for the anime, it seems odd to start the second paragraph on the anime with The anime has been also praised.
- Also not sure what this means Most of them are noted to have little to none plot continuation. plot continuity?
- The two sentence paragraph on expensive trading cards at the end of Reception might fit better in the Trading cards section.
- Try to avoid short paragraphs (one or two sentences) - combine or expand them.
- Provide metric and English units - so 12" statue . ((convert)) may be useful here.
- Drama CDs - could this be Dramatization on CD?
- Could concert performances be combined with Soundtracks - it is a very short section as it is
- Format of refs looks fine, before FAC make sure they all meet WP:RS - is Yahoo.co.jp reliable (not sure the American Yahoo is)?
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks :) I've spelled out OVA. Plot has been rearranged some, and I expanded it to include what a State Alchemist is (its actually a group within the state military). I'll see about getting the Ishval war summarized as well. I personally thing the terminology can come out, but will start a discussion on the talk page about how to handle it. :) -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 05:58, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Thanks. I have done more changes per your comments, anymore notes apart from copy-editing Ruhrfisch?--Tintor2 (talk) 17:22, 13 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- I thought the terminology summary of Ishbal civil war was useful and could probably just be moved to the plot. Do such articles ever have a background section? If this were a real history, that would work. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 15:12, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- In general, no they don't usually have a background section because it would be more plot. The production section would mention ties to any real historical events, if its sourcable, though. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- A "Setting" section that covers background within the "Plot" section is fine if you want, although I think it's not that necessary here. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 04:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My comment, could it be a good idea remove "Father" and "Dante" from main characters? They are already explained in plot since they are the main antagonists of the series.Tintor2 (talk) 13:24, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- If would, if we had a real List of Fullmetal Alchemist characters to move them to. Unfortunately, without one, there isn't really any place to put them. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 15:28, 7 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Done yesterday.--Tintor2 (talk) 15:53, 9 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
My concern, While I find the Anime News Network to be a good source for anything "anime related," however they tend to strickly focus on anime. This means the average Jane or Joe who doesn't know too much about anime wouldn't look at them as a reliable source and that draws concern. Are there any other more independent source, like the NY Times, or the Washington Post, or any other reputable independent source that normally has nothing to do with anime that has made coments or reviews for this series? Neovu79 (talk) 02:46, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Anime News Network is a reliable source for anime and manga related news. Just because it isn't a "mainstream" source doesn't make it any less reliable. That would be like saying you should use scientific magazines to source scientific topics, or you should used the TV Guide to provide any sort of sourcing for a TV article, or not to use a movie review site to source movies. Those "independant" sources you mention rarely cover more niche topics, including manga and anime series, anymore than they cover the vast majority of television series that aren't super popular or highly controversial. ANN meets all of the requirements for being a reliable source. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 02:52, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Comment - move the reception section beneath the media? Per previous times I've mentioned this, it's a more logical flow. Sephiroth BCR (Converse) 04:26, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]
- Woops...totally missed that. You'd think I'd remember by now :P Fixed. -- Collectonian (talk · contribs) 04:29, 10 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]