Talk:Steven Universe/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Gen. Quon (talk · contribs) 14:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

I'm excited to see this here! I should be able to tackle this article in the coming weeks (if for some reason I get caught up in other matters and forget, feel free to ping me).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:30, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

Intro

• "When the series is on hiatus, several episodes usually air after it concludes." I get what this is alluding to (that is, after a really long hiatus, there are generally stevenbombs), but it is kind of nonsensical, as the first part of the sentence leads the reader to think we're talking about when the show is not airing, but the latter part of the sentence focuses on the show when it is airing. It also reads as obvious ("After a hiatus, the show airs episodes"). I'd recommend re-writing this sentence, modelling it after a slimmed down version of the third paragraph in the "Broadcast" section.
• "The series is storyboard-driven; storyboarders write the plot and draw an episode during its development stage." -> "The series is storyboard-driven, meaning that when episodes are being produced the show's storyboard artists are responsible for writing the dialogue and blocking out the action."
• "The writers played homemade games during the writing phase, which helped them conceive new stories for the plot." Production is still going on, isn't it? This should probably be in present tense, then. I'd reword it to, "To develop new stories for the show, the show's crew often play homemade games during the writing phase of production."
• "The series has been critical acclaimed for its design, music, voice acting, characterization, promotion of LGBTQ themes and science fantasy worldbuilding, and has a broad fan base." -> "The series—which has developed a broad fan base—has been critical acclaimed for its design, music, voice acting, characterization, promotion of LGBTQ themes and science fantasy worldbuilding."
• I feel like the lede is sort of all over the place, with no real flow to the prose. It jumps from one idea to the next. I'd recommend trying to streamline it, making each sentence/section flow from one to the next.

• The lede is much better. If you take this to FA, though, I'd still try to smooth it out a bit.

Synopsis

• "Ageless alien warriors, they project..." -> "Ageless alien warriors, the Gems project..."
• "The Crystal Gems are..." -> "The Crystal Gems comprise..."
• "...his mother, former Crystal Gem leader Rose Quartz..." -> "...his mother, the former Crystal Gem leader Rose Quartz" (so as to avoid a false title, which seems to generally be frowned upon on WP).
• "he spends his days ... in Beach City and the Gems" -> "he spends his days with his father, Greg; his friend, Connie; his magical pet lion; the other people in Beach City; and the Gems"
• "...are Gems who (corrupted by a Gem weapon of mass destruction) can no..." -> ditch the parentheses and use commas, since this info is pretty important
• "the history of Rose Quartz and her relationships" Relationships with whom?

Conception

• "Rebecca Sugar described..." Perhaps use this space to explain who Sugar is, why she was at CN, etc.
• Italicize Adventure Time
• "Sugar worked on the project while she was working on Adventure Time." Not necessarily a requirement, but it might be a good idea to bulk this part up a bit. I know that there's info about her working on Steven Universe while she was boarding a number of AT eps, and in interviews, she talked about how stressful this period of develop was. If you don't have the sources, I can get them to you. Never mind!
• "The series was inspired by Sugar's 'Ballad of Margo and Dread'..." Could you expand on this? What is it? A song? a short story? A play?
• "...after the crew's art presentation, and Sugar is the first woman..." -> "...after the crew's art presentation, which made Sugar the first woman..."
• "The pilot was a slice-of-life type episode" Might be a good idea to expand upon this. Explain it as if I don't know what that means.
• "Although she planned to include art in the pilot to make the setting more realistic, she was unable to due to limited time and resources." What exactly does that mean? Like artwork? Music?

• I'm still not sure what this means. It's a cartoon so it's already a type of art. What did she want to include that she couldn't?

• I'm not sure, it's not said in the book. – 1989 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• If you're not clear as to what it means, it might be best to remove it. As it stands, I don't know what it's trying to get across. Should it be more like, "Sugar strove to go above and beyond to make her pilot distinctive, in terms of its artistic and aesthetic detail, but the time limit imposed upon her by Cartoon Network hampered her capabilities to do just that."

• "...with the show's concept: "[...] to know that..." -> "...with the show's concept "to know that..."
• "Storyboard artist Lamar Abrams praised" Was Abrams working on the show at this time, or were they saying this to secure a job on the show?

  It's not said in the book, it says his name and his role of the crew as he says what he says. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• It might be best to excise this, since it doesn't really add anything to the section, and comes across as kind of puffery (in that, of course a crew member is going to say good things about the series they are working on)

• "When the pilot was presented to Cartoon Network executives, they prompted the crew about their art presentation" Who is the 'they' in this sentence (CN execs? Morris and Abrams?) Also—and perhaps it is just me—I feel like 'prompted' is not the right word here. Are you trying to say that they helped them out?
• "...since the show was described as different..." Who described it? Where was it described?
• "It was popular when it was released, with forum discussions and hopes to see it on the air soon, and those who knew Rebecca Sugar from Adventure Time were also interested" -> "It was popular when it was released, engendering forum discussions in which people expressed their hopes of seeing it on the air soon. Those who knew Rebecca Sugar from Adventure Time were also interested."
• "Since Cartoon Network executives ... to impress the Cartoon Network executives" I feel like this can be worded a bit better. I'd think that someone in Sugar's position would take the job seriously. Perhaps something like, "Wanting to impress the Cartoon Network executives who supported her pilot, Sugar began to build a production crew with the utmost care." Or something

• I feel like "Cartoon Network executives supported her pilot as Sugar took it seriously from the beginning just in case they picked it up" is better, but still quite awkward.

• "Jackie Buscarino was hired as producer in September 2012 to hire people and supervise the crew" -> "Jackie Buscarino, who was brought on as producer in September 2012, was tasked with hiring people and supervising the show's crew."
• I'm confused by the line "Sugar and her crew were once moved to a "black building" behind the Cartoon Network studios during development". Should this be "Sugar and her crew were moved to a "black building" behind the Cartoon Network studios during development"? Why is the color of the building important?
• "They found colorist Tiffany Ford and art directors Kevin Dart, Ellie Michalka and Jasmin Lai, who joined the Steven Universe crew after The Powerpuff Girls concluded" -> "After The Powerpuff Girls concluded, artists who had formerly worked on the program, such as the colorist Tiffany Ford and the art directors Kevin Dart, Ellie Michalka and Jasmin Lai, joined the Steven Universe crew."
• "When Sugar saw Ben Levin and Matt Burnett (former writers for Level Up) on the list, she chose them as fellow fantasy nerds" Some issues with this: first, how did she know they were into fantasy by looking at the list? Second, the way it's worded suggests that she chose them to become fantasy nerds? The latter part of the sentence should probably be, "she chose them because they were fellow fantasy enthusiasts."
• "Steven Sugar (Rebecca's brother) continued his role as background designer after the pilot" The fact that Steven did backgrounds isn't mentioned until this sentence, making the "continued" part confusing (it might lead a reader to think that they missed something)

• This is still an issue. Also, "and appreciated the contributions of Dart, Michalka, Lai, background painter Amanda Winterston and others" comes across as awkward. Was he helped by these individuals during production? If so, just replace "appreciated the contributions of" with "was assisted by" or something.

• "Paul Villeco (writer and storyboard artist)" -> "Paul Villeco (a writer and storyboard artist)"
• "The a coming-of-age series explores children as they grow up, when their world becomes riskier and more complex" -> "The coming-of-age series explores the process of growing up—a time in which a child's world becomes riskier and more complex."
• "Love is also a primary theme, because she worked on it with Jones-Quartey since its development" I know that Sugar and Jones-Quartey are together, but a new reader doesn't necessarily know this. Explain why Jones-Quartey being there made love a main theme.
• "The series' messages are about love and acceptance" I feel like saying that love is both a theme and message, while not wrong by any means, is a bit clunky, especially with them one after another

  A writer from the show says that's what the message was, while the themes were said by the creator. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• I get that, but I think it can be integrated better. Right now it reads "Love is a theme. Love is a message."

• "According to Kat Morris, the series' concepts are organic instead of "overly calculated"" I guess I don't really know what that means. Does this mean that the show's thematic ideas develop on their own?

• I think this can still be made clearer.

• "During the art presentation, ... and they were criticized at the presentation" This sentence seems really out of place; I feel like it belongs in an art section more so than a thematic section
• The third paragraph in "Themes" is sort of three different ideas all smashed together. I'd try to reorganize this a bit so that it all flows better.
• "After the series was greenlit, Sugar's goal was to redesign everything from the pilot to make it look "flexible and simple" for her future crew to add ideas of their own to the production design" Drop the "to the production design" and add "into the show" or something like that.
• Didn't Tom Herpich do some designs for the pilot?

  Yes. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• I swear I remember him posting designs of the temple on his blogspot or something. Anyway, I could be off.

• He was a background designer for the pilot. – 1989 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• "...actual location, and drew the..." -> "...actual location, and he drew the..."
• "Sugar conceived the characters as similar to her and Steven Sugar's involvement in "fantasy, lore-heavy worlds" they had seen on TV..." I'm not sure I understand this. Should it be something more like "Sugar conceived the characters as similar to those that she and Steven Sugar had seen in the "fantasy, lore-heavy worlds" of their favorite TV programs" or something?

• First part looks much better now, but there is currently an odd fragment ("were interested in and acted out (drawing the setting when they were together)") about which I'm not sure what to do.

• "...influenced by Mickey Mouse's design by Disney artists..." -> "...influenced by the design of Mickey Mouse made by Disney artists..."
• "That was.[35]" ? I'm not sure what this is.
• "Realism was always a character priority" What does this mean?
• "flexibility and inconsistency" Should that dash be there over the "in"?

• I'm still unclear about this.

• Special:Diff/814463437 – 1989 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• "The title character, Steven, is loosely based on Steven Sugar (Rebecca's younger brother,[33] one of the series' background artists)" I feel like this should be mentioned earlier, possibly in the section where Sugar mentions asking her brother if it is OK to name the show after him?
• "Rebecca, Steven and their friends collaborated on comics when they were growing up" Kind of out of nowhere; this should be integrated into the preceding sentence better or excised. Right now it's sort of just floating with no real point.

Production

• "... for which Sugar and her crew was well-prepared." -> "...for which Sugar and her crew were well-prepared."
• "The "Cheeseburger Backpack" and "Together Breakfast"..." -> "The episodes "Cheeseburger Backpack" and "Together Breakfast"...".
• "...who draw (and write) the episode" -> "...who block out the action for the episode and write its dialogue."
• "The storyboards are animated, based on paper drawings by one of two Korean studios (Sunmin and Rough Draft) and the production crew's designs" -> "The storyboards are animated, based on paper drawings and the production crew's designs, by one of two Korean studios (Sunmin and Rough Draft)"
• "The episode concept is then discussed" This doesn't seem right. Surely they discuss the concept of episodes prior to their being animated, correct?
• "When season production begins, future episodes are discussed" Can this be fleshed out at all?
• "...ideas on post-it notes which covered the walls, table and boxes in the corners of their conference room" -> "...ideas on post-it notes, which are then attached to the walls, table and boxes in the corners of their conference room"
• "The Cluster, conceived during a meeting, became official by season two" What is the Cluster?

• Ok, this is clearer now, but seems completely out of place and better suited to a season two article, rather than the series article itself.

• No season articles for the series have been made yet. – 1989 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• I have taken it out of the article. While a season article hasn't been made yet, it really doesn't fit in this section and it disrupts the flow.

• "The show's initial premise was Steven's human side, (instead of his magic side)..." First, ditch the comma after 'side'. Second, it doesn't make a lot of sense for the show's premise to be "his human side". Perhaps, "The show's initial premise focused mostly on Steven's human side" or something like that.
• "While Sugar developed the Gems' history, she developed the pilot episode" -> "As Sugar developed the pilot episode, she also began to develop the Gems' history"
• "She planned plotlines involving the Crystal Gems in season two" Perhaps something like, "She began to plot out and explore plotlines involving the Crystal Gems in season two"
• "The storyboarders write the episodes with artwork, passing it on to the writers and story editors (formerly Levin and Burnett) to polish and outline the plot and waiting a least a day to meet with the editors." This sentence confuses me. First, how do the artists write the episodes with artwork? I think that needs to be clarified. Second, I thought that the storyboard artists got the plot from the writers and story editors?
• "...is like an algebraic equation: "[...] where one side..." -> "...is like an algebraic equation "where one side..."
• "The writers played games to come up with ideas" -> "To develop new ideas for episodes, the writers play writing games"
• What is the "the Gem-human era"?
• "...if Steven was not introduced well..." I think this should read more like, "...if Steven was not as well-developed..." or something like that
• "Levin also emphasized the importance of balancing Steven's human and gem sides" I feel like this is already noted at the beginning of the paragraph
• "the writers reveal bits of information relevant to a "climactic" episode" Reveal to whom?
• "they preferred to focus on plot and developed Steven in real time" -> present tense
• "...the background art begins..." -> "The production of background art beings"
• "...the backgrounds are modified..." -> "...pre-existing backgrounds are modified..."
• "...they intentionally made it slightly..." First, present tense. Second, what is 'it'?
• "Neither Korean studio animates the series digitally; it is animated and inked by paper, scanned and colored digitally" I get what this is saying, but isn't this technically still partially digitally animated? Perhaps it should read something like, "The animation is drawn and inked on paper, before it is scanned and colored digitally."
• "...who has appeared in several animated series and films..." Unnecessary
• "...a noted British singer..." Beware of WP:Peacock terms
• "For actress Michaela Dietz and actress and The Party singer Deedee Magno, the roles of Amethyst and Pearl were also their first animation roles" This is very confusingly ordered; I think it should be reworded, but I'm not entirely sure how to go about this at the moment
• "...been a voice actress in animated productions age of five or six" -> "...been a voice actress in animated productions since the age of five or six"
• "Magno enjoys the group sessions' laughter at faces they make while recording lines requiring emotion or movement" Something seems off about this line; I think it needs to be reworded to better convey its meaning
• The second paragraph of the "Music" section should probably come right after the introduction of Aivi in the previous paragraph
• "...Steven as a chiptune" -> "...Steven with chiptune tones"
• "The songs were becoming complex, and production became more difficult since their regular style no longer fit the lyrics" -> "Over time, the songs have become increasingly complex, and production has became more difficult since the show's original musical style no longer fits perfectly with the newer lyrical themes." Or something like that
• "An example is "Here Comes a Thought", sung by Estelle and AJ Michalka (who voices Stevonnie) without a specific musical style but discussing the song's "feel" with Sugar" -> "An example is "Here Comes a Thought", which was sung by Estelle and AJ Michalka (who voices Stevonnie). The two were less inspired by a specific musical style, but rather by the song's "feel", which had been explained to them by Sugar"

Broadcast

• "In January 2017 the network briefly released one set of episodes online a few weeks early, leading fans to believe that they had been leaked" This sentence seems kind of oddly placed. It doesn't have much to do with the preceding prose, and (imho) isn't that important to the show itself

Episodes

• "The episode, which Uncle Grandpa acknowledges is not canonical, contains a plot hole" I think it's probably important to note that it is non-canon, but the mention of the plot hole is better left for the episode page

• The sentence had some missing info so I changed it to "The episode contains a plot hole in which Uncle Grandpa acknowledges that the episode not canonical." Do tell me if that's not right.

Other media

• The entirety of the "Short films" section and most of the "Companion books" section is unsourced

Reception

• "Steven Universe has received critical acclaim, with praise for its art, music, voice performances, storytelling and characterization" -> "Steven Universe has received acclaim, with critics praising its art, music, voice performances, storytelling and characterization"
• The identification of both Whitbrook and Thurm shouldn't be in parentheses, but should be worked into the main prose

  I don't know what to do right now about that. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• As it is currently written, I fear that it veers a little close to WP:SYNTHESIS for comfort (in that it sort of implies that Whitbrook and Thurm are commenting on its fan base, when they are really just praising the show).

• I'm not the original author of that. @Sandstein: Would you fix what you contributed two years ago? – 1989 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• I don't understand what is considered to be the problem here. Sandstein 16:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

• The sentence implies that the show's "equally rewarding" nature and the fact that it is "the stealthiest, smartest, and most beautiful things on the air" are directly responsible for its large fan base. While I think this is probably true, the way the sentence is structured is a synthesis of published material, taking two different authors' assertions and building to an independent answer; if you want to make that point clear and avoid WP:SYNTHESIS, I'd suggest finding a source that specifically and clearly lays out why the show has garnered such a large fandom.

• "Steven Universe has a range of themes" Not really an appropriate opening line for the section about the themes; perhaps something like "Critics have applauded Steven Universe's diverse range of themes"

  Sandstein revised it. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• The first paragraph of the themes sections isn't really about themes, but rather the allusions to previous shows
• "...to acceptance as a Crystal Gem in his own right..." -> "...to an accepted member of the Crystal Gems in his own right..."
• Adventure Time and Regular Show are linked after they have been introduced

• The AT one is fixed, but Regular Show isn't linked at all anymore.

• "...Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005); its sequel, The Legend of Korra (2012); Adventure Time, and Regular Show (both 2010)..." -> "...Avatar: The Last Airbender (2005); its sequel, The Legend of Korra (2012); Adventure Time (2010); and Regular Show (2010)" (Be consistent with semicolon usage, and I'd recommend not having the 'both 2010' parenthetical for aesthetic reasons)

Awards, References, External links

• Refs 18, 41, and 60 should use pp. instead of p.

Optional suggestions

• You might want to add periods at the end of the shortened book citations, as this seems to be the style preferred by WP:SRF.

  I don't see a need for it as the example of the harv template didn't have a period. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• If you have an archive date, you don't really need to have the access date, too, since the archive date is sufficient to convey when the info was 'captured'
• Is there any info on the show's ratings?

  Not that I know of. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

• The List of Steven Universe episodes has a lot of ratings info that could be integrated into this article nicely (e.g. talk about season premieres and finales). But again, this is optional and a suggestion for perhaps a future FAN.

More to come!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 14:50, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

OK, in addition to the issues noted above (many of which are minor issues with the prose and/or rewordings that can be fixed en masse), there are two big things that are jumping out at me about this article:

• First, the prose is sort of all over the place. Some paragraphs are totally fine, whereas others are all kind of jumbled together. Paragraphs should ideally be thematically focused (which this article does), and flow from one sentence to another (which this article struggles with).
• Second, there are a lot of instances of odd grammatical constructions or bits that don't quite mean what I think they're trying to express (e.g. "she chose them as fellow fantasy nerds"). I'd really recommend getting this thoroughly copy-edited for clarity and organization.

These two issues mean that 1a of the GA criteria is not quite yet fulfilled in my eyes. With that said, I can't find much else to fault in the rest of the article. It's well-researched (pulling from a broad range of sources), unbiased, comprehensive, informative, stable, and well-illustrated. I'm going to put this on hold, but unlike many other reviews, I'll leave it open a bit longer than a week, since I think there's a lot of work that needs to be done first.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:33, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@Gen. Quon: I did my best to resolve all of the concerns except for the ones that have a comment. I did my edits by section so it would be easier (I think) to review. Cheers. – 1989 (talk) 21:40, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@1989: I appreciate the speedy response! I will go through the article tomorrow and see how things are looking (I'll probably also do a little copy-editing as I go this time). Also, I do hope that my comments don't come across as harsh or severe or anything... I'm actually really quite excited to see this show here (as you know, I'm a rather big fan of a certain CN show), and I want this article to be top quality!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 21:47, 11 December 2017 (UTC)

@1989: This now much-improved! There are still a few issues I'd like to see ironed out, but your quick work is much appreciated. (Also, I apologize for the typos in the above comments; I ran across a few while striking out issues!)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 15:16, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@Gen. Quon: Fixed what I can. – 1989 (talk) 16:30, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

@1989: Nearing the final stretch. I have just a few more minor comments. After those are resolved, I'll do a general copy-edit, and then judge it from there. Good work.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 17:06, 12 December 2017 (UTC)

Actually, I performed a comprehensive copy-edit, and I think it looks pretty good now. I am going to pass this! Good job with all your hard work.--Gen. Quon (Talk) 19:51, 12 December 2017 (UTC)