Talk:The Promised Neverland/GA1

GA Review[edit]

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

Reviewer: Benji man (talk · contribs) 20:00, 23 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Good Article review progress box

Criteria: 1a. prose () 1b. MoS () 2a. ref layout () 2b. cites WP:RS () 2c. no WP:OR () 2d. no WP:CV ()

3a. broadness () 3b. focus () 4. neutral () 5. stable () 6a. free or tagged images () 6b. pics relevant ()

Note: this represents where the article stands relative to the Good Article criteria. Criteria marked are unassessed

I enjoyed reviewing this article! I think there are a few issues that need to be addressed to meet the GA criteria in full:

The opening sentence of the Synopsis section may violate the policy on Writing about fiction (this should be easy to fix).
Especially the Production section contains a lot of direct quotes from the sources that are not marked with quotation marks. It is great that the sources are indicated in detail! But verbatim quotes have to be "marked like this" or significantly paraphrased, otherwise this counts as plagiarism of the sources' authors.

Some general comments that don't affect the GA process but that I think might improve the article overall:

The Reception section as a whole is too long and goes into too much detail. I think it would be better if it were more concise and gave less details about each review. Instead, consider giving a summary of overall reception, while keeping the links to the different reviews.
The Other media and Sales sections could also be made more concise. In Sales, the data might be more efficiently presented in a table.

I think the GA criteria should be easy to meet so I'm putting the review on hold for 7 days. Good luck and let me know if you have any questions! Benji man (talk) 18:08, 26 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Hello.

I think I just fixed the issues that you have mentioned at first, you can take a look and tell me if it's right. For the other few things, I think there is no issues for now, especially that it doesn't affect the GA process as you said. So as for now I think the article meets the GA criteria in full. Phil81194 (talk) 08:05, 28 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed, that's a pass! Congratulations. Benji man (talk) 13:17, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much. And thanks for the help with your edits. ^^ Phil81194 (talk) 13:22, 29 November 2022 (UTC)[reply]