This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the BanG Dream! article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find video game sources: "BanG Dream!" – news · newspapers · books · scholar · JSTOR · free images · free news sources · TWL · NYT · WP reference · VG/RS · VG/RL · WPVG/Talk |
This article is rated GA-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
BanG Dream! has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it. Review: October 4, 2020. (Reviewed version). |
A fact from BanG Dream! appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the Did you know column on 29 October 2020 (check views). The text of the entry was as follows:
|
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Reviewer: Lazman321 (talk · contribs) 00:18, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
Good Article review progress box
|
As part of the October Backlog Drive, I will be reviewing this article for GA status. Lazman321 (talk) 00:18, 1 October 2020 (UTC)
I was able to read this article quite clearly. Especially the history section. It is always good for an article to have clear prose. No action is needed.
The 5 MOS rules that need to be followed to pass for GA are the rules on lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation. I think the lead section is fine, along with the layout. I didn't see any words to watch out for. Unlike most articles, the rules on fiction do apply here due to this article being about something fictional. I do have a problem with the plot, but its more of a main aspect and focus issue, not a MOS issue.
List incorporation isn't a big deal in this article. In other articles, the discography section usually has a list of studio albums and a link to the band or artist's discography page. In other articles, if a GAN article had a discography section listing the studio albums in prose format, I'd have the nominator change it to list format. However, in this case, it looks like that won't be possible due to the amount of many albums from many different bands, most of them being soundtrack albums.
It is worth noting that I tried using the automated peer review to reformat the article for MOS adherence to see if there any MOS violations at all. I didn't use it due to it trying to wiki-link [] brackets, even if the wiki-linking was excessive and the [] brackets were being used correctly. The only two MOS problems were the use of "don't" contractions (The MOS requires "do not" to be used over "don't".) and a pipe being used in one of the categories without an additional parameter being used. Neither of these things is required to be changed for GA status.
There is a reference list. This is the easiest GA criterion to meet. No action needed.
Every source used seems to be reliable. No action needed.
Note A seems to be original research because there is no citation accompanying it. The controversy section has no citation accompanying it also.
I don't see any copyright violations. No action needed.
Are you sure there are no reviews about the multimedia franchise as a whole? If there are, they could be added to the critical reception section. Also, you may want to rename the Plot section to the Fictional backstory section and have information about the fictional backstory comes from. Though, I am getting the feeling that the plot section is a summary of the anime.
If the plot section is just the anime plot summary, you might want to move it to the article about the anime as that article is seriously lacking in content. I've never seen the anime before so I don't know for sure if its the anime plot summary, but I am getting the feeling that it is. You might also want to copy the anime subsection in the reception section, add it to the article about the anime, use {{copied}} in the anime talk page and the main article talk page, and then in the main article, trim the subsection down. Overall, I think that a lot of the information about the anime could go into the article about the anime.
This article is neutral. It did not read like an advertisement or read like it was written from a fan's point of view. No action needed.
There are no ongoing edit wars or content disputes going on right now. No action needed.
There are only three images, a logo, an image of promotional material, and an image of a building promoting the franchise. The logo is not protected under copyright law. As a result, it is free to use on Wikipedia. The promotional image has a non-free image use rationale, so that one is fine. If the picture of a building was non-free, it would've not been allowed on Wikipedia. However, the image was the uploader's own work and was uploaded to Wikipedia under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International tag. As a result, it is free to use on Wikipedia. Overall, no action needed.
The three only images used on Wikipedia are relevant to the article. The logo is the main logo of the franchise as a whole. The promotional material shows the vocalists from the five bands. The image of the building was a convenience store that was promoting the mobile game. No action needed.
This article is great, but there are still some issues that need to be resolved. I am putting this article On hold for 14 days. Good luck! Lazman321 (talk) 17:42, 3 October 2020 (UTC)