Talk:Strawberry Panic!/Archive 3

Archive 1

Archive 2

Archive 3

Archive 4

Good Article = The Win!

Like Squiliebob, I've been watching this article. I reviewed the criteria for addition to GA and did not find this article lacking. Kyaa the Catlord 13:43, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

O_o Wow, and I just added it ten minutes ago. Sweet though; I've put my heart and soul into this and the branched articles. =)--Juhachi 13:47, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Well, I'll admit I'd been watching and waiting for someone to nominate this one, it is one of the best anime articles on WP, hands down. I've enjoyed watching it... teehee... bloom. Kyaa the Catlord 13:50, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

(edit conflict) Wouldn't it have been better to leave it listed and let somebody with no preconceptions review it? It doesn't look like such a great article to me. The lead uses all sorts of terminology which isn't explained. Yes, there are links, but I don't think it's a very reader friendly lead. References are patchy. Layout is haphazard. Not a GA in my opinion. --kingboyk 13:53, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I admit there are still some problems, but they are minor. Everything in the article is verifiable using the references given within the article. The lead is similar to those for other anime Good Articles. The layout seems fine to me. Maybe this is a subjective issue? Dispute is healthy and will help improve this article to future, possible FA status. Kyaa the Catlord 14:03, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Alright, discussion is good. To kingboyk: Yes the lead does use terminology which isn't directly explained, though think about what type of people are bound to find and read this article. Since this is a very new series in Japan, most of the English speaking readers would be interested in a fansub version of the anime or translated version of the manga; or at least that is how they would have come across it. When you consider that only the fans that are used to fansubs and new anime would seak to read this article, these terms do not need to be explicitly stated since it can be assumed they already know their meaning. Terms like yuri and bishōjo are very commen terms in the anime community and only newer fans wouldn't know these terms.

Next onto the references that you say are "patchy" though I'm not sure what you mean by this; please elaborte. Of the sources, references and external links given, much outside information has been linked to the article, which helps the reader to know where most of the information from the article came from; this in effect can reassure the reader that the information in the article has been verified, making the article a good source of information.

Finally, you commented on the layout being haphazard. Following the layout, after the leading note comes the plot followed by characters which is a standard begining to an anime/manga page, I've seen. Next the Etoile section since it pertains closely to the characters and is also important to understanding a part of the plot. Following that is the information on the three schools and the dormitory the students live in, all things that are often referenced to in the series. Then the manga, light novel, anime and video game sections are presented, and they're in that order to be chonologically listed and that's how they appear in the infobox at the top of the article. Finally, the miscilanious sections of trivia, sources, references and external links which are readily found near the bottem of anime/manga pages, I've seen.

I do realize there are still problems with the article, and the GA template on the talk page expresses that it can still be edited and added to in order to improve it more. Also, after review of the criteria that make a good article, I agree that it should be kept as one.--Juhachi 14:33, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

stop this shouldn't to get into a heated argument Gnangarra 14:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Hi, I've done some work on this article with Juhachi in the past two months, mainly with grammatical areas and general opinion of how things should be laid out, finding sources, doing some minor additions where I can. I was the one that contributed to the game section with the ref tags, like Juhachi, I'm not sure what you mean by 'patchy', but I do feel that the name of the links are kind of dull, admittedly, I don't really know how to make 'Explanation of the game's system' anymore "exciting", per se. In terms of "layout", I don't know what you're talking about, but I think the overall flow is nicely composed. However, if you were talking about the positioning of some things, then yes, I think there are some room for improvements. I guess part of the problem is the large infobox and table of contents listing, which kind of makes things look really bad. I haven't done anything about it since I don't really know how to format pages. Another issue I have is on the formatting on the 'Schools' section. It looks really weird (to me) with the first and third school being indented but not the second, I'm not sure whether this was intentional or not though. --Remy Suen 15:13, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Please see my comments on the Failed GA. Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 15:19, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Awesome! Thank you for your descriptive comments. We'll put them to good use. :) --Remy Suen 15:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Restored Nomination for GA

This article was unfairly treated in the GA nominations, reviewing of articles for GA should start from the top of the list. Instead of having the nominated for delisting I have reverted to a nominated article in the same position as it was nominated. Sorry to editors of this article for the breakdown in the GA proccess and Good luck with your nomination Gnangarra 14:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I had a quick read and checked the images in the article, Copyrighted images need a fair use rationale for each use on the image page, The image in the infomation box has been edited this is a significant breach of copyright laws this image should be deleted from Wikipedia immediately. Gnangarra 14:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Although I disagree that it was unfairly treated, I'd like to thank you for your input. This article has benefitted from it. Kyaa the Catlord 18:01, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I just restored the nomination for GA; this topic just went through an editing hurricane. x_x But it sure has come out looking better, I'll say that. =) Thanks to everyone who made it possible, and I'm glad I was here to help. Now to wait for the second verdict once all of the other articles on top of this one are passed or failed.--Juhachi 18:35, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

GA Failure

Reasons -

• Contents at the side - more of a stylistic issue - why?
• The intro is far from perfect, it's more of a "this is all the stuff and when it was released", when it should "this is... it's about... it's plot is... it's medium is...". An introduction should be 2-3 paragraphs, and you have room!

• Plot
  • Who is "Nagisa Aoi"?
  • the colon in "each other:" should be a comma or a semi colon.
  • "which is the one she attends." is not brilliant prose
  • "Among all of the students, there is one that is chosen to be the representative of all three schools, who is named Etoile, meaning "star" in French. Nagisa meets the current Etoile, Shizuma Hanazano, before her first day at her new school begins, which proves to be an interesting first encounter with each other." Sounds more of a blurb than a summary.
  • "There are also strong shōjo ai themes"... good to know?

• Major characters
  • "Miator", "Spica", "Lulim"?
  • Too much bold, the bios are awfully short and fannish, if the character fall into groups, they'd probably be better in paragraphs.
  • "klutzy" isn't even a word!

• Etoile
  • This is a great section! More of this please.

• Schools
  • Don't add the Japanese to the headers, prose it in
  • Too many pictures! When your pictures cut into the text like that, you know you have a problem. I think there may be too many pictures here, I think it could be breaching fair use.

• Seven mysteries
  • You say there are seven mysteries.
    • Then you reveal there are actually twelve
      • Then you list eight?
        • If you can't list them all, tag with {{incomplete}}, rather than leave us hanging ;)
  • Don't bold this list
  • If you are going to give details, give details about them all

• Remaining article
  • Merge anime, manga and video games into "In other media", or something similar
  • "Trivia" - trivial?
  • "Sources" and "References", need to be merged together, you can list books, DVDs, TV shows and other things as references, which may cover a lot of your original research.

• Images
  • Need Fair Use Rationales

Good start, I think a lot of referencing got mixed up, Sources and references are the same thing. The article may breach the Manual of Style here and there, especially with the bolding. There are also some underlying problems, are you mainly referring to the game, anime or manga? And, you don't seem to mention that everything is fictional in this article. If you have any questions leave a note on my talk page, Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 15:16, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The comments above about the lead are what I wanted to say. Spot on. Please expand the intro: explain exactly what this is, so that even clueless idiots like me can understand it, give it some context, explain it's significance, etc. See WP:LEAD for more advice. Hope that helps, and thanks to User:HighwayCello for the detailed review. --kingboyk 15:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

The intro is much better now. I understand it! That wasn't so hard now, was it? :) Well done all, you've responded graciously and the article is all the better for it. --kingboyk 21:10, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Clean-up

TODO:

• Layout

• Introduction
  • Needs to be expanded and/or rewritten.

• Plot
  • Improve the prose and elaborate on points a bit better.

• Major characters
  • Combine into groups?
  • Use the school's full name.

• Schools
  • Remove all or some of the images
  • Remove the Japanese from the headers.

• Seven mysteries
  • Reorganize to list what few mysteries are revealed in the series thus far
  • Properly tag that the others are currently not known.

• Remaining article
  • Merge "stragglers" into one section?

• Images
  • Needs fair use rationale.

• Overall
  • Explicitly state what the article is covering
  • Properly merge 'Sources' with References'
  • Stylistic issues, see manual of style

I'm starting a new section here with matters in point form to include some of what HighwayCello's stated above so that each point can be addressed and thereafter crossed out accordingly. More sections can be added below if necessary. --Remy Suen 15:48, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I have expanded and rewritten the introduction note and the plot; is this not better? The school section complys with the outline.--Juhachi 16:26, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Sorry if I step on your toes while correcting grammar and word choice. :P This is fun. Kyaa the Catlord 17:37, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Ah it's okay; I don't mind; and yes it is fun, but it can be tiring. x_x Anyway, I want to keep the trivia section and do without the {{incomplete}} tag, based on what I said on HighwayCello's talk page. Now to get to those fair use rationals.--Juhachi 17:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I have a couple of issues with the current introduction.

...is a fictional, in-depth story...depicting various female characters and themes, the main theme being yuri...revolves around a group of teenage girls...and the interactions between them...only goals pertaining to intimate relationships between the characters.

It is never stated as to just what exactly is so 'in-depth' about this series. Whether it actually is in-depth or not is largely a matter of opinion. I don't think it really belongs there, at least certainly not as the starting sentence of the article. It might if it was actually ever explained, but it never is in the current introduction.

Now the next bit mentions that it 'depicts various themes' (note the plural form), one of which is yuri, and the other seems to be 'girls trying to start relationships with one another', or something of that nature. That being the theme is implied, though not explicitly stated. If that was intended to be the other theme, I think that "schoolgrounds romance" qualifies more as a genre than a theme.

though when [the short stories] first appeared is still unknown...a manga was then adapted from the short stories in 2005, though it's still unknown how closely the manga's plot matches that of the short stories...a light novel series also started being produced...An anime version was quickly adapted from the manga

There's a whole lot of 'this is unknown' going on around here. The way the sentence is being worded also almost makes it sound like it is 'not known as of the time of this writing'. The fact of the matter is that 'it is known but the editors here just happen to not know' (we know it can be known for a fact since anyone that happens to be subscribed to the magazine would know it started on so-and-so date since the previous issue did not have the short stories).

Then we go on to the light novel, and then it decides to not mention whether it follows the storyline closely or not (granted, from the current wording, it seems that we do not even know as to whether it is based on the short stories or the manga).

After that bit, it says that the anime was based on the manga. I have no reason to doubt the factual accuracy of that claim, but then here it is not mentioned as to whether it follows the manga's storyline or not. This constant 'jumping around' gives the reader a very inconsistent paragraph and it is almost glaringly obvious that multiple editors butchered it up together, resulting in its disjunction. I understand many people edit articles on Wikipedia collaboratively, but we should strive for consistency so that the sentencs flow together.

Both the manga, light novel and anime are currently being released in Japan, while the short stories were discontinued for unspecified reasons.

Here we have the unknown problem again with 'unspecified reasons', which I feel should be cut off. Given what's said in the second paragraph it is very obvious that we, the current editors, have little information on the original short stories and I think the readers aren't going to expect anything from the article. Repeatedly specifying explicitly that there are no sources for some information regarding the short stories seems excessive and unnecessary.

I hope some of my points above can be addressed. --Remy Suen 22:25, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I've tightened up the lead some. Comments? Kyaa the Catlord 07:29, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

Very nicely composed! I especially like your choice of '...have subsequently been discontinued' in the last pargraph. --Remy Suen 10:02, 30 June 2006 (UTC)

More notes

• Can you convert the wild links and web references per WP:CITE?
• Can you pad out the media section, it's quite stubby
• Good improvements! Highway ^{Rainbow Sneakers} 18:38, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

I've got #1. Kyaa the Catlord 18:40, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Per #2, I have never read the light novel, and only 7 of the first chapters of the manga have been translated into English, the anime is only half finished and the video game has yet to be released; not much else we can add I'm sad to say.--Juhachi 18:49, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

Also a note on the light novel, it is very difficult to get a hold of, even in Japan. I'm not sure if this is a problem with distribution or if it is simply popular. :P (I hope for the second.) Kyaa the Catlord 18:58, 29 June 2006 (UTC)

GA Notes

Good work so far, some more things -

• The manga and light novel sections of Media need... well writing.
• The whole school section needs refs
• The mysteries need refs
• The other two schools (and the end of the first) needs ref

Good luck, Highway ^Batman! 12:08, 3 July 2006 (UTC)

First line of Media section has a statement which is specific to now. It would be best to change to it absolute dates than using a word like "recent". (it's in the manual of style somewhere) --kingboyk 13:11, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

I have just fixed that problem and included the dates within the note.--Juhachi 18:28, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

The DVD section of the anime part is horrid at best. I don't think I've ever heard of the term "usual edition", it's generally referred to as the "regular edition". The most disturbing part is using a Google-translated page as a reference. This is not reliable in any way, shape, or form. If no one actually has a reliable source for the exact naming of the episodes on the DVD (given the currently presented chaotic switching between actual regular English names and romainzation like Etowaru), I think we should just go with what is used in the list of episodes article for consisteny. --Remy Suen 22:01, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Why don't we just translate the page back into Japanese, and remove the nonsense about regular/special editions? Highway ^Batman! 22:08, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Tagging the source as the original page and not the "translated" version sounds appropriate. I wouldn't particularly advocate for the removal of describing the differences of the two editions, this may be of interest to people interested in buying the DVDs but are incapable of reading Japanese. The episode names however should either be removed completely or replaced with the corresponding numbers instead. --Remy Suen 22:18, 4 July 2006 (UTC)

Can't we use the ones from the episodes list? Highway ^Batman! 10:11, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

Well, if we're going with names it's probably a better idea to use the one in the list for consistency purposes, yes, which was my original feeling. However, I'm pushing for their replacement with numbers since episode names are rarely used for conveying information. When I talk with people, I generally talk about the episode in which this-and-that happened, I don't say the episode's name, heck, I usually tend to forget the episode's name. I know that using numbers instead aren't much better and people don't really refer to numbers either unless the series is still running (which will soon not be the case, so it is important that we think ahead), but they do keep the paragraph tighter and not as long-winded. --Remy Suen 11:43, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

There is a fine line when it comes to these things, I'd rather we had them in, we shouldn't write in a casual tone. Highway ^Batman! 12:53, 5 July 2006 (UTC)

My intention was not to have the article be presented in a "casual tone", but it is more of a question of "will these extra words actually be meaningful to the reader?". *shrugs* --Remy Suen 00:26, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Well I think we should keep them in, it just comes off less casual. I know Pokémon articles use episode titles, not only for professionality, but because there is 500 odd, and all regions have different numbers. Just because there are 26 makes no difference. Highway ^{Return to Oz...} 00:29, 23 July 2006 (UTC)

Failed GA

There has been some good work here but i dont think the media section is big enough. Childzy ^{(Talk|Contribs)} 11:25, 19 July 2006 (UTC)