Talk:Doraemon/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Link20XX (talk · contribs) 14:45, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey. You said that you're active, so I will review this article. This is a big article though, so it may take me awhile. Link20XX (talk) 14:46, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your good article submission. Unfortunately, this article in its current form does not meet the good article criteria. Here is why:

Unsourced/poorly sourced statements:

• In Creation and Conception, the third paragraph is not cited by the source.
• In the same section, My Anime List is not a reliable source
• In Media, this line is not cited: "Since the debut of Doraemon in 1969, the stories have been selectively collected into forty-five tankōbon volumes that were published under Shogakukan's Tentōmushi Comics imprint from 1974 to 1996."
• Also in media, this line about the English release is not cited: "A total of 200 volumes have been released."
• Also in Media, The series ended with 1,787 episodes on March 25, 2005
• Also in media, there is a Citation needed tag
• In Reception, "and the films grossed over $1.8 billion at the worldwide box office, making Doraemon the highest-grossing anime film franchise.", you can't use other wiki articles as a source
• In Reception, "It was also available in neighbouring Pakistan, where the Hindi-dubbed version was aired until 2016 (Hindi and Urdu are mutually intelligible)."
• In Reception, "As of 2016, Doraemon has grossed at least $5.608 billion in licensed merchandise sales worldwide."

Other reasons:

• Sources in the lead and plot sections are not needed
• The entire article in general is written pretty poorly and badly needs a copyedit or even to be completely rewritten in some cases, like the lead

Overall, this article is at best a C-class due to all the unsourced statements and most of the sections just being poorly written. Once these issues have been properly addressed, you can renominate the article, but the result of this review is not promoted. Please also take time to read the criteria on Wikipedia:Good article criteria. I hope that this doesn't discourage you, because you have made some improvements to the article, just not enough. Please take the criticism to heart and use it to improve the article to GA status. Link20XX (talk) 15:53, 4 March 2021 (UTC)

@Link20XX: Thanks a lot for bringing the issues forward. Hope to renominate it in the coming months.--Atlantis77177 (talk) 06:03, 5 March 2021 (UTC)