Talk:Legal status of fictional pornography depicting minors/GA1

GA Review

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

Unfortunately, I have to fail this article due to criteria 1 (prose) and 3 (coverage). The article's prose is chopped up by short, one-sentence paragraphs and doesn't follow MOS much. I'll list some of the issues I spotted immediately:

• MOS:BOLD – the names in the prose should be either wiki-linked in case they're notable or not
• I've seen "AUD $9,000", "$3000 Aus", etc. The correct form is the linked ISO shortening preceding the number, such as "AUD 9,000" or "USD 78,900"
• A Japanese website appears in the references. Its title should, beside the original, contain a romanization
• There are numerous external links throughout the prose. These should be all converted to inline citations.

You should subject the article to a peer review to fix the prose issues. However, the main issue here is the coverage of the article. The article simply describes an incomplete list of the status of cartoon pornography depicting minors by country (for one, it lacks Japan, which is probably the most productive country regarding this matter). There's no separate mention of the history of the legal status or its tendencies. If you're going to continue this article by amplifying the list, you should move it to "Legal status of cartoon pornography depicting minors by country" and aim for a featured list status. Else, I suggest you to concentrate on things that can be written about the legal status from a global point of view. Admiral Norton ^(talk) 21:44, 13 March 2009 (UTC)

Boldface usage in the heading of articles helps to single them out when these alternate terms are redirected to them. The names in question are redirected to the appropriate place in the article where they are mentioned. They are not the 'main topic' of the article but are main topics of the article's sections (potential articles in and of themself if enough data is collected). I don't know anything about listing money, but that seems to be a very simple change you can make yourself :) I take it you mean reference #3, I just used google here, I will add the translation in there.

I don't think that's what 'Romaji' is though... but a translation I can do. I will go hunting for external links to ref tag, I have been doing that on an ongoing basis but they don't always stand out. As for Japan, I was under the impression it was legal in all cases there (in spite of UN efforts for change). So far I think the idea is to list countries where there are laws against it, and to not list countries where there are no known laws against it. I understand your point, there should be more of a unifying aspect to this article (right now the broad-speak is more of a brief introduction to a world list). Even so, I don't think a 'by country' would be appropriate up until such a broad sweep has been developed, especially since the list can help in composing that. Tyciol (talk) 16:48, 18 March 2009 (UTC)