Wikipedia:Peer review/Banana Fish/archive1

Banana Fish

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

.

When I expanded this article a few months ago I didn't do so with the intent of one day taking it to FAC (I'm very happy with my current rate of one FAC per year), but upon reflection the article is of comparable length and scope to the previous manga articles I've taken to FAC (The Heart of Thomas and Kaze to Ki no Uta), so I'd like to submit it here as a float test for FAC, and to identify any gaps or deficiencies in the article. Morgan695 (talk) 16:58, 4 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Tintor2

Some small tidbits that FA reviewers tend to point:

Context is kinda strange. I know Banana Fish is a shojo manga but the series and author are not mentioned until the second paragraph.
- You'll recall this came up in the GAR as well; my rationale was that a major component of Banana Fish's notability is how it represented a break from established shōjo manga conventions of the era, so I believe the article needs to devote some space to establishing what those conventions are. Do you have any suggestions for how the section can read better? Morgan695 (talk) 17:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Doesn't the manga use chapter titles for the list of volumes?
- In this case, maybe creating an article for the volumes and summaries might work.
  - The manga does not use chapter titles; or at least, the English edition does not. Morgan695 (talk) 06:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
References like "Yoshida, Akimi (November 13, 2002). Banana Fish, Vol. 7. ISBN 1569318433." might need a better replacements
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 17:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- I see that User:Citation bot has swapped the new Amazon citation for the previous format, so I suppose this is the preferred cite style? I guess we'll wait and see if this comes up in the FAC. Morgan695 (talk) 21:46, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Remember to add transtitle to every Japanese references.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 17:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Archive the further reading Manga Bookshelf article. Tintor2 (talk) 13:23, 7 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 06:01, 8 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Tintor2: Hi, reply above. Morgan695 (talk) 17:16, 9 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

Addressed comments

I would archive the source link for File:BananaFishVol1.png. It is not required for a FAC, but I'd encourage it to avoid any future headache with potential link rot and death.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For File:RIVERP1989.jpg and File:J. D. Salinger (Catcher in the Rye portrait).jpg, I would include the year that the photo was taken to the caption to provide a more complete context for readers.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 04:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
From my understanding, it is discouraged to link very well-known cities like New York City.
- Removed. Morgan695 (talk) 05:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I have a clarification question about this sentence: Ash begins to investigate the meaning of "banana fish" while simultaneously endeavoring to dismantle Golzine's criminal empire. The first paragraph introduces Ash as a gang leader so what made him change from being a leader in crime to wanting to stop it? Was it because of the man's death, the connection with Dino, etc.? It is not immediately clear to me.
- I've attempted to clarify this section without getting too deep into the weeds on plot detail; hopefully there is now sufficient context. Morgan695 (talk) 05:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - It looks better to me and thank you for providing this context. Aoba47 (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Homoeroticism is not linked on the first use in the article and it is over-linked in the article.
- Revised. Morgan695 (talk) 05:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Link photographer's assistant in the lead since it is linked in the body of the article.
- This felt like OVERLINK so I just removed it entirely. Morgan695 (talk) 05:00, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Fair enough. I agree that it seems like an over-link as I would imagine that a majority of readers can understand this concept. Aoba47 (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would specify in the prose that Stand By Me was also released in 1986.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 05:03, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I think the "a killer" quote can be paraphrased.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I am uncertain of the "ignominy" word choice. While there is nothing wrong with it, it is not a particularly common word so I am curious if it is the best word choice to best inform readers.
- I'll leave it for now and see if it comes up in the FA. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Should CIA be spelled out as Central Intelligence Agency?
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 04:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Unless I missed it, manga by itself is not linked. I would link it if anime get a link.
- Removed. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
For this part, and stays Eiji, do you mean and stays with Eiji?
- Amended. Morgan695 (talk) 04:31, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Year 24 Group is linked twice in the article. The same applies to shōnen-ai and it seems like this is a particular point with the "Themes and analysis" section.
- Amended. Morgan695 (talk) 04:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
"A Perfect Day for Bananafish" should in presented in quotation marks not italics as that is how short stories are presented in prose.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 04:24, 11 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
I would avoid having citation titles in all caps (á la Citation 60 and others) even if the title is presented that way in the source.
- Done. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
Why are the "Further reading" citations not incorporated into the article?
- The Manga Tokyo article was included in an earlier version of the article but doesn't appear to be an especially reliable source, so I moved it there per WP:ELMAYBE. The Manga Bookshelf is similarly interesting long-form fan analysis that doesn't lend itself well to being cited in the article. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]
  - Thank you for the explanation. That makes perfect sense to me. Aoba47 (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are helpful. Once everything is addressed, I will do a more thorough read-through of the article. If you have time, I would greatly appreciate any feedback for my current FAC which is about a series that has far, far less impact and has fallen into complete and utter obscurity. Best of luck with the peer review! Aoba47 (talk) 18:40, 10 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: Hello, responses to your comments are above. Morgan695 (talk) 16:41, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for addressing everything. I appreciate the time and energy you have put into this article (and your work in general). I will likely read through this article again over the weekend. I doubt I will find anything else to comment on, but I want to make sure I try my best to be a solid reviewer. Aoba47 (talk) 17:21, 13 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]

I read through the article a few times and I could not find anything further to discuss here. I will be more than happy to help with the FAC in the future. Best of luck with it! Aoba47 (talk) 22:15, 14 October 2022 (UTC)[reply]