Wikipedia:Peer review/Embodiment of Scarlet Devil/archive2

Embodiment of Scarlet Devil edit

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

This peer review discussion is closed.

Reopening peer review in arts category since there was not much feedback where it was listed before.

First time here - I'm listing this article for peer review because I really want to get this up to GA status for the possibility of it being nominated for FA next August 11 (20 year anniversary). I've spent a lot of time rearranging the article and adding sources - it was pretty barren before, and a lot of text was completely irrelevant to the point it was nominated for deletion last year. I can imagine there's a lot of improvements that I could still work on however (improving wording and conciseness). I've been using articles such as Cave Story, Ikaruga and Crash Bandicoot (another page in the review process) as examples of what the page should structure like, but I'm still not entirely sure. I don't know if the page is already alright in the image area or if it needs an image of the developer. It's my first time doing this, so all input is very much appreciated. Thank you very much :) Kettleonwater (talk) 14:24, 30 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]

bump :^) Kettleonwater (talk) 10:40, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Z1720 edit

Hi Kettleonwater, I am sorry that it has taken so long to receive comments. Here are some thoughts below:

There should be a citation at the end of each paragraph, as a minimum. The Gameplay section should have more citations, too.
Knowyourmeme is not considered a reliable source on Wikipedia and will need to be replaced or removed.
Consider posting to Wikiproject Video Games for help from a video game editor.
The development section is quite long. Any way to split it into subsections?

Those are my comments! Please ping if you have any questions. Z1720 (talk) 15:57, 2 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Thank you so much for responding! I've tried to edit the article according to your thoughts:

There should now be a citation at the end of every paragraph (excluding the lead-ins). The Gameplay section uses the same source quite often, the game manual featured on the disc (and also hosted online). The manual consists of 12 different pages however, linked in the sidebar of the main index page. Is this alright, or should I source every different page of the manual separately?
KYM sources have been replaced. There is one section about the confusion of John Stump's "Faerie's Aire and Death Waltz" and the track "U.N. Owen Was Her?" from the game where I would like to add sources but I am unsure whether it would constitute as original research - the point is to clarify that U.N. Owen spread online through the Death Waltz name, and that at least one reputable source has misidentified the two pieces (https://boingboing.net/2015/03/17/playing-the-unplayable-death-m.html). Would this pass?
Done. I've also flagged it for a reassessment of the current rating.
I've tried to split it into three, pre-dev, dev, and music. I didn't know what to call the pre-dev section, so I named it "Mystic Square and hiatus" for context, since Wikipedia does not feature articles for any games in the Touhou series before this one. Do you think a picture of ZUN (the developer) would also add to the article or would it be too much?

Thank you very much for your feedback, it was worth waiting for! Kettleonwater (talk) 02:59, 10 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Kettleonwater: are you still looking for feedback? If so, I suggest posting a request for reviews on various Wikiprojects attached to this article. If you think the article is ready for a GAN, I suggest closing this PR and posting it at WP:GAN. Z1720 (talk) 15:11, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Hi! I'm still looking for feedback, although I also think I could just submit to GAN. I'll submit some requests at those WikiProjects and wait a couple weeks. If there's no feedback to add, I'll close and proceed. Thanks Kettleonwater (talk) 17:16, 14 December 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Wizzito edit

I love this series and am very impressed by your quest! Here is what I noticed:

I don't think YouTube, as seen in references 5, 64, and 66, is a reliable source. See WP:RSPYT for more information.
I also think you should translate the Japanese text in references 25, 30 (should maybe find an online version of 30), 32, 34, 39, 44 to 46, 48, 49, 55 to 59, 67 (although I don't think that Niconico is a reliable source), and 70.
Can you link the omakes in references 27 to 29?
For reference 24 and 51, you need to add the ISBN of the book. See Template:Cite book for more info. (always include ISBN, if one has been assigned)
Source 50 isn't reliable as it's a fan wiki/wiki-based translation center. See WP:FANDOM for consensus about one popular fan wiki site (Fandom/Wikia).

wizzito | say hello! 22:41, 11 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wizzito: Thank you so much for your feedback! I did just throw a lot of sources at the wall to see what stuck. There's still a lot to iron out, I've removed the Youtube, NND and translation center sources. The ISBN stuff should be taken care of now, and I've also converged all those references citing the same book into one, referencing the page number on each citation.

For the Japanese text, should I do quoting in the references of these specific parts? Would this apply for the game manuals as well (since I've cited them multiple times) and the omakes? (since they were originally in Japanese). I can link translated versions of both the manual and omakes, but these are hosted on the Touhou Wiki. Would this be ok (and would I cite the original manual or translated manual in the article) Would I also have to change each game quotation to say they're translated for the article too? (Since they are all originally in Japanese, and there exists no "official" translation of any of the games)

Thank you very much!!! :) Kettleonwater (talk) 13:07, 12 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]

@Wizzito: I've translated relevant parts of all non-english sources apart from the votes (ref 50-54) since these are cited first for the game's ranking, second for the music's ranking, and third for the character rankings, which would kind of make this really complex and visual consuming. The rest of what you asked me to do should be done, do you think the article now functions better? Please tell me what you think :) Kettleonwater (talk) 00:41, 21 November 2021 (UTC)[reply]