Talk:Howl's Moving Castle (film)/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jclemens (talk · contribs) 20:39, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.
2. Verifiable with no original research:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.
	2b. reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose).
	2c. it contains no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.
	7. Overall assessment.	Good job, and working together I think you've uplevelled this a good bit since its nomination state, which was appropriate for GA nom in the first place.

Initial Thoughts

• Witch is capitalized far more often than it needs to be. When used alone, it is not a proper name.
  • done
• The 'flight' section is an entire paragraph sourced to one reference. I know for a fact that you can find more references on that. The assertion that The Wind Rises has the strongest focus on flying is also debatable--I would say that Porco Rosso or Castle in the Sky each have a lot to commend them as well. I don't doubt that the one cited source says that, but it'd be better to have a variety of RS commentators.
  • Okay, I've added stuff to this section, changed the thrust of it a little, and changed that sentence about The Wind Rises. Take a look. I'm still looking for more references specifically to flight in this film, but they don't seem available; it looks like when people want to discuss Miyazaki's portrayals of flight, they go to a different film.
  • I'm not ignoring this point: i'm trying to find information, and it's proving strangely challenging. I am, however, thinking of changing it to a section that covers technology more generally, as I have found a couple of sources which discuss this.
• There is only one picture here. We have a freely usable picture of Miyazaki himself, what about other key roles? Voice actors, perhaps?
  • I've added a few. I'd have liked to have images of the Japanese voice actors, but those aren't available, unfortunately...
• In the 'old age and compassion' I'm not sure I agree that what the article characterizes as feminism would be universally accepted as such. Can we put it in the source's voice, maybe with a quote?
  • done
• Quoting "devotion" is unnecessary.
  • done
• "The idea of compassion is strongly demonstrated when Sophie takes in the witch of the waste when the latter is rendered decrepit by Madame Suliman, despite the witch having been the one to curse Sophie in the first place." Awkward--I can think of 2-3 obvious ways to improve the sentence structure and clarity... just pick one and go for it.
  • I've modified this, take a look
• "Mamoru Hosoda of Toei Animation was originally selected to direct the film, but quit after Studio Ghibli's executives rejected any of his concept ideas." Any? Many?
  • That's a typo, should have been "many." fixed.
• Overlinkage? hatter, anti-war, wizard, bombed, masculinity... Hmmm.... I'm not sure I'd link all those.
  • Yes, there's a few too many. I've unlinked bombing and wizard. The others are more central to the article, so I'd prefer to leave them linked; I did remove one link to hatter
• Venice Film Festival is bluelinked once in the Accolades section, but 61st... is redlinked above.
  • fixed
• Overall in the Accolades section, there seems to be a relatively low number of awards for which the film received a nomination that it didn't also win. How sure are we that this is complete?
  • The answer is that it's absolutely not complete. Per MOSFILM, if the accolades overwhelm the article, splitting them off and summarizing them is appropriate. I'm working on the "splitting off" bit; this is the summary, which I've tried to confine to truly notable wins and nominations. Open to shuffling which entries are presented.

At any rate, that's my first pass through the text. More thoughts later, but this gives you some things to address. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 21:04, 24 July 2016 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick responses. It may take me until tomorrow night (~24 hours) to go through a second, in-depth pass and detailed criteria review, but your prompt responsiveness is noted and appreciated. Cheers, Jclemens (talk) 04:52, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I do my best :) Thanks too for picking this up quickly: I've never had a same-day response before! Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 05:02, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

I was going to pick something moderately old, but I saw this nom pop up on my watchlist, so I hopped on it since I'm quite familiar with all of Miyazaki's work. Jclemens (talk) 05:54, 25 July 2016 (UTC)

Second Pass

• Thanks for adding the images, but it looks like you need to add a second fair use rationale for the picture of Diana Wynne Jones. Alternatively, you could take it out, as you've added plenty more relevant images already. Jclemens (talk) 03:09, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Taken it out: I didn't notice it was fair use, my bad. Thought I'd checked that.
• Can you add alt text to the images? And is it possible to display the poster image perhaps 20% larger? Jclemens (talk) 03:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • done
• I see three issues listed at [1]. Can you update those links and/or retrieve them from Internet Archive or similar? Jclemens (talk) 03:23, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I've added an archive-url to one of them. The other two seem to be false positives, in that the links work fine (I double checked them) and there's no registration required or anything that would make it specific to my computer, so I'm not sure what it is I need to fix...
  • I missed one the first time, the cite that gives a 403 error. I've converted that into a journal citation; we'll have to live with no web access, unless the author decides to make it available again.

• Jclemens, I think I've gone through and either implemented or responded to all your points: take a look. I've also gone through all the prose again myself, and made some copy-edits. Regards, Vanamonde (talk) 11:21, 26 July 2016 (UTC)
  • Noted. Will get to them in the next 16 hours or so, depending on my schedule. Jclemens (talk) 14:05, 26 July 2016 (UTC)

Pass the Third

• "Miyazaki deliberately decided to make a film..." Glad he didn't accidentally decide to.
  • Haha point taken. done.
• "This plot change also involves some changes to the various characters involved" I'm sure it does, but I can imagine less awkward ways to say so. Jclemens (talk) 00:06, 27 July 2016 (UTC)
  • I've tweaked this, take a look. Vanamonde (talk) 03:41, 27 July 2016 (UTC)

• Thanks for a quick but very helpful review! Vanamonde (talk) 04:40, 27 July 2016 (UTC)