Talk:Kazuya Mishima/GA1

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Aoba47 (talk · contribs) 05:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Grabbing for a review. Aoba47 (talk) 05:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Lead and infobox

• In this part (first appearing as the main protagonist in the original 1994 game), remove the word “main” as the word “protagonist” already conveys that Kazuya is the main character of that game.
  • Done.
• I have a comment for this sentence (Kazuya becomes one of the series’ antagonists, often facing his son Jin Kazama). I have never played a Tekken game, and the previous sentence establishes Kazuya is a protagonist. Could you clarify in this sentence how or why Kazuya is an antagonist in later games?
  • Done. Since those games don't have too much story, I just changed it to his motives.
• I would put the original Japanese names in a footnote to avoid interrupting the prose (i.e. Kazuya Mishima, Devil Kazuya, and Devil).
  • Reorganized.
• For the Devil Kazuya sentence, I do not believe the parenthesis with the Devil name is particularly well presented in the sentence. I actually find the Devil Kazuya sentence as a whole to be rather awkwardly constructed. I would revise it to something like this, with the Japanese names as footnotes. (He possesses the Devil Gene, a mutation which can transform him into a demonic being known as Devil Kazuya. Devil Kazuya is also known simply as Devil, and appears as either a separate character or a part of Kazuya.).
  • Tried giving it a touch
• I have two comments about this part (which rivals that of Heihachi (another antagonist)). I would get rid of the parenthesis part as I do not believe that it is particularly beneficial and it interrupts the prose. Also, for Heihachi, are you referencing Kazuya’s father or a different character? If you are referring to the dad, then for sure remove (another antagonist) as it implies he is a different character altogether. If you are referring to a different character, is there a link for him?
  • Done.
• For this sentence (Critical reception of Kazuya's portrayal in film has been mixed, because it differs from that in the video games.), I would clarify how the character is different in the films.
  • Done.

Character design

• Use the character’s full name on the first use in the body of the article.
  • Done
• Make sure to link Jin when you first mention him in the body of the article.
• For the image caption, I would add (‘'pictured) after Yukio Mishima’s name to make it completely clear.
• What sources are being used to support the first half of the first paragraph? It does not appear to be supported by a source.
  • Removed
• Could you expand on this sentence (His character was inspired by author Yukio Mishima.)? It is rather vague in its current form. I am very interested in Mishima (I am very much an otaku/Japanese culture nerd) so I would also just like to know more about this point too.
  • They remain vague other than his look.
• I do not understand this sentence (Harada said in 2016 that he has a family of his own,). It reads like you are referencing Harada’s family that he made in 2016. I would revise this sentence for clarity.
  • Trimmed.
• I am confused by the structure of this particular section. It jumps around from a lot of different ideas and games. Could you explain me to how you organized the information here? I will wait to do more comments on this section during my second read-through as I would like further clarification on this before moving forward. I just want to make sure I have a firm grasp on your intention for this section so I can provide the best comments and suggestions.
  • Wait, I don't get it.
    • I do not understand the organization and structure of this section. See your previous work on the "Concept and creation" section for Allen Walker. It has a more cohesive approach to presenting its information to the reader. The similar section to this article seems to jump around rather liberally from different points about the character in a rather unorganized. In the above comment, I was asking why you organized the information in this way so I can better understand it and, by extension, better provide comments on how to improve it and make it more cohesive. I have more comments below about this section. Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Gameplay

• I would put the original Japanese names of the moves as footnotes as I suggested in the lead for the names of the characters.
  • Wait, how does that work?
    • Since this was not done for the Allen Walker article (and not requested during its FAC review), then it should be fine. Aoba47 (talk) 22:35, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• I am uncertain about this sentence (He saw Kazuya as a fun character, however, adding that gamers who lose while playing as him feel ashamed.). I think that the first half has good information that should be kept in the article (i.e. Harada’s opinion that Kazuya is a fun character), but I do not see the importance of the ashamed part. I think any player who loses a game while playing any character would feel that way so I do not see how it is unique or particularly information for this article?
  • Done.

Appearances

• Would it be better to move the Devil Kazuya image to the part in the “Character design” section, in which you talk about the creation and design of that character/part of Kazuya?
*For this part (Kazuya enters the King of Iron Fist Tournament to seek vengeance against his father Heihachi, who had thrown him off a cliff.), could you clarify why Heihachi threw him off a cliff?
  • Done.
• For this part (This time, Heihachi reclaims the Mishima Zaibatsu by defeating Kazuya), I do not believe the “This time” is necessary. I would remove it as I have always been told to avoid the use of “This”.
  • Done.
• I would get rid of the “Video game” subheading and make each individual sub=subheading into its own subheading.
  • You mean like Kratos (God of War)? I mean Kazuya barely appears in the fifth game.
• For this part (to extract the half of his devil dene), I think you mean “devil gene” instead of “devil dene”.
  • Fixed.
• For this part (In Tekken 7 Kazuya's mother), please add a comma between “7”and “Kazuya’s”.
• I am confused by this sentence (As in the Tekken game series, he is thrown off a cliff at a young age by Heihachi and saved by a deal with the devil.). You do not mention that he made a deal with the devil in the previous section about his appearances in the video games.
  • Fixed.

Reception

• For the image caption (Statue of Jin Kazama (left) and Kazuya Mishima in Osaka), add (right) after Kazuya’s name.
  • Fixed.
• For this part (their similar natures and dark rivalry.), I do not believe that the word “dark” is necessary.

• Fixed this for you. Aoba47 (talk) 22:06, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• For this part (Den of Geek enjoyed its violence), what are you referencing with “its”?
  • Fixed
• This part (due to the resemblance between the villains and the similarities in their design.) seems to repeat the same information (i.e. they look similar to each other). I would cut the first part and just say (due to the similarities in their designs).
• I am not sure what you mean by this sentence (Alex Henning of The Fandom Post felt that John Kim's Western comics adapted Kazuya's personality in the series.). Is he praising how the comics adapt Kazuya’s personality?
  • Fixed.
• For this part (In a review of the first Tekken live-action film, DVD Talkcriticized Kazuya and Heihachi's subplot. In Kazuya's Revenge, Manlu Movie criticized the actor's performance. GameCrate criticized his moves (calling them "noticeably generic") and his romantic relationship with Laura.), avoid the use of “criticized” in three consecutive sentences.
  • Done.

Final comments from first read-through

• Great work with this article as I can imagine that this took a lot of time and research. I only have relatively minor comments for most of the sections; my major concern is with the structure of the “Character design” section as I believe that the information could be presented in a more organized manner. After my comments are addressed, I will read through the article again and provide more suggestions. If it is okay with you, could I also make edits to the article as part of my review? You would be more than welcome to revert any edits that you do not agree with. Either way, I hope that you find this review helpful, and have a great rest of your weekend! This article definitely inspires me to work on an article on a video game character. Aoba47 (talk) 20:29, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I'm not sure if I tackled everyone, such as the one you mentioned subheadings so feel free to mention more.Tintor2 (talk) 21:53, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

Second round of comments

• This sentence (Kazuya Mishima was created to be as corrupted character.) is grammatically incorrect. It should either be "as a corrupted character" or "to be a corrupted character". Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• In the above sentence, clarify who created him in this way. Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• This part (Tekken producer Katsuhiro Harada "pure dark side") does not make sense. I am assuming there are works missing here. The sentence as a whole needs revision. Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• I am confused by this sentence (Harada also described Kazuya as nearly a yakuza.). What does it mean to be "nearly a yakuza"? How is the information relevant to this section? It comes a little out of nowhere. Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• The information in these sentences (Harada also described Kazuya as nearly a yakuza.[2] For Tekken 6, Takayuki Yamaguchi designed an outfit for Kazuya which makes him look like a robot.[3] His character was inspired by author Yukio Mishima, but the Namco staff was vague about specific similarities beyond physical appearance.[4][5]) is important, but it is rather random listing of facts about the character with very little flow or cohesion between any of them. Aoba47 (talk) 22:19, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• I would revise this sentence (According to Namco's Tekken design team, "It was Nina or Kazuya who was the soul, the cool part, of the [first] game.") to make better use of the quote as it is rather awkwardly constructed now. Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• The image caption (Kazuya was pictured after author Yukio Mishima.) does not make sense and needs to be revised.
• I would completely revise this paragraph (Harada described the violent characters in Tekken who are constantly fighting: Heihachi, Jin and Kazuya. He saw that type of family as too quarrelsome.[7] Harada denied claims that Tekken's plot is complicated, saying that he saw the story as a "simple" struggle among members of the Mishima family with other characters dragged in.) to (Harada referred to Heihachi, Jin and Kazuya as the violent characters in Tekken, and described them as too quarrelsome. Denying claims that Tekken's plot is too complicated, Harada viewed the story as a "simple" struggle among members of the Mishima family with other characters dragged into the conflict.). Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• The paragraph about Tekken 7 comes rather abruptly. What is your reason for including this paragraph about a later game as the third paragraph in this section? Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• Make sure that Tekken is always italicized. Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
• I am very confused by this sentence (The end of Kazuya's last fight with Akuma was intentionally ambiguous, with Harada joking that the situation would have otherwise negatively affected Namco's relationship with Capcom.). Who decided to leave the battle ambiguous? What would it negatively impact the relationship between Namco and Capcom? Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Rearranged a bit. Not sure where you might want prefer it.
• For this sentence (About ending the rivalry between Jin and Kazuya, Harada said that Jun Kazama would appear in the story.), the source says the following: "Naturally now I’ve no comment. But someday, she is an important and essential element in talking about the story of Kazuya and Jin." He is not really saying that the character will end the rivalry between the two characters as you state in the article. Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Fixed.
• Why do you use "however" in this sentence (However, the devil can be unlocked as an alternate skin for Kazuya in the first game.)? It does not really make sense in this context given the previous sentence. Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Fixed.
• For the last paragraph of the "Other media" subsection, you use the word "appears" in almost every sentence. I would revise this paragraph to avoid that. Aoba47 (talk) 22:37, 15 July 2018 (UTC)
  • Fixed.

These are my comments after giving a brief overview of the "Character creation and design". I would like to hear more about your approach to this section (i.e. why you organized the section in this way) before going more in-depth commentary. I am just confused by the overall structure of the section. Aoba47 (talk) 22:33, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• • Rearranged the creation section a bit to make subsection for both the Devil persona and the voice actors.

Done.Tintor2 (talk) 22:52, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• • • Thank you for the edits so far. If possible, can I go in and edit the section and get your feedback on it? Aoba47 (talk) 23:02, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Yep. For some reason Tekken 7 obtained a lot of commentary from the director which might explained why the section is so large.Tintor2 (talk) 23:07, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

• Thank you. I just wanted to get your approval first; there is nothing wrong with that. I do not have an issue with the content of the section, but I want to try and make it more cohesive and flow together as a whole better. Aoba47 (talk) 23:10, 15 July 2018 (UTC)

I have revised the section. Please let me know what you think. Everything looks in order to me, but I will read through it again tomorrow if that is okay with you. Aoba47 (talk) 00:11, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

@Aoba47: Okay, thanks for the review.Tintor2 (talk) 00:38, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

After reading through everything again, I believe that this is ready for promotion. If possible, I would greatly appreciate some help with my current FAC? Either way, have a great rest of your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 01:58, 16 July 2018 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.