Talk:Sakura (Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle)

Powers

We should add "unnaturally good luck" to her powers...don't you think? -Ashley-kun —Preceding unsigned comment added by Ashley-kun (talk • contribs) 05:38, 9 January 2009 (UTC)

Clone/original Sakura

This page could really do with a passage to explain the close/original Sakura thing.

perfectblue (talk) 20:07, 15 July 2008 (UTC)

Well I suppose this article's up for another move soon enough because it transpires Sakura's real name is not Sakura after all (chapter 196). 213.166.17.12 (talk) 08:56, 4 August 2008 (UTC)

XXX holic chapter appearance

oi,oi,oi. hold on a minute. im reading XXX holic AS I TYPE THIS and she appearsin chapter 12, not 8.

since i dont know when someone will getthis. please dont get mad that im gonna correct it if i can. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Akumi Katsuya (talk • contribs) 05:02, 29 August 2008 (UTC)

Syaoran's Mother

There seems to be a mistake. Syaoran's Mother is Sakura Kinomoto from Cardcaptor Sakura herself. Not someone who was given the wand by her. Please correct this. 119.73.1.207 (talk) 07:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

- I'm not sure it's a mistake: maybe Shaoran's mother is Sakura Kinomoto and the other she sees in the vision/dream and speaks about the wand is an other Sakura... or maybe the two Sakura both use the wand and the little Sakura that Shaoran mother sees in the dream is Sakura Kinomoto. I don't think it is said explicity that Shaoran's mother is S.Kinomoto so I dont think it is sure... --151.50.166.100 (talk) 13:11, 27 May 2009 (UTC)

Chapter 223 of Tsubasa Reservoir Chronicle finally corrects this problem. I had a slight suspicion during the past week that the two reincarnated clones would become the parents of the Original Syaoran and by extension Watanuki (Talk about a Time/Temporal Paradox). But I had thought it would be too far fetched. I've made the necessary changes so please before reverting take a look for yourself. I've also made the changes on both of the Syaoran's pages and Watanuki's page as well. If I've overlooked something them correct it. 119.73.1.137 (talk) 20:58, 17 June 2009 (UTC)

Thanx :) I thought too that Syaoran (the clone) and Sakura (the clone) were real Syaoran parents ^^ Now is't sure :) --151.50.170.167 (talk) 12:21, 18 June 2009 (UTC)

Restore the article?

Discussion moved to Talk:List of Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle characters#Restore Syaoran's and Sakura's articles?

Curious to know when these two characters gained enough notability... I thought these articles were gone for good. ggctuk (2005) (talk) 17:15, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

I actually was surprised to find a lot of reception for these two characters for various of their traits. However, I couldn't find enough conception info which could be probably found in the character guides or the books Clamp no Kiseki.Tintor2 (talk) 17:22, 16 February 2011 (UTC)

Copyediting concerns

A few comments and requests for clarification as I'm copyediting this page:

The (newly renamed) section "Character outline" includes quite a bit of detail on the conclusion of the series, which should probably be marked as spoilers.

I also think there is a lot of information in the top section that is simply a repetition of what is stated later in the article; it's not bad, but could it be rewritten to summarize more and not go into too much detail?

There's a paragraph in "Creation and conception" about Sakura's character development and the value of relationships. I believe this belongs more in the "Character outline" section, I'll try to work it in somewhere if there are no objections.

I'd also like to clarify that the French "chapitre" is used in the original manga to title chapters, and thus is used here to refer to chapters of Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle.

2macia22 (talk) 05:03, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

Well, WP:Spoiler is against this marking spoilers. Regarding the lead, I'm not sure how to rewrite it without making some grammar mistakes. Thanks for copyediting the article. Tintor2 (talk) 16:02, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

I see, thank you. Copyedit is done now, good luck with the GA nomination! 2macia22 (talk) 18:12, 21 April 2015 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Sakura (Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Johanna (talk · contribs) 19:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Second on my "to review" list. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 19:42, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I'll give my best.Tintor2 (talk) 22:39, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

Comments

Infobox and Lead

• Instead of putting her two appearances on different lines, put "Tsubasa: Reservoir Chronicle and xxxHolic character" as it is in the article Frasier Crane, Addison Montgomery, and other characters who appear in multiple series.
• Be sure the lead follows the structure of the article (i.e. earlier sections come first in the lead). If you find that that doesn't make sense, change the section layout instead.
• Are there two characters named Sayoran in two different mangas? If so, specify this.

Creation and conception

• "the characters of Osamu Tezuka" upon first reading, it appears that Osamu Tezuka is a character to those of us who don't know any better. :) I would replace it with "the characters created by Osamu Tezuka"
• Also, how are they similar to each other? Is this sourced?
• What's an OVA?
• "Makino pointed…" Do you mean "pointed out"?

Character outline

• Why exactly are the chapter titles in French?
• Just a question: why is there a big jump in references between chapters 32 and 145?
• How did Fei-Wang die exactly?
• Does the anime series make any changes to her storyline?

Reception

• It should probably be "popular among readers" not "within"
• Who was she second to in the first poll? In the second poll, what rank was she and who was she behind?
• I might place this rankings stuff at the end of the section, as this is more typical.
• "Megan Lavey initially called" Could you elaborate a bit on her opinions? It's a bit unclear what she was getting at right now.

References

• Refs 44 and 50 are dead.

@Tintor2: Nice article and nice writing! I was expecting to have a lot of comments on the plot summary, but it was quite well written! Clear this up and you'll be set to go. :) Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 02:49, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

I've done some work and:

• I moved the creation section per WP:Lead.
• Is it okay to write "pointed out."? I mean it's a phrasal verb.
• I would add the original Syaoran in the lead but the character is introduced in the second half of the series.
• Found an archive ref 50. I don't know which one is ref 44 after moving the article's lead.
• The anime doesn't go anywhere and is followed by the original video animations
• The manga in both Japanese and English uses the word Chapitre.

@BenLinus1214: Tintor2 (talk) 14:59, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

@Tintor2: The old ref 44 is now ref 56 (animage). Other than that, I can definitely pass. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 16:25, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

Never mind, I found an archive-url quickly. Pass. Johanna (formerly BenLinus1214)^{talk to me!}_{see my work} 16:28, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose, no copyvios, spelling and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

Thanks.Tintor2 (talk) 16:28, 10 September 2015 (UTC)

About the unreliable sources tag

Dani Cavallaro's publications have been designated as generally unreliable sources in this discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard. Citations to her work can be replaced with more high-quality ones or removed, and the tag can be taken off once complete. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:52, 6 June 2024 (UTC)