Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Ah! My Goddess The Movie

Ah! My Goddess The Movie

I withdraw the nom, will pursue peer review. --Cat out 17:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not believe this article is ready to be promoted, however I need help in determining how to expand it. --Cat out 22:13, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You want a Peer Review. Withdraw this nomination unless you really believe it ought to be promoted. —mercuryboard^talk 22:15, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh I will expand it with comments here. Peer review is a dead process (per experience). --Cat out 22:31, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

He is right you know, 120 in peer review and most just have automated bots. Judgesurreal777 22:52, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Machine input is... well... not all that interesting. --Cat out 23:00, 30 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Dead or not, I concur that you should have gone through the motions of a Peer Review first. Excel Saga had a great review, and I've reviewed several articles. If it's a dead process, I imagine it's because reviewers get no or little feedback from other editors. "The forms must be obeyed." ;) Therefore: Object. Nothing about production or critical reception. The plot section is way too detailed for my tastes: "Belldandy's former master, Celestin, escapes his imprisonment and uses her as a tool to continue his war against the Almighty. Keiichi, Urd and Skuld must race against time to save Belldandy, themselves, and the universe." More detail can be employed, e.g. mention Morgan le Fay (oh, why did they hijack King Arthur's mother?) and the World tree, but plot per se shouldn't take more than one or two paragraphs. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Monocrat (talk • contribs)

I do not have another anime featured list to base this as an example, that is why I ask the direction I should modify the page.

Production and critical reception will be there shortly.

--Cat out 10:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are plenty of film Featured Articles that could serve as a template (recent ones: Tenebrae, V for Vendetta, Revenge of the Sith). A problem you're going to encounter if you attempt FA for real is the lack of Japanese sources (see Excel Saga's FAC.--Monocrat 12:35, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Amazingly enough, automated semi-bots actually provide pretty useful advice ;). This article definitely could've benefited from it, interesting or not... Object for short lead, lack of footnotes and references, inclusion of a trivia section; in fact, all it is a giant plot summary, with nothing about reception. Check out some of the featured articles at WP:FA#Media. Thanks, Andy _t 00:51, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I do not know whats wrong with a trivia section. I thought that was good practice. None of the featured lists are about an anime movie, that is why I want opinions from the 'featured candidacy comunity' (whatever that means). --Cat out 10:14, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

While Peer Review certainly needs more attention, it has been my experience that I get at least one comment there more often then not, sometimes more, and now we have a great PRbot by AndyZ who will give you some MoS advice, too. Please use PR first, then try FAC. I'd assume you will submit the article to PR after taking advice from this section, I'll sure comment later.--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 15:31, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Very well. Though I do not exactly like listening to a bot. :P --Cat out 17:41, 1 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]