| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
This article passed its GA nomination almost 10 months ago and not much has changed since. It's very clean and sharp, but I feel falls just short of optimal health. Eventually I would like to take this article for an FA review (only befitting considering how great season 2 was!) and some feedback would be much appreciated.
Thanks in advanced, DAP 💅 20:37, 8 May 2017 (UTC)
- I'll give it a try:
- Is the Prod Cod. necessary for casual readers?
- Avoid short paragraphs like the first one from Development and Writing. Either expand it or merge it with the second paragraph (same with ratings)
- Try to give more flow to the reviews like "X reviewer also" or "On the other hand, X reviewer"
- Are there sales articles that could expand the home media releases?
Other than it seems well written. If you have the time could you review my own peer review? It's Wikipedia:Peer review/Yu Kanda/archive2. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 23:03, 10 May 2017 (UTC)