Wikipedia:Peer review/Megatokyo/archive2

Previous request archived at Wikipedia:Peer review/Megatokyo/archive1

Megatokyo

I feel that the criticisms and suggestion from the previous peer review and the FA nom have been adressed and dealt with and this article will soon be ready to be go up for featured article status. I am hoping that this will act as a good step to get some suggestions on how the article can be improved and made better so that it will meet the quality requirements for a featured article. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 00:28, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a very odd article, I'll give it that. I'm not entirely convinced it's FA material just yet, despite (in spite of?) working on the article on and off at times. Some comments:

The lead should actually talk about, y'know, the comic. Currently it's simply a lot of short, factual statements that look like they're pulled right from the infobox they're next to. The only statement about the comic in the lead is that it uses l33t speak; is that really the kind of comic Megatokyo is? It uses l33t speak?
I would not be opposed to merging the characters and plot together into one section; the characters section drew fire in FAC last time, and it's definitely not much improved since. Bulleted lists definitely won't earn you points in FAC, since it's not "brilliant prose".
I'm gonna sound really stupid, but the plot actually needs some fleshing out: it says next to nothing about the direction the comic took after Caston left, merely that it has "changed somewhat". Currently the only real plotline given its own paragraph is the "Piro and Largo need jobs" plot, which is resolved (relatively) early on as other plots move on. The rest of the section mainly talks about the setting at large.
I gave Image:Megatokyo - 0619.png some fair use rationale. I don't know if the manga covers also need it, but it couldn't hurt.
Again, there is more MT after Caston leaves, but the History section doesn't go past it. Use the space to say some things about how Piro sees the comic; in particular, I believe on several occassions he's said he sees the website as a working journal of sorts for the book versions. Also go over how the comic has been funded over the years (has it always been merch?)
Not sure if the forums deserve their own section or not. One of my rules of thumb for pop culture is "The fandom doesn't matter", particularly since it's not exactly the most citable thing in the world.
~~Merge the MegaGear section into the History.~~ It's too short by itself and can't be expanded much.

That's about all I can think of. No comment on the Reception section yet. Nifboy 03:59, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the suggestions I'll get right on them. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 06:33, 19 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The Megagear is now merged thanks to one of the editor.--Kiba 02:54, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Was going to say "see my objection from FAC", but I note there's actually some discussion of the style of the comic now. However the content is still pretty patchy, and there's no real cross references still. The NYT quote is pretty cute though. The lead needs work, as does the format and layout of the artilce, which is really... odd at the moment. Like, why is 'History' at the bottom? Also, pet peeve:

"It is written and drawn in a manga-influenced style." - this just isn't helpful, either needs another way of phrasing what's trying to be said, or you need to narrow down what 'manga' is meant to be, or you're just saying "this comic is drawn in a comic-influenced style".
"the comic changed into a manga-styled free-form layout" - what's this even meant to mean?

Are there any featured webcomic articles atm? Dunno if there's anything that could serve as a useful template for improvement. --zippedmartin 09:48, 23 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- I checked and I couldn't find any. Pegasus1138^{Talk | Contribs | Email} ---- 01:50, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  - This is the only webcomic that even has references (Correction: Penny Arcade now has references thanks to me, but the article is a raging mess.). Nifboy 03:20, 24 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
    - Does this mean that Megatokyo is the best webcomic article ever?

--Kiba 21:05, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

- - - - Yes. Nifboy 21:27, 25 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Japanese names need to follow WP:MOS-JA and should be written in western order. i.e. Yuki Sonoda (園田由紀) not Sonoda Yuki (園田由紀). You can always use template:nihongo for quick formatting i.e. {{nihongo|Yuki Sonoda|園田由紀|Sonoda Yuki}} → Yuki Sonoda (園田由紀, Sonoda Yuki). --Kunzite 19:47, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are four {{citation needed}} templates. These statements needs sourcing, or removal.
Notes should not be preceded by space, and should be placed after punctuation, per WP:FN style.
Multiple links to the same article should be reduced.
No "characters" section
- There is a serious issue in the related articles: There is Main characters of Megatokyo, Minor characters of Megatokyo AND a Characters of Megatokyo. Since the last is the only linked from the article, but the other two are in {{Megatokyo}}, this issue needs to be resolved.
Non-comic elements are not discussed: "Dead piro days" are mentionned without saying what they actually are, Shirt Guy Dom is not mentionned.
One paragraph sections should be expanded or merged.
This has lead to a section of former fans feeling that Megatokyo was better when Caston was writing it. This statement should also be sourced.

These are what I see if yur aim is FA status. Circeus 15:17, 14 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here's a couple more:

Some characters in the main characters section are gone into depth way beyond summary style - I'd recommend keeping it to a 2 paragraph limit on each one
"Chapters" needs some more prose.... maybe you could explain what the chapters are

Anyway, it has been a long time and I think several FACs for this and I'd like to see it featured, but there is still a bit of work to be done.... Just another star in the night ^{T | @ | C} 21:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]