Wikipedia:Peer review/Nerima Daikon Brothers/archive1

Nerima Daikon Brothers

I've been working on this page off and on for about two weeks. Rather than make a stub-article out of the requests for translation I thought I'd try to give it the full treatment. This is my first major article. I'd like to bring it up to good-status. I'd like to get comments and suggestions for improvement. Thanks! --Kunzite 02:42, 30 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Suggestions:

include Reception section summarizing (possible) show & manga criticism and ratings.

>Is it acceptable to use criticism from blogs and other types of ephemerial sites? I've searched for published data, but the one print magazine that I did found is not availale to me.

"Broadcast and release information" time slot information do not specify between A.M. and P.M..

>Ah, yes. I forgot to include that. In Japanese they were written as 26:30 and so forth. So I didn't see the need at the time.

Call me stupid but I dont understand the Rating Data column in the table under Episode Titles and Ratings section. Maybe expand the legend below the table...?

>It's confusing. I'm still looking for confirmation. I think it's residences per million.

Is the manga available in other languages, has the show been dubbed in other languages? has the show been aired in other countries?

>No and no. It may be scanlated when it comes out in tankoubon but references to those things are swiftly deleted because they're copyright violations. The anti-fan translation people delete the smallest references to such things.

is the manga (or) show no longer in production?

if not whats going on with it?

if it stopped, why?

>The manga has concluded its run. It's not atypical for series to only have short runs. The anime/manga request section is full of them. A digest version of the manga should come out soon.

Note: Comments added to bullet points by. --Kunzite 04:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Except for this the article looks great, if possible (although I suspect information isnt too widely available about this) more expansion would help since alot of the article is technical data. Thank you. - Tutmosis 01:03, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you so much for your input. There are one or two things that I can expand on, but I do more research. And perhaps see if I can find some relevent information in an actor interview or in a copy of the print magazine referenced above. --Kunzite 04:27, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for aknowledging my suggestions, looking for more information would be great although I'm sure it must be very hard since I dont think there is alot about this manga/show. Also, Characters section can be improved since it gets confusing sometimes for a person who never read the manga or watched the show. Example would be "Madonna Diet Members". To your reply above, I dont think blogs are a reliable source. One last thing, I would also recommend informing the reader if there any changes between the show and the manga. Is it a pure conversion and the show is 100% same as the manga? Is each episode based on a manga issue? Also there is no information who produces the show, only the manga. - Tutmosis 01:47, 2 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Ooh, quite a shiny article for a current anime. Some points to improve:

There's a lot of [too literal/confused/clumsy] translation, or just bad statements. A selection:
- "Until recently with TV anime didn't make jokes about the current news topics like homosexual love, consumer credit, or the success of Korean artists in Japan such as Bae Yong-Joon." <- "homosexual love" and "consumer credit" are current affairs? Anime hasn't made jokes about homosexual love? "or the success" is an ambiguous, is it something they didn't make jokes about, a cuurent affair, or both?
- "The comic was drawn by Takamitsu Kondou and conceived by Aniplex and Studio Hibari." Too literal credits-on-the-cover-of-the-manga sentence, it just means the manga is based on the concept from the anime (c) Aniplex/Studio Hibari.
- "Because the 30-minute show contains risqué humor it was broadcast at the 1:30 time slot in Tokyo." There's plenty of 'risqué' in daytime anime (Crayon Shin-chan, anyone?); and lots of entirely harmless anime is broadcast after midnight because that's how the scheduals work.
Also, the problem with ja.wikip is that they're rather listy, and haven't found the joy of giving sources - most of the things you cite from there could really do with backing up.
You probably want to mention Excel Saga. I know, I know, just force yourself.
English title translations are lackluster. Not easy to do well, sure, but I'd try and preserve the 俺の... gimick.
Ratings are from a *blog*? Can't you just dig up the Newtypes, probably where he got the numbers from anyway. Likewise, where's the rank from, and what's it meant to mean? It's certainly not 'anime with top viewing figures'.
Some inconsistant romanisation. Shoutarou/Shōtarō etc.
Some of the images have dodgy/incorrect licencing info, and no source/copyright holder info, required for fair use claims.
You're overusing that darn help:japanese template, if people don't get the idea the first time the funny squiggles appear, they're beyond help anyway.

As for value judgements on the article in its current state... It's too much lists-of-data (a ja.wikip translation affliction), the lead isn't very good, the references are pretty patchy - lots of tabloids/blogs, no useful value judgements or commentary on the actual subject, and there aren't enough panda pictures. In short, it's probably the best anime article I've seen on wikipedia. And I wish some beggers 'd sub it... --zippedmartin 05:44, 1 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]