Talk:Luna Snow

RPG stats

@Kung Fu Man "Luna Snow is a tall, slender Asian woman standing 170 cm (5 ft 7 in) tall." Considering that I don't believe RPG stats belong in Wikipedia, this probably isn't needed. Also, I doubt that Luna's height is consistent within all of her appearences, nor is it relevant.

Great work on the article overall tho! ModlordD (talk) 00:28, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

@ModlordD Those aren't RPG stats, that's what helps the reader understand how tall (or short) a character is. Video game characters in general use them (along with three-sizes where applicable) to help give a sense of scale compared to other characters. It's been considered a useful detail on that end for over fifteen years at least.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 00:38, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Okay, it seems I may I have gotten confused. Is this article in general more of the comic book character or the video game character? For a comic book character, stuff like the height would never be talked about, and comic book characters are more my expertise. But I guess since Luna Snow is known more as a video game character, you are probably more experienced there. My apologies ModlordD (talk) 00:55, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

No no, it's completely fine, she overlaps so that's a big thing here. I did check too, and she's a character who they do list stats for in her comic debut (the same 170 cm), but I definitely understand what you mean about the character having variable height often in comics themselves. With games at least it tends to be more fixed.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:19, 21 April 2026 (UTC)

Design

I noticed it said, "Meanwhile, her icicle earrings and heterochromia were meant to reference K-Pop culture directly." I might be wrong, so please correct me, but I don't think heterochromia is a reference to K-pop culture. ~2026-28541-49 (talk) 01:18, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

It's sourced to an article by Marvel, specifically this quote: Her icicle earrings and differently colored eyes, which complete her half-dark and half-light ice look, were meticulously designed with modern K-Pop culture in mind.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:24, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for clarifying! ~2026-28479-45 (talk) 03:00, 12 May 2026 (UTC)

GA review

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

---

This review is transcluded from Talk:Luna Snow/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Nominator: Kung Fu Man (talk · contribs) 17:27, 13 April 2026 (UTC)

Reviewer: TheVoicelessWriter (talk · contribs) 18:17, 8 June 2026 (UTC)

Hello, fellow Marvel fan here. I will be reviewing this article.

Criteria

Good Article Status - Review Criteria

Further information: WP:WIAGA

A good article is—

1. Well-written:

(a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and

(b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.

2. Verifiable with no original research:

(a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;

(b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);

(c) it contains no original research; and

(d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.

3. Broad in its coverage:

(a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; and

(b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

(a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and

(b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.

Notes

Review

Criteria

1. Well-written:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (prose)	No spelling and grammar issues found. I improved the readability of a few statements.	Pass
(b) (MoS)	No issues in lead section The article properly follows Wikipedia:WikiProject Fictional characters/Style guide. No "words to watch" issues It does not violate MOS:WAF.	Pass

2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (references)	There is a list of properly cited references.	Pass
(b) (citations to reliable sources)	The article does not cite unreliable sources.	Pass
(c) (original research)	Fixed issues found while doing a source spot check Fixed uncited information issue in the "Conception and development" section	Pass
(d) (copyvio and plagiarism)	No issues found with copyvio	Pass

3. Broad in its coverage:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (major aspects)	The article sufficiently covers the main aspects of the subject matter.	Pass
(b) (focused)	The article does not go out of topic.	Pass

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.

Notes	Result
The article is written without bias, covering positive, negative, and neutral statements in a neutral manner	Pass

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.

Comment	Result
No ongoing edit war	Pass

6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:

Criteria	Notes	Result
(a) (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales)	All non-free images are tagged and have fair use rationales.	Pass
(b) (appropriate use with suitable captions)	Change addressed. All images have appropriate uses and suitable captions.	Pass

Source spot check

• 1. (a) Y (b) Y (c) Y
• 2. (a) Y (b) Y (c) Y
• 11. Y
• 23. (a) Y (b) Y
• 35. Y
• 36. Y
• 38. Y

Result

Result	Notes
Pass	The article meets the criteria of a good article.

Discussion

• @Kung Fu Man: Please move the image in the "Promotion and reception" section to the "Design" subsection of the "Conception and Development" section. Change the caption to make it appropriate for the image and its new subsection. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 1:24, 9 June 2026 (UTC)
  • But why? All the commentary about it is in the reception section. See Invisible Woman (Marvel Rivals) and Pharah for similar concept art uses in relation to the reception.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 01:35, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

  Look at the image. It is more perfectly suited in the Design section because it shows what the actual design looks like. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 02:45, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

  Yes but the point of its inclusion is to go with the gfinity esports source, discussion how her design was sexualized. Putting it up in design without that context does nothing but make it seem decorative.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:02, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

  Good point. I request moving the image down to the last paragraph (where the sexualization topic is discussed) and rewrite the caption to focus more on the sexualization of the character. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 03:14, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

  I have taken the opportunity to move the image next to the discussion about her sexualization and the caption has been rewritten to better focus on the topic. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 03:38, 9 June 2026 (UTC)

• "Conception and development" section
  • @Kung Fu Man: In the 3rd paragraph of this section, This duality was meant to make her a hero that balanced her abilities between each hand like she balanced the aspects of her life, and special attention was paid to ensure that her portrayal of them fit her pop idol presentation. is original research. The intended supporting source did not state this idea. Please fix this issue. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 10:12, 11 June 2026 (UTC)
    • @TheVoicelessWriter: I see what happened, another source got lost in the mix (both are from Marvel.com with near-identical titles). It's been worked back in, look for the text "balance" in it. Sorry about that.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 13:51, 11 June 2026 (UTC)
• Experienced reviewer
  • @Vestrian24Bio: I am done reviewing this article. Please check my review. TheVoicelessWriter (talk) 19:38, 11 June 2026 (UTC)

  I will check and post here in a while.. Vestrian24Bio 07:34, 12 June 2026 (UTC)

  @TheVoicelessWriter and Kung Fu Man:

  • Both images are missing an alt text - MOS:ALT.

  Otherwise a good review and a good article; great job guys! Vestrian24Bio 10:18, 15 June 2026 (UTC)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.