Talk:Luna Snow/GA1
Add topicLatest comment: 1 month ago by TheVoicelessWriter in topic GA review
GA review
[edit]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.
| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
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
[edit]Good Article Status - Review Criteria
A good article is—
- 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.[1]
- 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);[2]
- (c) it contains no original research; and
- (d) it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.
- Broad in its coverage:
- (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
- (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. [4]
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio: [5]
- (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.[6]
Notes
- ↑ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style, or the Manual of Style mainpage or subpages of the guides listed, is not required for good articles.
- ↑ Footnotes must be used for in-line citations.
- ↑ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
- ↑ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of unconstructive editing should be placed on hold.
- ↑ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
- ↑ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (or other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.
Review
[edit]Criteria
[edit]- Well-written:
- No spelling and grammar issues found.
- I improved the readability of a few statements.
- 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.
- Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
- Fixed issues found while doing a source spot check
- Fixed uncited information issue in the "Conception and development" section
- Broad in its coverage:
- Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
- Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
- Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
- Change addressed.
- All images have appropriate uses and suitable captions.
| Criteria | Notes | Result |
|---|---|---|
| (a) (prose) |
|
 Pass |
| (b) (MoS) |
|
Pass |
| 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) |
|
Pass |
| (d) (copyvio and plagiarism) | No issues found with copyvio | Pass |
| 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 |
| Notes | Result |
|---|---|
| The article is written without bias, covering positive, negative, and neutral statements in a neutral manner | Pass |
| Comment | Result |
|---|---|
| No ongoing edit war | Pass |
| 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) |
|
Pass |
Source spot check
[edit]- 1. (a)
(b) (c) - 2. (a) (b) (c)
- 11.
- 23. (a) (b)
- 35.
- 36.
- 38.
Result
[edit]| Result | Notes |
|---|---|
| Pass | The article meets the criteria of a good article. |
Discussion
[edit]- @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)
- 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)
- "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)
- @Kung Fu Man: In the 3rd paragraph of this section,
- 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)
- @TheVoicelessWriter and Kung Fu Man:
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.