Talk:Nanohana (manga)

Did you know nomination

The following is an archived discussion of the DYK nomination of the article below. Please do not modify this page. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as this nomination's talk page, the article's talk page or Wikipedia talk:Did you know), unless there is consensus to re-open the discussion at this page. No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was: promoted by SL93 (talk) 00:33, 19 January 2021 (UTC)

(

• Comment or view
• Article history

)

• ... that the manga anthology Nanohana was among the first creative works in Japan to address the Fukushima Daiichi nuclear disaster? Source: "International Perspectives on Shojo and Shojo Manga: The Influence of Girl Culture"
  • ALT1:... that the manga anthology Nanohana was inspired by efforts in Chernobyl and Fukushima to use plants to absorb radioactive material? Source: Courrier International
  • ALT2:... that the appearance of Madame Pluto, a character in Nanohana who is the anthropomorphic embodiment of plutonium, is based on Lady Gaga and Marilyn Monroe? Source: Courrier International
  • ALT3:... that English-language translation of the manga Nanohana uses Scottish accents to indicate the Tōhoku dialect spoken by certain characters in the story? Source: Mechademia

• Reviewed: Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez

Created by Morgan695 (talk). Self-nominated at 01:34, 2 January 2021 (UTC).

• New enough, long enough, neutrally written, well referenced, no close paraphrasing seen. I like the approach of the first three hooks, but inline cites are needed in the article to support ALT1 and ALT2. I added an inline cite for ALT0. I struck ALT3 as getting a little far afield. Images are fair use and freely licensed. QPQ done. Yoninah (talk) 21:55, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: Citations added. Morgan695 (talk) 23:28, 17 January 2021 (UTC)

• @Morgan695: thank you, but there is no inline cite for the part about Madame Pluto being the anthropomorphic embodiment of plutonium in ALT2, and I think that's the most interesting hook. Yoninah (talk) 11:42, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

• @Yoninah: I didn't cite in in the plot summary per MOS:PLOT, but the claim is supported by the Courrier International source ("plutonium, a radioactive element, is represented by a magnificent woman who tries to justify herself in the face of her detractors"). Morgan695 (talk) 19:02, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

• Well, if you don't want to repeat it outside the plot section with a cite, we'll have to pass on ALT2. Foreign-language hook ref AGF and cited inline. Either ALT0 or ALT1 good to go. Yoninah (talk) 19:54, 18 January 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Nanohana (manga)/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Link20XX (talk · contribs) 16:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

Hey I will be reviewing this article shortly. Link20XX (talk) 16:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Morgan695: I have completed my initial review. Great work with the article, just a couple small changes are needed:

Is it well written?

1. A. The prose is clear and concise, and the spelling and grammar are correct:

   B. It complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation:

2. Is it 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. All in-line citations are from reliable sources, including those for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines:

   C. It contains no original research:

   D. It contains no copyright violations nor plagiarism:

3. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. It addresses the main aspects of the topic:

   B. It stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style):

4. Is it neutral?

   It represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each:

5. Is it stable?

   It does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute:

6. Is it illustrated, if possible, by images?

   A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:

   B. Images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:

7. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

• The lead should be expanded a bit, specifically with information as far as reviews and the play adaptation.

• In the first paragraph of the Synopsis section, the article says that Fukushima Drive was added in the tankōbon edition, but later parts of the article and the Infobox says it was released in Big Comic. This should be clarified a bit.

• The title Nanohana is restated multiple times in each section, but that's unnecessary. You should replace them with something like "the manga", "the series", etc.

That is all. Address the issues above and I will pass it. Link20XX (talk) 21:56, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Link20XX: I've implemented your edits. I attempted to cut down on overuse of "Nanohana", but the article has to distinguish between "Nanohana" as the name of the collective series and the specific "Nanohana" one-shot comic, so there is inevitably going to be a bit of repeated use. Morgan695 (talk) 22:36, 3 March 2021 (UTC)

@Morgan695: The changes are sufficient. The result of this review is Pass. Congratulations! Link20XX (talk) 22:53, 3 March 2021 (UTC)