Talk:To Your Eternity

Pre-GAN comments

I am leaving comments on how to further improve the article here per a request on my talk page.

• I have two different comments about this sentence: In contrast to her previous work, A Silent Voice, To Your Eternity is set focus on the cast's futures rather than past. The set focus part does not make sense and would need to be revised. I have never read either of these two manga, but I am curious on how a story can completely focus on its characters' past without anything on their future?

→ Will reword that sentence, or delete it. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• The transitions in this sentence, Nevertheless, Fushi's continuous character arc was praised while Ōima's artwork received positive feedback based on its detailed facial expressions and environments., do not make sense. Nevertheless does not work in this context as the previous sentence was about the premiere getting positive reviews and this sentence is about the series continuing to get positive reviews. While does not work in this context either as it is used to indicate a contrast and both the character arc and artwork received praise.

→ I have changed it to your proposal, I might have been responsible for that one from a previous edit. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:05, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

It happens. It is good that you added transition words like that, but it is important to remember the context of everything too. Aoba47 (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• The "Plot" section reads more like an introduction to the plot instead of a summary. It leaves out details that are only revealed later in the article. Instances of this include the arctic setting and March's death. Articles like Naruto and The Heart of Thomas go into more detail with their summaries so I was curious on why the same is not done here? Is this "Plot" section structured like this because it is still an-ongoing series?

→ Whatever the case, at this moment, I would not add to the plot, given the distance between the manga and anime (which is indeed ongoing). Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Could you clarify what you mean by "the distance between the manga and anime"? I am reading it as the manga and anime being very different in terms of story, but I want to make sure that I am correct in that interpretation. Aoba47 (talk) 19:58, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

→ The anime is an adaptation of the manga, which is quite further ahead in the story from where the anime is right now. I'm concerned for the possibility that, should the plot synopsis be expanded with all the content of the manga, a newcomer to the story might get massively spoiled. However, I'm unfamiliar with Wikipedia's general guidelines regarding these situations, so I tend to err on the side of caution. Horsesizedduck (talk) 21:39, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• Wikipedia includes spoiler in the plot summary. To be perfectly honest, if a newcomer looks this up and chooses to read the plot summary, they cannot get mad if they are spoiled since they are going out of their way to read the plot in the first place. Aoba47 (talk) 21:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• For this part, he takes the form of a rock, then a dying wolf, say arctic wolf in full as just saying wolf is unnecessarily misleading and somewhat of an Easter egg.

→ Amended. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• For this part, An exiled villager friend/older sister figure, I would avoid using the backslash in the prose in such a way. I would instead just say An exiled villager friend and older sister figure.

→ Amended. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• For these two parts, Manga artist Yoshitoki Ōima conceived the title "To Your Eternity" and She chose "To Your Eternity", why is the title put in quotation marks and not in italics?

→ Amended. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:27, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• I would link primary school in this part, originated from Ōima's work in primary school, as it may be helpful for some readers.
• In this part, Ōima wanted to make the protagonist neutral, and said she prefers neutral female characters., what is meant by neutral?

→ The reference presumably containing those words is in Japanese, so I can't really elaborate on that. I would prefer to delete it, and re-add later if necessary. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:17, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• It may be helpful to do more search on what the Japanese words are referencing instead. While machine translations like Google Translate are very helpful, instances like this one show that it is important to do some research into the language so you get the right meanings. Aoba47 (talk) 19:56, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• In this part, and the bear as obstacles of the human will., say polar bear in full as just saying bear is unnecessarily misleading and somewhat of an Easter egg.

→ Amended. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:34, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• I would link eskimos like this instead of doing the eskimos redirect.
• A Silent Voice is linked multiple times in the article when it should only be done on the first instance.

→ Fixed. Horsesizedduck (talk) 17:08, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• I am uncertain of the value of the block quote in the "Reception" section. It puts a rather significant amount of weight on one critic's opinion.
• For the citations, I believe you need to provide translations for the titles of the Japanese citations as well as for the Spanish one.
• I would strongly encourage you to archive your citations.

I hope these comments are helpful and best of luck with the GAN. Have a great rest of your week! Aoba47 (talk) 16:29, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Horsesizedduck: I'll see what I can do. Also pinged Horseizedduck since he is quite better at grammar.Tintor2 (talk) 16:40, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

→ Thank you for pinging me, was about to ask if we could begin! ... May I? Horsesizedduck (talk) 16:43, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Feel free. I'm busy at work I'm a bit inactive.Tintor2 (talk) 17:12, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Nice work. Already archived all references and expanded the main plot a bit. There is a main arc but it is developed through several story arcs that might across as either a premise or a incomplete plot.Tintor2 (talk) 19:51, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

@Horsesizedduck: In regards to spoilers, Wikipedia's guidelines, Spoiler, we have to include such information. The only exception is in regards to the lead section which is meant to actually work as an introduction to the article (Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section).Tintor2 (talk) 21:49, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

• I have already put a comment about this above, but I just wanted to say this is correct. If a newcomer really wants to avoid spoilers, they can still read the lead, which should be an overview of the anime as a whole. That being said, if someone wanted to read or watch something completely spoiler-free, I am not entirely sure why they would read the Wikipedia article first. Aoba47 (talk) 21:57, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Understood, will continue to describe the plot as I find the opportunity. Horsesizedduck (talk) 22:28, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

Thank you for your patience and taking the time to do this. The plot summary already looks a lot better to me in that it gives me a better understanding of the plot. Aoba47 (talk) 22:31, 8 June 2021 (UTC)

I added an alternative summary in a comment, covering all 15.5 volumes in ~1000 words. I tried to cover only the most important events and mention only the most important characters, and avoid character description as there is a separate section for that. The later events are slightly more detailed, as they are more complicated than the early ones. 204.112.199.2 (talk) 00:06, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

→ Thank You for the assistance! Horsesizedduck (talk) 00:30, 11 June 2021 (UTC)

Nomination?

@Horsesizedduck: The article's copyedit is finished. Are you interested in nominating it to GA? I would try but you have also been a really active editor here.Tintor2 (talk) 21:07, 11 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tintor2: Sorry for the late response, kind of forgot about this. If you wish to nominate it, go ahead. I'd say it was mostly your creation. Horsesizedduck (talk) 13:53, 12 July 2021 (UTC)

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Link20XX (talk · contribs) 15:57, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

Marking this for review. Will start soon. Link20XX (talk) 15:57, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tintor2: This was a fascinating article to read through, and will be good enough with the few points below being addressed.

Lead

• This may be nitpicky on my end, but "selling multiple copies" could mean just 2, maybe the word "many" or something of the like would be a better fit?
  • Revised

Characters

• The English voice actors for child Gugu and Rean need a source.
  • Removed. Not even Behind the Voice Actors confirm it. Neither the actors' twitter accounts.
• The character descriptions for Mia, Oopa, Sandel, and Uroy are all just the same one line. If that same line is all that can be said about them, are they worth mentioning at all?
  • Removed

Production

• It is entirely possible that this is due to machine translation issues, but I can't find the statement "Each volume cover represents a character's dream such as the first one, which depicts the unnamed youth finding freedom. Volume three depicts Fushi's dream, which is to live happily and peacefully with everyone" in the Kono Manga interview.
  • Revised.

Media

• "having announced it on May 23, 2016", isn't supported by the source, since the ANN article dates to May 24, 2016. Is this a typo?
  • Removed
• There isn't a source in this section for the Japanese volume count. Perhaps it should be added?
  • Added.

Reception

• This isn't a critique, but a question. Do you have a reason to consider Manga Mexico and Fantasy Mundo as reliable sources?
  • Both sites cite the original publisher for their region's release and are linked with sites that sell the volumes among other type of merchandising. Hope this helps.

That is all. Link20XX (talk) 23:09, 14 July 2021 (UTC) @Link20XX: Thanks for the review. Ping me if there is another issue.Tintor2 (talk) 23:42, 14 July 2021 (UTC)

@Tintor2: With the changes, the article satisfies the good article criteria. Happy to Pass this review. Link20XX (talk) 23:48, 14 July 2021 (UTC)