Talk:Lucario/GA1

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.

---

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Nominator: Pokelego999 (talk · contribs) 02:53, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Reviewer: TrademarkedTWOrantula (talk · contribs) 17:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

MAX AURA! TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 17:57, 6 July 2024 (UTC)

Hi @TrademarkedTWOrantula, please remember to wait for a cross-check by an experienced reviewer before closing this one for the backlog drive. If you haven't got anyone in mind as your reviewer buddy, you can list it here [1]. -- asilvering (talk) 18:53, 7 July 2024 (UTC)

@Pokelego999: Finished. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 19:59, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

@TrademarkedTWOrantula finished going through your comments. Let me know on some of the Reception ones, since I was a bit iffy on a few points. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:17, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Rate	Attribute	Review Comment
1. Well-written:
	1a. the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct.	Prior to reviewing, I found the grammar squeaky clean. No typos spotted. Article reads smoothly.
	1b. it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.	Lead section is of adequate length. Article is correct per MOS:LAYOUT. Article is not overrun with words on the WTW list. Fiction is out-of-universe. List incorporation policy does not apply.
2. Verifiable with no original research, as shown by a source spot-check:
	2a. it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline.	Article has a reference section. No bare URLs spotted.
	2b. 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).	Although there are a few situational or questionable sources (TechRaptor, ComicBook), these are overshadowed by several reliable sources from WP:VG/S (e.g., TheGamer, Fanbyte, Polygon, VG247, Joystiq, Famitsu, Game Informer, and not to mention the scholarly journals).
	2c. it contains no original research.	Spotchecking proves there is text-source integrity and, therefore, no original research.
	2d. it contains no copyright violations or plagiarism.	According to the Earwig report, the top result is at a 13% similarity, meaning that the article is unlikely to contain any copyright violations.
3. Broad in its coverage:
	3a. it addresses the main aspects of the topic.	The character's concept and creation, appearances, promotion, and reception all contain necessary information and address the main aspects of the topic.
	3b. it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).	Article stays focused.
	4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.	Article is neutral; it does not try to promote or criticize the fictional character itself.
	5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.	Article is stable.
6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
	6a. media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content.	Both the Lucario artwork and the fitness program photographs are tagged with their copyright status. Both have valid non-free use rationales.
	6b. media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.	The character artwork is useful for showing what the character looks like. The fitness program screenshot shows an example of how the character was acknowledged.
	7. Overall assessment.	Watch the power... BLAAAAAAAAAARGHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH!!!!!!!

Quickfail?

• Y Article is stable.
• Y No cleanup banners or citation needed tags spotted.
• Y No considerable copyright violations, per Earwig.
• Y First GA review.
• Y No glaring issues.

Lead

• Recommend putting the pronunciation notes into a single footnote, as seen on MOS:PRONPLACEMENT.
  • I frankly have no idea how to do this. I have tried but literally cannot figure it out (Please help, I am technologically illiterate sometimes) Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

  Use the {{Efn}} template, then make a separate section for notes. I'll do it for you. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 23:44, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

  Many thanks. Efn's still confuse me to this day. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:47, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

• Game Freak is linked twice.
  • Fixed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• as a main character?
• then as a cameo
• subsequent sequels -> later sequels
  • Changed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• also appearing in various merchandise, spin-off titles and animated and printed adaptations of the franchise. -> Outside of electronic media, Lucario also appears in various merchandise, spin-off titles, and animated and printed adaptations of the franchise.
  • Spin-offs include video games, which are electronic media. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• The linked word "Aura" doesn't lead anywhere
  • Bizarre. I've de-linked it, though do you believe a link to Aura (Paranormal) is warranted here due to being an adaptation of the concept? Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• and has been featured in several forms of merchandise, including figurines, plush toys, and the Pokémon Trading Card Game. - This could be mentioned a paragraph earlier (the part where it says it appeared in "various merchandise")
  • Merged it with the prior paragraph. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• Reception could have a short summary. What was Lucario praised for, and has it been used outside of the Pokémon franchise?
  • Let me know if the expansion is sufficient. 23:37, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
    • Looks better now. All good!

Concept and creation

• Nice copypasta as always.
• "design lead" -> "lead designer"?
  • Changed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• "appears to be" -> "is considered" (according to the citation, it states that people think Lucario's based on Anubis)
  • Changed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• Does the word "hourglass" need to be quoted?
  • Probably not, good catch. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• Try a better word for "nubile"; it gives off the wrong connotation.
  • I removed it since it wasn't adding much. Today is how I learn what nubile means. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 23:39, 8 July 2024 (UTC)
• So far, so good!

Appearances

• What's a Statue Cameo?
  • Clarified. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• 15,000 points in what?
  • Removed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• which detailed how certain collectibles could be applied to certain characters - I don't remember there being any collectibles?
  • There are collectibles (Stickers, in this case, though it's easier not to name them in the case of this article.) Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• "predominately Shaolin Kung Fu" -> "including Shaolin Kung Fu"?
  • Fixed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• now being voiced by Sean Schemmel - Might want to clarify that Schemmel didn't just voice the character in Ultimate alone
  • Changed. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• and has made Lucario's attacks riskier - ???
  • Simplified. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• What's the Tree of Beginning?
  • Removed reference for simplicity's sake. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• Other Lucario later appear in the series. - The TV show?
  • Yes. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 00:51, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Promotion and reception

• Cut "having been" in "having been released"
  • Done. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• Described in a press release as being used due to its characteristics of "Futsu no Kokoro" and "Seishinryoku" - What are those?
  • I admittedly have no idea, so I've elected to simplify the text here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• in similar promotions across Japan to promote fitness - Tautology... ahhhh
  • Reworded. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• Would recommend linking this article somewhere around the part where it mentions that Lucario was used for... uh... "entertainment".
  • May god have mercy on my soul. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• Called the "unofficial poster child" for Pokémon from Diamond and Pearl by IGN's Dale Bashir, he further called it one of the best designs in the franchise - Misplaced modifier (he's the "best design" in the franchise, as he so claims)
  • Bit confused on what you want me to change here, but I've changed he to "Bashir." Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• Seeing an odd repetition of "noting that" and "noted that". Usually, the word "note", the verb, is used for facts. (see MOS:NOTE)
  • MOS:NOTE seems to only apply to the prose, and when the writer of the article intends to speak to readers directly. There's no mention made of it being used in Reception, akin to how it is here. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• tone of facial mannerisms - So like, body language?
  • Reworded to this for simplicity. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• He closed with noting that - Confused.
  • Simplified. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)
• They felt too the character's death fulfilled its own knightly narrative - Medieval quote, medieval-ish writing...
  • I have removed "too" from the narrative with utmost haste. (Technically the sentence is fine but the "too" convolutes things. Let me know if that fixes it.) Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 21:16, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

  Looks like everything's up to order. TWOrantula^TM (enter the web) 22:29, 9 July 2024 (UTC)

Spotchecking

• Since it's basically midnight and I get more sleep than a... something that doesn't sleep a lot, I'm only gonna check three sources. Sorry :( (this revision)
• #6 Y
• #33 Y
• #44 Y

Assist review

Cross-check review as requested by Asilvering (talk · contribs)

• The article itself is in great shape actually. The non-free images used have valid non-free use rationales, and it's cited to reliable sources.
• Spot checks:
  • Refs 3, 20, 24, 40, 44 (oofs) all supports the statements
  • Ref 53 doesn't have the quoted phrase "inferior copy", but generally supports the criticisms by the author.

That's all for me.--ZKang123 (talk) 07:33, 8 July 2024 (UTC)

Removed the "inferior copy" quotation. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 19:50, 8 July 2024 (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.