Talk:Kamen Rider Stronger

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Kamen Rider Stronger article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic.
New to Wikipedia? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help.

Article policies

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Television Low‑importance

	Television portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Television, a collaborative effort to develop and improve Wikipedia articles about television programs. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page where you can join the discussion. To improve this article, please refer to the style guidelines for the type of work.TelevisionWikipedia:WikiProject TelevisionTemplate:WikiProject Televisiontelevision articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Tokusatsu Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Tokusatsu, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Tokusatsu on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.TokusatsuWikipedia:WikiProject TokusatsuTemplate:WikiProject TokusatsuTokusatsu articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Kamen Rider Stronger was a good articles nominee, but did not meet the good article criteria at the time. There may be suggestions below for improving the article. Once these issues have been addressed, the article can be renominated. Editors may also seek a reassessment of the decision if they believe there was a mistake.

Article milestones
Date	Process	Result
August 30, 2006	Good article nominee	Not listed

A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on May 8, 2006.

The text of the entry was: Did you know ...that the final episode of Kamen Rider Stronger, a Japanese tokusatsu television series, features appearances from the main characters of every previous series in the franchise?

All the character links under "Characters" are dead. They just lead back to this article or the main Kamen Rider article, rendering them effectively useless. Takeshi357 (talk) 22:45, 26 February 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Ratings

What are the sources to Kamen Rider Stronger having low ratings? I've never really seen actual numbers and the final episode of Stronger does indeed say "Farewell Kamen Riders" after showing a montoge of footage from Kamen Rider~Amazon set to the themes of Kamen Rider and V3. So that would lead one to assume that it was intended to be the final series. Kazuhara 14:10, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're talking about two different things. Whether the series was intended to be the last is a subject of the debate, nobody questions that Toei/Ishinomiri/TBS was unhappy with the franchise, otherwise they wouldn't have waited four years between Stronger to produce New Kamen Rider. By the time the series was nearing its end, the production team knew that they wouldn't be producing another series for some time. Regardless, according to August Ragone, it was NET's broadcast of Himitsu Sentai Goranger that led to the downfall of Stronger— the two aired in direct competition with each other. See [1] and [2], containing insights from tokusatsu historian August Ragone and others, including one Tetsuo Takagi who personally verifies the competition between the two and the wild success of Goranger. These two references are also used as footnotes in the main article text. If there's any way you think you can make the text more clear, please edit it.--Sean Black 15:55, 27 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good article nomination failed

This article does not meet all of the criteria for good article status. The writing of the article is questionable, with passages obviously taken from other sources, a few words changed around, then put back in a form still recognizable from the source. Since there are no citations whatsoever, another reason this article fails, I simply looked at the references and saw how some had been minimally altered and replaced. The references themselves are questionable: using a thread from a discussion isn't a reliable source. Because no citations exist, and the references listed are not necessarily reliable, it seems that this article might also be the result of original research. I am also concerned with minor issues, such as the use of spoilers without warning. Furthermore, all of the research seems to be from a fan site, and while the enthusiasm of this site has been toned down, the article seems overly positive, and possibly non-NPOV, given that, for example, the poor ratings the show received are explained away by when the show aired, giving a forum discussion as reference, and provides no criticism of the show: perhaps it got bad ratings because people didn't like the show. Significant ongoing edits since the nomination of this article make its stability questionable. I encourage the editors of this article to change and resubmit this article for consideration for GA status, but I regret it does not meet the standards in its present form. Chuchunezumi 16:51, 30 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'll respond to your claims in turn:

What the hell? How dare you accuse me of copyright infringement without evidence to back it up.
"No citations whatsoever" ? Show me one thing that isn't sourced.
There is no "criticism" of the show because I could not find any references for such a thing. Had I done so, I would have included it.
Most of the technical and production information comes from the IMDb; the "fansites" simply provide plot and character details. This is a better references than simply using the show itself as a source, as would have most likely happened otherwise.
Oh, please. The article has been edited a few times in the past week or two, but it's perfectly "stable". The changes are either minor or simply the addition of undisputed content.

--SB | T 01:07, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This is not up for discussion. If you disagree with my assessment, then request a review or renominate it. I recommend you reread the criteria for good article status, and read Wikipedia:Citing sources. Chuchunezumi 02:58, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're missing the point. Instead of weaseling your way out of this after I pointed out the flaws in your logic and the outright lies in your statement, why don't you defend your assessment? --SB | T 03:40, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I find it quite appalling that you would make accusations of copyright infringement without even providing evidence, and then refusing to back it up. jgp ^T_C 03:44, 31 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]