Talk:Weaving a Story

Weaving a Story has been listed as one of the Media and drama good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: May 14, 2023. (Reviewed version).

Anime and manga: Evangelion Low‑importance

	Anime and manga portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Anime and manga, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of anime, manga, and related topics 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.Anime and mangaWikipedia:WikiProject Anime and mangaTemplate:WikiProject Anime and mangaanime and manga articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Evangelion work group.

Science Fiction Low‑importance

	Speculative fiction portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Science Fiction, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of science fiction 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.Science FictionWikipedia:WikiProject Science FictionTemplate:WikiProject Science Fictionscience fiction articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Television: Episode coverage 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.
	This article is supported by the Episode coverage task force.

The Soul of Eva 00

In advance: some have let this type of debate (on different shows and topics) veer into near messageboard-like conditions. While that hasn't happened yet at all, I just want to lay out that: 1-Yes, we should mention the debate surrounding Eva 00's soul and any solid evidence the show presents, in this article, rather than cutting it out entirely 2-People have been debating this for ten years, and we will officially never arrive at a definative conclusion here. No one side is "right". The point of this is just to lay all of the facts out on the table in one convenient place, better enabling other fans to draw their own conclusions. We can point out patterns and such, i.e. "everyone Eva 00 attacked was someone Naoko Akagi would have wanted to attack", but go no further. In the end, the matter will remain unsettled. We're just listing the information here. I would point to the "Do Balrogs have wings?" debate (in a sense, the "soul of Eva 00" debate is the Evangelion equivalent of that, in that fans have heavily divided opinions on it but have never come to a solid conclusion and likely never will). I do hope Rebuild or Live-Action sheds more light on this. --Vi Veri Veniversum Vivus Vici 01:36, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Weaving a Story/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Tintor2 (talk · contribs) 18:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Lead and plot seem fine
Production

To whom was the project published?
Maybe mentioning Weaving a Story's title could be fitting for the first paragraph.

Reception

Everything seems fine but was this the lowest rating so far or there was another one?

The lowest of the lowest!

That's all.Tintor2 (talk) 18:40, 10 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Tintor2: Okay, then. Done!--TeenAngels1234 (talk) 21:52, 14 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Will be reviewing this article.Tintor2 (talk) 18:18, 9 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

It is reasonably well written.
a. (prose, spelling, and grammar):

b. (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a. (reference section):

b. (citations to reliable sources):

c. (OR):

d. (copyvio and plagiarism):
It is broad in its coverage.
a. (major aspects):

b. (focused):
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a. (images are tagged and non-free content have non-free use rationales):

b. (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Overall:
Pass/fail:

(Criteria marked are unassessed)

About the unreliable sources tag

Dani Cavallaro's publications have been designated as generally unreliable sources in this discussion at the reliable sources noticeboard. Citations to her work can be replaced with more high-quality ones or removed, and the tag can be taken off once complete. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 20:06, 6 June 2024 (UTC)[reply]