Wikipedia:Good article reassessment/Spirited Away/1

Spirited Away

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 • Watch article reassessment page • Most recent review

Result: Issues remain. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:53, 30 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been considering this nomination for a while. This is a 2013 promotion that underwent a peer review in 2016. My most pressing concern is the failure of criterion 2b (reliable sources), with multiple self-published sources, primary sources, and other problematic material used. I've added inline or banner tags for all of these issues (though some of these have gone unresolved for over a year). I also doubt the article clears criterion 3a (addresses main aspects) with the number of high-quality scholarly sources left unused in § Further reading. Delist. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 23:18, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Having worked as one of the major contributors to the article, I've also notified the relevant WikiProjects of this reassessment. Lord Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 23:49, 16 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

i concur, i'm surprised that the article doesn't even source napier's anime from akira to howl's moving castle. i see sources from travel websites and amazon (twice), and it seems as though the accolades section has been flagged as requiring attention for over a year. unless all of these issues are fixed quickly, i (regrettably) call to delist. Plifal (talk) 11:30, 26 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I don't see how this article can claim to meet current {{Good article}} standards when the Awards/Accolades table is not properly referenced. WP:VERIFY is fundamental. Unless there is an editor actively working to fix it soon then the article should be downgraded for failing to meet the necessary standard. -- 109.76.129.14 (talk) 18:06, 2 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Impressive cleanup, thanks. (I would also recommend removing any Navbox for any awards that are no longer mentioned directly on this page. Relevance matters, WP:INDISCRIMINATE and WP:NAVBOX "The subject of the template should be mentioned in every article.") -- 109.77.194.73 (talk) 17:00, 5 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your work on § Accolades, EzrealChen! That section is now in much better shape. For the purposes of this reassessment, however, my !vote stays the same due to the other issues I mentioned in my nomination statement. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 00:42, 4 March 2025 (UTC)[reply]

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.