Jump to content

Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Raichu/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The following is an archived discussion of a featured article nomination. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the article's talk page or in Wikipedia talk:Featured article candidates. No further edits should be made to this page.

The article was promoted by Gog the Mild via FACBot (talk) 27 August 2024 [1].

Raichu

[edit]
Nominator(s): Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

This article is about a fictional species in the Pokémon media franchise, the evolution of mascot Pikachu. The article discusses the character's design and appearances, as well as reception in the context of it as its own species and in relation to Pikachu from both audience perception and company handling of the character.

The article passed GAN in January of this year, and underwent a peer review in April, with feedback from both worked into the article. Additional discussions to refine sections have also taken place on the video game character task force to help get consensus on how to approach commonly used terminology and help a reader unfamiliar with the franchise or gaming understand them. One point of issue may be the use of a ScreenRant source in the reception section, however this source is being used strictly for the author Niki Fakhoori's opinion, and they have a long history in gaming journalism for outlets such as Prima Games and RPGFan as illustrated here (the latter of which recognized as a reliable source by the Wikipdia Video Game project).

I hope this article meets FAC standards, and will be receptive to quickly fix any issues or concerns that may arise.Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:31, 30 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Pokelego999

[edit]

I don't normally look at FANs but given that this is within my main subject area, I thought I'd stop by and leave some comments.

-"Sugimori asked Nishida to design the form, who gave it a "soft and fluffy" appearance. Nishida felt that Raichu's original design was far cuter than people gave it credit for, and wanted to express this in the Alolan form" The wording feels a bit informal here, and I feel this could be better worded.

Reworded for better flow.

-What are Types? (Electric and Psychic) and what do they do? For those unfamiliar with Pokémon this aspect isn't very well-defined.

Added a definition to the opening paragraph explaining this.

-I'd define what an ability is (Clarify it with something like "an in-battle special ability or something like that) for those unaware of in-game terminology

Fixed.

-I'd also clarify what Electric Terrain is, given it isn't clarified what that is.

Fixed,

-"First found in Pokémon Red and Blue, they have appeared in most Pokémon titles since, including every major game." This statement seems to be unsourced.

Reused the Ode to Raichu reference here as he mentions capturing it in every game.

-"and another Pikachu must be obtained instead." I'd reword this to also mention "...must be obtained instead in order to obtain Raichu" or something like that

Reworded

-I'd clarify "the games" Pokémon Sun and Moon in the prose in the Appearances section

Fixed

-I'm not sure how necessary "due to the latter evolving his as quickly as possible" is in the article's context.

Reworded

-I'd utilize a source that isn't Comicbook.com for cite 27 (Verifying Goh's Raichu) given that site is inconclusive in terms of reliability and tends to have low quality articles.

Sadly this is the best source for that matter, as all others omit details. The anime at this point is not heavily discussed in sources and ComicBook.com offered the best material for this matter.

-How reliable are "Visual Entertainment Plandas" and "Gung Ho Bookings"?

Both are the booking companies of their respective talents, and while still primary sources the alternative would have been to cite episode credits directly for Japan or Ms. Mongillo's Twitter, which per the previous FAC attempt was frowned upon. Most voice work in the anime are often either difficult to find secondary credits for or uncredited entirely in the English end.

-"or ending up not using them at all" I'd just change this to "end" for grammatical reasons

Fixed

-"and expressing his confusion at the reaction." I'm very confused as to what this is supposed to mean.

Reworded

-I feel the Comicbook.com source in the Reception isn't really adding much. I know there's other small sources used, but these at least have a reason to be used. The Comicbook.com source just feels unnecessary.

While it's lighter it's used as a glue for that whole paragraph as it helps offer another reaction to how the fandom and company have treated the character. I feel removing this would undermine that paragraph and an idea of how the character was received in that regard overall as the series progressed.

-" to Ash's idealized childlike state instead of maturing in Pikachu's refusal to evolve into Raichu and how this displayed that they drew power from their younger states respectively." I'd cut the "instead of maturing" here because this sentence is very hard to comprehend otherwise.

Fixed.

-The LGBTQ+ source is honestly really cool, but it only mentions Raichu once and is a small part of the article. I'm not sure if this counts as significant coverage in the scope of a FA.

I feel strongly it helps bring a different enough viewpoint to the relation between the two and is significant enough to keep. While smaller sources on their own may not be ideal, they can help cement larger opinions and give the reader a more thorough perspective on how a relationship between two fictional characters can be seen.

-I think this article has potential but does need some work. Fantastic job overall, but do let me know your thoughts on the above or if you need any clarification, since this article still needs some improvements before I'll give my Support vote. (I believe that's how this works? Do correct me if I'm wrong since I'm not as familiar with FA voting.) Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 01:48, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Pokelego999: I believe I have addressed all your concerns.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:26, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Kung Fu Man thank you for addressing the above concerns. I don't believe I have many concerns regarding the sources above per your explanations, and your fixes are very good. Happy to Support this for FA. Has one ever considered Magneton? Pokelego999 (talk) 03:28, 31 July 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from the Night Watch

[edit]

I'm traveling right now but I think I'll be able to get some comments up within the next week or so. Haven't looked at Pokémon in a long while but this might be a good start. The Night Watch (talk) 08:40, 1 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Just know that the review is still forthcoming, I'm just not feeling the best. May take a few more days The Night Watch (talk) 22:28, 7 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support from Hurricanehink

[edit]

I figured I'd review this, since I noticed this FAC when I nominated my own FAC.

  • "concepts of self-identity and portrayals of youth in anime media" - I feel like one of these could get a wikilink
  • Wikilinked self-identity, portrayals of youth may be too broad to pinpoint to any one wikipedia article I fear.
  • "the Japanese franchise began in the 1990s with the release of the video games Pokémon Red and Blue for the Game Boy" - I feel like I need to be pedantic and point out that it was called Red and Green in Japan. I think you should mention the exact year the first game was released, since you mention that in the infobox, and otherwise there's no reference for when Raichu made its first appearance. And then you could also say, it was re-released in North America as Pokemon Red and Blue. Maybe even having a note that for consistency sake, they are referred as Red and Blue? I don't want to belabor the point too much, but the remakes were FireRed and Leaf Green, so that lends to the originals being Red and Green. I'd just like some clarification that the article is deliberately calling them Red and Blue.
  • We've actually had some back and forths regarding this across the wikipedia community as a whole, and part of the problem is that the games themselves are listed on here as Red and Blue, causing confusion for some readers when wikilinked if Red/Green was used in the text (I think this even came up with MissingNo. back in the day but that's over a decade ago now). While we could go into more detail on it too, I feel the Keep It Simple, Stupid policy may apply here also as the exact game names bear little weight on understanding Raichu as a concept or character, and going on a tangent about it may confuse readers in this article and others (given this block is shared among multiple Pokemon character articles)
  • Well regardless of the Green/Blue, there should still be a reference and indication that the game came out in 1996. Leaving it to "the 1990s" is too vague when 1996 is a much better answer, and is what's in the infobox. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Tweaked this a bit, avoided saying "released" to bypass an earlier issue (Red and Blue were technically released in '98, that's why the whole "1990s" bit came about as seen here.
  • Also, since this is up for FAC, I have to ask, is there any literature on when the designs for the Pokemon started? Like, I know Rhydon was the first Pokemon ever created, so I wondered if there's anything about when the rest of them were made. If the first Japanese game came out in 1996, and it was apparently approved as a game in 1990 when Satoshi Tajiri pitched it. I feel like some of this should be mentioned for context, so it's not just leaving it to a vague decade long period that could have served as the origins.
  • Not really, sadly. Pokemon had a very long development period, so an exact window of when certain designs were considered or even when exactly Atsuko Nishida was brought onto the development team isn't clear. We're only now getting more of the behind the scenes as time goes on.
  • "In these games and their sequels, the player assumes the role of a Pokémon Trainer whose goal is to capture and train Pokémon." - feels redundant to say Pokemon twice, and "Trainer/train". Any way you could reword this a bit?
  • Reworded this a bit with the following sentence.
  • Pikachu evolves into Raichu through use of the game's "Thunder Stone" item,[9] while Raichu was originally planned to evolve into a Pokémon species dubbed Gorochu. - I love this factoid. I highly suggest splitting into two sentences.
  • Split into two sentences.
  • I wonder if it's worth mentioning the addition of Pichu in Gold/Silver. Raichu is the final evolution in that family, so I think that's worth mentioning.
  • The problem is Pichu came afterward, and has no real bearing on Raichu's design or vice versa, and there's no discussion about a relationship between the two. It would be especially awkward to work it in as it has no bearing on the rest of the article at all.
  • Except Pichu completes the evolutionary family. So when you mention Raichu as "Pikachu-related product lines", I have to wonder about other parts of the Pikachu line. I think it would be natural to mention Pichu after mentioning the canceled Gorachu, since that completes the evolutionary line. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Tried to work it in carefully, since Pichu's design is Sugimori's and I didn't want to throw too much at the reader.
  • "In Red and Blue the Gym Leader Lt. Surge, a Trainer that acts as a boss the player must defeat to proceed, utilizes a Raichu" - the grammar could be better
  • Reorganized, is this better?
  • " Outside of games, Raichu has appeared on several pieces of merchandise, including plush toys, figurines, and as promotional material with companies such as Burger King." - could you go more into this? I think this is the most significant proof that Raichu is indeed fairly notable, independent of its relationship to Pikachu. I have been on Wikipedia long enough to remember when there was an article for every Pokemon, until there wasn't, and only certain ones were important enough for an article. Given all of the sources and analyses about Raichu, there is probably enough here, but expanding on the sentence I mentioned would really help prove that.
  • I expanded this a bit with some references noting how Raichu's been part of Pikachu-themed product lines, I'm hoping that suffices for this. There was some commentary about it being part of the Year of the Rat promotion in 2019, but the only source I could find to corroborate that was Nintendo Soup which isn't a reliable source per WP:VG/S.

And that's my review. I didn't get into checking out the sources or images. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 20:02, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Hurricanehink: Hit everything I could and addressed the others the best I could, let me know if there's anything else.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:15, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks, much better already, just two follow ups, if you don't mind. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:05, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Hurricanehink:Addressed it the best I could, lemme know what you think!--Kung Fu Man (talk) 22:53, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Support, yes thank you! Happy to support this now. ♫ Hurricanehink (talk) 22:58, 11 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Sammi Brie

[edit]
  • First introduced in the video games Pokémon Red and Blue, they were created by Atsuko Nishida at the request of lead designer Ken Sugimori, with the design finalized by Sugimori. Since their initial appearance, they have appeared in multiple games The lead is inconsistent as to the use of "it" vs. "they".
  • Electric and Psychic-type Try "Electric- and Psychic-type" as both items are hyphenated.
  • "look strong." MOS:LOGICAL the quote of a sentence fragment should have period outside quotes. This also recurs in the Critical reception area multiple times with commas and periods.
  • they had previous explored missing "ly"
  • Both have appeared in the mobile game Pokémon Go, and, in physical media, were in The number of commas obscures that the one after "Go" must go. It is a WP:CINS error, as the subject is the same on both sides: "Both". Try Both have appeared in the mobile game Pokémon Go and, in physical media, were in
  • series of articles arguing that Raichu was "loved by many and despised by more," an This comma is unnecessary
  • that evolving Pikachu would be a disadvantage, or, in some titles, prevent Pikachu Remove comma after "disadvantage"
  • was treated with less recognition, and added Should be was treated with less recognition and added,
  • He argued that Raichu was simply a stronger counterpart to Pikachu, and felt Raichu Remove comma

Very solidly written. The they vs. it dichotomy, especially given that like every other Pokémon the singular is the plural, is a bit tough to square up. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 16:50, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

I do have an FAC open myself for your consideration if you wish to review. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 16:57, 18 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
@Sammi Brie: sorry for the delay in responding but got everything done, let me know if there's anything else! As for the FAC, I'll take a gander, though I'll admit radio stations tend to be a bit outside my scope of expertise.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:58, 20 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Hi Sammi, how is this looking now? Gog the Mild (talk) 18:59, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for the ping. Happy to Support. Sammi Brie (she/her • t • c) 06:35, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Source review

[edit]

I know next to nothing about these sources (quite aside from language barriers) so I'll lean heavily on Wikipedia:WikiProject Video games/Sources. What makes https://www.yomiuri.co.jp/fukayomi/20180501-OYT8T50139/ a reliable source/translation? Same question about plandas, Gung Ho Bookings, Pocket Games, The Gamer, Woman.excite, PokemonCenter Online, Kakaku and ComicBook.com. Some archives, like #5, seem to be broken - all needs checking. It seems like formatting is consistent. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 17:38, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • The Yomiuri Shimbun is a major newspaper in Japan. The interview was translated by Nintendo for their Pokemon website, which was the original citation until primary source concerns were raised.
  • Plandas and Gung Ho Bookings are the respective talent agencies for their voice actors. It's the only available source to attribute them short of citing the episode credits itself for the Japanese voice actor and tweets by the North American VA (unlike Japan the English VAs are not credited in the episodes). This was considered a preferable alternative to those sources in the first FAC, as direct citations were seen as too primary.
  • Pocket Games is a printed sub publication magazine by the Electronic Gaming Monthly team. It was released seasonally in the late '90's/early 2000's.
  • The Gamer is a long standing news website that, while owned by Valnet, has been recognized by the Video Game project as viable for verification and in cases where the author's opinion meets WP:SIGCOV the author's opinion. In the case of the latter with reference 38, Isaiah McCall is a longtime freelance writer with a variety of publications and went to Ramapo College of New Jersey and is a Communication Arts major with a concentration in Journalism according to his bio on the Gamer.
  • Excite is one of the world's largest web portals, with Woman.excite being a sub website of the main Excite hub. It is cited here strictly for secondary confirmation of the existence of these products. I've now wikilinked the reference.
  • PokemonCenter Online is a primary source cited here because there was not a secondary source that could confirm information to the same degree. It is owned and operated by Nintendo.
  • Kakaku.com is a longstanding price comparison company in Japan that started in 1997, and is cited here strictly for secondary confirmation of the existence of those products. I've now wikilinked the reference and fixed the website name.
  • ComicBook.com is a longstanding website with editorial oversight that is part of Paramount Global. They have been cited in multiple articles across wikipedia. The article in question is cited strictly for the author's opinion, who has a degree in Journalism and has written for multiple publications.
  • Fixed the reference error in #5, it appears to be an isolated case due to a bad copy/paste.
@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I've gone through and fixed everything that needed to be, and added verification/justification for each source brought up. Please let me know if there's anything else!--Kung Fu Man (talk) 20:34, 21 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I must confess that I don't think the information sourced to Plandas and Gung Ho Bookings requires a secondary source, it ain't analysis, evaluation, interpretation, or synthesis. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:44, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
I agree, but crediting the people directly was a big issue raised during the first failed FAC, so I'm hoping better safe than sorry here.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:47, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Spot-check of this source:

  • 1 Using Google Translate, I don't see "cartridge" and the squirrel paragraph is a bit hard too.
  • From the Pokemon website translation, Cartridge: "Nishino: “There was also a problem in terms of the size of the game data. We had to save space by taking Pokémon originally designed to evolve twice and making them evolve only once. Pikachu was not one of the first three Pokémon, so it was an easy target for this kind of reduction.” ROM space may be slightly more accurate, but could also be more confusing to a casual reader.
  • Squirrel: "Nishida: “I didn’t draw an illustration on paper, but went straight to the computer screen and punched in the dots. Using dots to create the face of this dumpling-shaped creature with no definition between its head and body! At the time, I was obsessed with squirrels. I didn’t own a squirrel, but I wanted to because I thought its movement was comical. It was here that I was inspired to make Pikachu store electricity in its cheek pouches. When hamsters store food, their entire body puffs up, but with squirrels, it’s just their cheeks.”
  • 3 Can't read this one.
  • Kei Shindō (真堂圭) is credited at the block of text starting with 【出演声優１】
  • 6 OK
  • 7 Can I have a copy of this page?
  • The book used to be more readily available on Archive.org, but has since been limited.
  • 8 Can I have a copy of this page?
  • 12 OK
  • 14 Can I have a copy of this page?
  • 16 OK but where does it say new psychic?
  • "We're absolutely loving the new Electric/Psychic Alolan Raichu though, and think it fits in perfectly with the Hawaiian theme of Pokémon Sun and Moon."
  • 17 More a question about the source: Is Niki Fakhoori a prominent commenter? Also, where does it say that the company has an emphasis on Pikachu?
  • Regarding the first part not sure the issue there, she's written editorials for the sites mentioned above and extensively. Not saying she's on par with Jason Schreier by any means but the existence of editorial oversight on the site and her credentials should hopefully suffice. Regarding the second, replaced emphasis with focus, as it's more neutral and summarizes the statements in the article's beginning paragraphs better.
    When it comes to reviews and comments, I tend to grade sources by their prominence. A prominent reviewer is a higher-quality source on a work of fiction than an obscure one, certainly under WP:DUE considerations. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 10:25, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • 18 Can I have a copy of this page?
  • This was on Archive.org but has been since removed. It's one of the harder books to hunt down when it gets scanned.
  • 20 Where is the Boss thing explained?
  • It's inferred, but I could add this from Game Rant as a secondary source there to confirm if needed. I do feel The Gamer's text makes it clear the role of Gym Leaders in the game though as bosses, and I'm wary about adding more Valnet sources to the page given the (slightly founded) bias against them.
  • 21 Can I have a copy of this page?
  • 22 You know, I didn't think that "Pokémon Sun and Moon" were 2 separate games. Assuming that they are set on Alola and only on Alola, then it fits.
  • 24 Supports part of the information.
  • 25 OK
  • 27 Can I have a copy of this page?
  • 30 Supports part of the information.
  • 33 Where does it say that the anime presentation was inspired by memes?
  • Reworded that slightly as it feels I might've read that incorrectly when citing it.
  • 37 OK
  • 41 Can I have a copy of this page?

Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:28, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Aoba47

[edit]
  • For this part, (Since Raichu's initial appearance, it has appeared in multiple games), I would avoid the repetition of appearance / appeared.
  • Fixed, replaced initial appearance with debut.
  • I was initially surprised by this part in the lead, (a large brown mouse), as I see Raichu as being more orange than brown. The article describes Raichu as having orange skin with brown paws so I would think that makes him more orange than brown?
  • Fixed.
  • I would avoid repetition in the following sentence if possible: (Designed to be the stronger counterpart to Pikachu, who evolves into Raichu through use the of a "Thunder Stone" item, Raichu was intended to be able to evolve into 'Gorochu' before the latter was removed.) I am specifically referring to Raichu and a variation of evolve being used twice.
  • Not really a clean way I can see to fix that, as evolve tends to be a rather fixed term in the pokemon franchise.
  • This could just be me over-thinking things, but I am uncertain about the word "reputation" in this part, (and overall damaged its reputation). I just do not really think of "reputation" in this context, and I would consider something like "appeal" to be better.
  • Replaced, though the term is based off its reception. I can see why on its own it feels amiss.
  • Thank you for the response. Just to be clear, I could just be over-thinking it so I would be okay if you decide to change it back. It was just something that caught my eye for some reason, but like I said above, it could just be a case of me over-thinking it. Aoba47 (talk) 15:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • For this part, (Raichu is a species of fictional creature called Pokémon), shouldn't it be "a species of fictional creatures" instead? Something about the singular in the current version seems off to me, but I could be wrong.
  • Replaced with creatures after some digging online. I was unsure if it should be singular or plural in that case as we're discussing one species, but it seems the terminology is more often plural for the creatures part in similar sentences elsewhere.
  • Do we have any further context on why Satoshi Tajiri changed Pikachu / Raichu from squirrels to mice? I understand if there is not any further information, but I was just curious.
  • We do not unfortunately. A lot of information was kept pretty close to the chest for a long time when it came to Pokemon development. For a long time many articles on here even said Tajiri made most of the Pokemon because that was the common assumption in media due to a lack of info.
  • This part, (When developing sequel titles Pokémon Sun and Moon, "Alolan form" variants), is grammatically incorrect as it literally reads that these variants are the ones developing the games. I would instead use something like "During the development of sequel titles Pokémon Sun and Moon" to avoid this mismatch.
  • Fixed.
  • Since the special ability for the Alolan form is mentioned (i.e. "Surge Surfer"), shouldn't the special ability for the original form be mentioned as well? Or is this not done as this ability is not discussed in third-party sources? If that is the case, then I understand, but I was just curious about it.
  • I haven't found it discussed in third party sources in the same manner. I think Surge Surfer's standing out is in part due to it being unique to Alolan Raichu while the others are more generic abilities shared by others.
  • Is there any information about Raichu's appearances in manga that are not about Ash Ketchum?
  • The Japanese citations should have English translations for the titles.
  • Fixed, did the French book title too!
  • It's just more an oversight on my part due to not knowing which of these have an article given that some do not (for example TheGamer doesn't, despite being a more prominent part of Valnet ironically)

I hope that this review is helpful so far. I have left comments on the citations and on the article up to the "Critical reception" section. I will continue after everything has been addressed so far. I am enjoying the article so far. Hopefully, this FAC will lead to more Pokémon and more video game characters in general being nominated for FACs in the future. Best of luck with this FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 22:03, 22 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for addressing everything so far. I will start looking at the rest of the article later today and post the rest of my comments then. I did notice that the question about Raichu's appearances in non-Ash Ketch-related manga was not answered. It could be the case that they were not covered in third-party, reliable sources (or Raichu may not have any importance or major role in those manga), but I just wanted to double check. I am always happy to help (or at least try to help). Aoba47 (talk) 15:38, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • Missed that bit but yeah it's an issue of not being covered by third party sources and not having a significant role.
  • I would avoid the "with X verb-ing" sentence construction as shown in this part (with IGN in their "Pokémon of the Day Chick" series of articles arguing). I do not have a strong opinion about it, but I do not know that it is brought up quite often in FACs so it would be best to avoid it.
  • Tried to fix this somewhat to make things smoother.
  • This part, (Later articles, such as Nintendo Life's retrospective of Pokémon from Red and Blue,), mentions that multiple articles, but only cites one in the actual paragraph.
  • Reworded this.
  • I am a bit confused by the overall structure for the first three paragraphs. The last two paragraphs have a clearer topic (i.e. different views on Raichu and the reception for the Alolan form), but could you explain to me how the first three paragraphs are structured? WP:RECEPTION is a great resource as these sections are notoriously difficult to write well.
  • The first paragraph is to cover initial reactions compared to a significant later one, while the second leads into Kenneth Shepard's multiple articles in support of Raichu and his view that the company mishandled the species. The third shows others than Shepard offering similiar views to support the second paragraph, while the fourth is regarding discussions about the species' themes as presented in media. The last paragraph is for reactions for the Alolan version, and how it was received by others including Shepard.
  • I would avoid "Meanwhile" as a transition as done in this part, (Meanwhile, Kenneth Shephard of Kotaku criticized). This transition is used to say something is happening at the same time as something else, and that is not the case here. I have the same comment for this part, (Meanwhile, journalist Nicole Hill).
  • Fixed.
  • I have a clarification question about this part, (or, in some titles, prevent Pikachu from evolving at all). I have only played a few Pokémon games, and I know that Pikachu refuses to evolve in Pokémon Yellow but what are the other games where this occurs? To be clear, I am not saying that the titles need to be explicitly stated in the article. This is just more so because I am curious about it.
  • Let's Go Pikachu is another title where the Pikachu you get at the start cannot be evolved in Raichu in-game and requires the player to trade another pokemon to it.
  • For this part, (In an article for Fanbyte, he further explained), I would use Shephard rather than "he" to avoid any confusion as it has been a bit since Kenneth Shephard was mentioned in the prose at that point in the paragraph.
  • Fixed
  • I would revise this part, (such as the book La Culture de l'Enfance à l'Heure de la Mondialisation, which compared it to the story of David and Goliath), as whoever wrote the book made these comparisons, not the book itself.
  • Fixed.
  • I made a small edit to this part. I removed the university part as I do not think it is particularly beneficial when that can and likely will change for professors. I changed "Social Sciences" to "social sciences" as I do not think this is a proper noun and does not need to be capitalized in that way. Aoba47 (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
  • This could just be a matter of personal preference, but I have a comment on this part, (Gina O'Melia in the book Japanese Influence on American Children's Television drew). I personally think it is more beneficial to use some sort of descriptor for these individuals to highlight their expertise rather than naming the book in the prose itself (unless the book is notable).
  • Fixed.
  • This following sentence would need to be revised as it is coming across like Wikipedia is saying this: (Despite praising the design on its own aspects, the form came across as a reminder that "if Raichu is to get any spotlight", it would be "as a kind of canvas" for new ideas instead.)
  • Fixed
  • This is more of a clarification question, but did any of the coverage mention any of the more positive representations of Raichu in the anime? I have a feeling that is not the case, but I wanted to double-check with you. It is a shame that Stage Fright! was banned for its usage of Jynx as it would have been a more positive usage of Raichu in the original series.
  • Not that I was able to find sadly. Outside of certain standout episodes a lot of the show itself didn't get deep dives into character handling.

This should be all of my comments for the "Reception" section. Once everything has been addressed, I will look through the article a few more times to make sure that I have not missed anything. I hope you are having a great start to your weekend! Aoba47 (talk) 16:15, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Aoba47: I've got to head back to work on my end, but I tried to address everything you mentioned. Let me know if you notice any other issues and I'll get them done when I get home tonight!--Kung Fu Man (talk) 21:26, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for addressing everything. I will look through the article again tomorrow if that is okay. I hope you are doing well with work. Aoba47 (talk) 21:50, 23 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you for your patience. I have read through the article again, and I do not see anything further for me to point out in my comments. I support this FAC for promotion based on the prose. Best of luck with the FAC! Aoba47 (talk) 20:12, 24 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Image review

[edit]

File:Raichu.png might need a bit more explanation of how it fits WP:NFCC#8; "showcasing" an image isn't really a valid reason. File:Pokemon Raichu Alolan Art.png, I kinda wonder what the image is of - preliminary sketches of the character? Might also want to say why the images at commons:Category:Raichu (one of which seems nongermane, anyway...) can't replace these. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 15:25, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Jo-Jo Eumerus: I've adjusted both, using terminology based off those used in the images for Jill Valentine, a Featured character article, and your own suggestions. Is this sufficient?--Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:45, 26 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]
Seems like. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk) 08:05, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Drive-by cooments

[edit]
  • References: article titles should consistently be in title case, regardless of how they appear in their original.
  • Fixed
  • The IPA spelling should be inside the same parentheses as the Japanese characters. And separated by a semi colon.)
  • Fixed. I think. This is a bit newer for me.
  • "Classified as an Electric-type Pokémon". Why the upper-case E?
  • Typing is treated as a proper noun in the games and capitalized. Even in the development article it's capitalized.
  • "later examinations have been more favorable, showing preference for its design.". "examinations", what is being examined? "showing preference", preference over what?
  • Rewritten, should be better.

Gog the Mild (talk) 18:47, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]

@Gog the Mild: Should be all fixed.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:07, 27 August 2024 (UTC)[reply]


The above discussion is preserved as an archive. Please do not modify it. No further edits should be made to this page.
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Featured_article_candidates/Raichu/archive2&oldid=1242651415"