# Talk:Free Collars Kingdom

Done. It is from a book cover.[1] --Nightshadow28 18:18, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

I saw you added this to the copyedit requests section and wanted to make a suggestion before you nominate it at GAC. Check a featured article (I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings is today's, so I'm using it as an example) and they will usually have book sources in a references section using {{cite book}} and citations in the form of 'Lupton, pp. 29–30' and 'Lupton, p. 64'. Follow this format and it will save space/time as well as look a lot neater.
You also don't need 'New York, United States of America' for the location. Simply 'Oxford', 'New York', 'Tokyo', etc are preferred from my experience. You can put New York City if you want to be more precise I suppose. Recognizance (talk) 21:36, 4 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the reply! I've gone through and removed quotes, but kept the style. As for that article, all of the references that say '-name-, pg #' appear to be critical essays, devoted to styles, themes, etc, of that book. Most of them link to the article/essay as well. However, thanks for the heads up. I may keep to the current style (albeit without the USA part and quote) because other GAs and FAs (as well as future GAs/FAs) in the anime/manga category that use the same. I am going to be working on a book article soon, though, and this is some pretty helpful information. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:05, 4 April 2009 (UTC)
I'm glad I was able to help particularly being a relative new comer. Part of the problem is the lack of a uniform standard to go by, but others probably see that as one of Wikipedia's strengths. Anyway, a couple of things:
"While drawing the series, Fujima noted that his art style changed, though he was originally was asked to draw it in a style he had previously used." Did his style change throughout the series or in the process of creating it? I was going to reword the sentence but was unsure which you meant. Where you expand on this in the development section, there should also be some explanation of how it changed. Ideally with a picture comparing the two styles.
In the next sentence, is the difference from his previous work referring to the stylistic differences we just mentioned or something else?
There's a lot of duplicate information in the media section and lead. Not sure what to do about it - it may be fine as-is.
The complete lack of coverage of Japanese-language reception is going to hold this back as well. I'm sure someone had to mention it in the English-speaking community, but also if you ask someone on Wikipedia, post on a forum somewhere, etc you should be able to find someone in Japan to help you. Recognizance (talk) 07:55, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
The duplication is fine, its the norm and part of WP:LEAD. The lack of Japanese-reception should also be okay. Its a sad thing, but most Japanese sources don't review manga/anime series, and those that do rarely keep archives available. Other articles have gone to GA/FA without them, so its okay (though always great if they can be found...for this series, though, highly unlikely). -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 08:01, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
As said above, the duplication and lack of Japanese reception is fine. As for the part about production, he is talking about drawing style changing. I'll make that more clear. As for a picture, this is only his second series. The first is Deus Vitae, which I don't own. We'd need a nice comparison picture between the two, clearly showing the change in style, but I'm not sure how many usable images for Deus Vitae are available. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 13:18, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
As another note, before attempting a GA on this article, please finish the plot to include the entire work - start to finish - not just apparently the first volume. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 16:38, 5 April 2009 (UTC)
Fixed, though not incredibly well (in my opinion, anyway). It's something that will need copyediting, but it gets the job done and provides all necessary information. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:59, 5 April 2009 (UTC)

I feel that this article is pretty much ready for a GAR. However, does anyone have any last thoughts on what can be improved before I bring it there? Thanks, WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 00:42, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

The lead needs tweaking. It should summarize the article, and its currently missing a summary of the reception section. Other than that, I'd say its about ready except for a copyedit (and that would be a GAN since its not currently a GA :-) ). -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:53, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I'll fix the lede now. The article has been removed from the Guild of Copyeditors list; it was copy edited and the tag was removed. Does it need another? Oh, and the serialization in Japan (thanks for adding that and the review, btw) needs dates. It was added as 2004 to 2004. I'd change it but I don't own the book :) WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 01:04, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
The new stuff added probably needs a reviewing, maybe see if the same editor could check that? Woops, will fix. Should be 02-04. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:29, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I left a request on their Talk page; if they are unable to do it (due to time constraints, etc), then I can go back to request page.
Don't hesitate to ask if you need help with this or other articles in the future. I joined the CE project to help out. Not in a condition to focus atm but I'll do it tomorrow. Gonna spend time on something mindless til I fall asleep. ;) Recognizance (talk) 07:24, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Take your time--I'm in no rush. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 13:22, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I ended up falling asleep before I got to Huggle. But to add to the above comments, I'm learning as I go along, e.g. the stuff about lead sections and coverage, so it's helpful to me too. Recognizance (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
I did another copyedit and still think some explanation of how Fujima's style changed (a picture's worth a thousand words as the saying goes) would improve the production section significantly. But if it's unavailable then it can't be helped, just like the Japanese reception. I did change 'change' to the fancier word 'evolved'.
As for the changes to the plot section, it reads well. You might double check the changes I made such as the last sentence or two where I made it say "his new family", to make sure I didn't change the intent of the original. Recognizance (talk) 19:27, 11 April 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! It looks greats. Calling it a new family sounds correct, but I think I'll change it to friends just to be safe. For comparison pictures, I'm unsure as to where I could find a nice example of his old art. The most I can find is volume covers of Deus Vitae, his first series. I believe that Free Collars Kingdom was his second, so it's the only representation that can be used. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 19:35, 11 April 2009 (UTC)
Yeah, no one can fault you for not having access to it. Go ahead and nominate the article, we'll see what they have to say. Recognizance (talk) 05:33, 12 April 2009 (UTC)
Thanks again, to both you, Recognizance, and AnmaFinotera. I'll nominate it now. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 13:16, 12 April 2009 (UTC)

This review is transcluded from Talk:Free Collars Kingdom/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.
Hello, I will be reviewing this article. Check back soon for a full review! CarpetCrawlermessage me 21:31, 17 May 2009 (UTC)


### Review by Goodraise (talk · contribs)
"Convinced Siam must be destroyed, Cyan confronts her and learns she was once a Free Collar until her brother, Puriam, was chased onto a road by humans and killed by a bus." - Consider adding a "that" after "Convinced".
Done.
Are all characters described in the first paragraph of the characters section members of the Free Collars? Please clarify.
I've added a sentence describing the Free Collars, which implies that the entire paragraph is about them (with the exception of Scottie, who is noted as not being one). A bit has also been added to the sentence, to make sure the reader knows that those characters are on the opposing side.
In "drawn as hot anthrophorphic cat-girls and cat-boys", I guess "anthrophorphic" is supposed to be "anthropomorphic". If the word is misspelled in the source, please mark it with {{sic}}.
I don't know; that review wasn't added by me. I don't have the book, so I'll ask AnmaFinotera if it was a spelling mistake or a typo in the book.
"and praises it for having a unique twist" - This is rather vague. If the source uses the words "unique twist", consider placing them in quotation marks.
Again, I don't have the book. I'll also bring this up.
That was purely my typo. I've fixed that and added the missing quotes for "unique twist". -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 00:39, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Polley, Dan. "Free Collars Kingdom v2". Manga Life. Retrieved 2009-01-18. - This reference is missing a publisher. Also, what makes it a reliable source?
Fixed the publisher bit. The site is an "offshoot" of Silver Bullet Comics, and has a team of reviewers. People who work with the site include columnist writers, editors, writers, professional comics writers, and others; this is explained here. Also, they have an article in the "featured" section written by Alethea and Athena Nibley, who have translated such works as Saiyuki and Fruits Basket among others. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
Are you saying that Manga Life is reliable because it's an offshot of Silver Bullet Comics? If so, what makes Silver Bullet Comics a reliable source? Nothing else you said makes Manga Life reliable. If you are unsure how to respond to this comment, this signpost provides advice. Goodraise 01:40, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
It has a limited set of contributers, most of whom are experts in the field of comics and manga and it has been used as quotes/sources by other publications, including Publisher's Weekly. -- AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) 02:24, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
AnmaFinotera's assurance that the website is quoted/sourced "by other publications, including Publisher's Weekly" as well as the cited statements at Comics Bulletin#Awards and Comics Bulletin#Acknowledgements have convinced me that Comics Bulletin and Manga Life (as its "offshot") are reliable for statements of opinion. Goodraise 06:28, 22 May 2009 (UTC)
Goodraise 22:16, 21 May 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the input! WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 23:37, 21 May 2009 (UTC)
WP:GAN suggests "giving an overview of how you believe [the article] fulfills the Good article criteria". In this case I don't know how to do that. There are no close calls. I checked the article for all of the criteria and it solidly meets them; hence I'm promoting it to GA-status. Goodraise 07:30, 22 May 2009 (UTC)

Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified 6 external links on Free Collars Kingdom. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.randomhouse.co.uk/tanoshimi/book.htm?command=Search&db=%2Fcatalog%2Fmain.txt&eqisbndata=0099506866
Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.starcomics.it/acquista.php?testata=12&start=40
Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6ATxjdq7X?url=http://www.mania.com/collars-kingdom-vol-01_article_82915.html to http://www.mania.com/collars-kingdom-vol-01_article_82915.html
Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6ATxlJwZp?url=http://www.mania.com/collars-kingdom-vol-02_article_83169.html to http://www.mania.com/collars-kingdom-vol-02_article_83169.html
Added archive https://www.webcitation.org/6ATxmAr6P?url=http://www.mania.com/collars-kingdom-vol-03_article_83158.html to http://www.mania.com/collars-kingdom-vol-03_article_83158.html
Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20111113172205/http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6495399.html?industryid=47069&q=Free+Collars+Kingdom to http://www.schoollibraryjournal.com/article/CA6495399.html?industryid=47069&q=Free+Collars+Kingdom
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.
Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 13:31, 7 October 2017 (UTC)