It's not stringent for the purpose of promotion, but can't the two articles be created for Hasegawa and Oguro? Even a few lines would be fine. They are definitely encyclopedic because they have participated in and written successful and relevant works beyond Utena.
I'll look into seeing if I can't make at least stub articles for them both.
I would suggest adding a summary of the Reception section in the lead.
Done.
I know what gyaru are, but can you make it more explicit by explaining it?
I'm not sure how to best approach this one. I don't think gyaru in this context requires any more explanation than "a boisterous woman", but that just seems repetitious with the context the quote already gives.
I would suggest explaining who said "influenced by idiosyncrasies."
Done
I would avoid explicit references to other sections, such as "See Soundtrack and music below."
Done.
"Saito ultimately expressed an affirmative position on how the series presented the relationship between the characters." Can you explain further? I'm not sure I understand.
That she ultimately has spoken positively of the decision to depict them as a couple; I've rephrased the section.
Soukatsu shite. Can you add the Japanese text with the Nihongo template and translation?
Perhaps capitalization for "for western audiences" would be better?
Done.
Perhaps "Animerica described" is better than "Animerica characterized."
Done.
"patcicipating." Probably a typo.
Done.
Ikuhara's comment in Reception seems superfluous to me.
I disagree; a creator specifically acknowledging that a series continues to have a following two decades-plus after its release specifically because of its LGBT fans feels relevant to a section on its impact and legacy.
I would suggest moving the content regarding Evangelion to the Themes section, perhaps creating a separate subsection.
Giving it its own section under Themes feels like it would be
WP:UNDUE to me, but I'm not sure the paragraph makes sense anywhere other than under Reception.
@
Morgan695: That's all I can find. The rest seems to me to be not only from GA, but perhaps also from FA. As a long-time Utena fan somewhat upset by the anime's poor recognition on Wikipedia and elsewhere, I am pleased. Great job.
TeenAngels1234 (
talk) 20:43, 25 February 2023 (UTC)reply
Brief summa. The entire article is verifiable and full of reliable sources. The prose is excellent, like an AF. Exposition practically flawless. Editing was timely and appropriate. Great job.--
TeenAngels1234 (
talk) 17:55, 26 February 2023 (UTC)reply