Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Madlax

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 02:07, 1 June 2007.

[edit] Madlax

This one has been sitting on the FAC a while. I'd like to get some fresh eyes on it (Old nom) Raul654 17:28, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support — A very good piece of writing. Excellent article. (Ibaranoff24 17:18, 26 May 2007 (UTC))
• Comment. I've made a few minor adjustments, but notably tackled the themes section a bit. I commented out the section on Elenore's loyalty for now; while that's certainly a plot element, I'm unsure if that's really a "theme" so to speak, and the ref'ed review also takes it pretty factually. Also, I removed the qualifier about "Although Madlax does not depict obvious lesbian relationships;" it's possible my recollection is faulty, but since at least "relationship" as in "one night stand" is so strongly implied in at least one episode (Specifically, Vanessa/Madlax while one and/or both is insane around ep. 14 or so?) that saying "not obvious" is misleading. It's not confirmed, yes, but it's there. (Feel free to correct me if I'm off base?)

Also, question. ADV Films is sometimes italicized in this article, sometimes not. My understanding is that companies doesn't have to be italicized as per MoS:T, but I didn't make any changes yet (maybe it means it as in "The ADV Films release" which could maybe be italicized?). Someone else want to comment? SnowFire 06:40, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

I had my doubts about the loyalty part myself but decided to let a more objective reader judge its relevance... I fixed the ref you've blanked by commenting the section out. :) And you are right about the lesbian part, though "obvious" in this context meant hardcore yuri-hentai sort of depiction. ^^ As for the ADV Films, AFAIK it shouldn't be italicized anywhere, meaning that I probably overlooked several instances of it during cleanup... --Koveras ^☭ 08:50, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

Mm. I think "explicit" is the word you're looking for. Anyway, I went through and tried to phrase parts of the lead better as suggested beforehand as well as taking out the somewhat misleading statement about "factions" I complained of earlier on the talk page. Unfortunately, the current phrasing doesn't really allow for a logical spot to mention the mystery/psychological thriller genre elements. It is listed in the infobox on the side, but that would be nice to add back in, if someone can figure out a way that doesn't add to the current slightly longish length.

I'm still not a huge fan of the entire first paragraph of the themes section, though I still more blame the show more than the article (it would probably not be NPOV to say "There are none! This show is ridiculous!"). I gave it a bit of a runthrough; comments welcome. My edit unfortunately removed the bit about "one critic who ironically defined as "pseudo-existentialistic" (Margaret yabbering about good and evil) due to the cited reviewer talking more about the last episodes as a group, not Margaret's particular conclusion, but any chance to slip that comment back in would be good and help be a NPOV and cited phrasing of "this show, especially the last few episodes, is amazingly pretentious." I may work up my courage and attempt to watch the final episode again to see if I can do any further tweaking.

Aside from that first paragraph of the themes section (which is a tricky issue), the rest of the article looks fine. SnowFire 02:22, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Sorry to bring this up (as it doesn't concern only or primarily you), but could you please be a bit more careful with the refs? ^^ When you delete a ref in one section, it's blanked in all. %) As for your edits, I'll try to get the deleted bits you mentioned back in... --Koveras ^☭ 07:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Heh, sorry about that. I really was checking after missing that one before, but apparently still missed that one. SnowFire 16:31, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support

I feel the article is well written with a lot of good information regarding the series it all it's context. Regarding theme, I can see that it's tricky could you potentially say something to the extent: The theme is fairly difficult to mark out or something like that. Obviously Madlax isn't a very black and white Anime when it comes to theme, other than war and the concept of good and evil. But I'm sure Human nature still could be considered a theme element. --67.177.36.225 03:10, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. :) However, statements like "the topic is quite difficult" are so not liked by the editors here unless there are three external sources that state that verbatim. ^^ I, too, think that Madlax is extremely complex and rich on themes but, alas, I'm still working on putting everything together in one big bad article somewhere out there... --Koveras ^☭ 07:14, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

• Support - I did some rewording on the second and last paragraphs of "Themes". I think they read better now; comments welcome. I also removed and/or rephrased all the weasel content I found (SnowFire already did most of the work though). Other than that the article looks good to me and I believe it deserves its star.Kazu-kun 07:09, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

The above discussion is preserved as an archive. 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.