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.
First off there appears to be a reliance on primary sources for large segments of the article, and the way they are phrased suggest that it is original research. (The most obvious examples of this are in
Sailor Jupiter, where "However, unlike these delinquent girls, her curly hair is natural." is cited to "In her first manga appearance, a teacher questions her about her hair."
Finally, I do not feel that these articles meet the "broadness" criteria, in that it does not address a main aspect of each character; the reception. The only sources in all four articles are to fan polls, which are highly unreliable given we know nothing about them and do not even prove the notability of each character. This is a serious hole in coverage, and given the above issues combined, I am boldly delisting all four. Remember that you can renominate the articles at
WP:GAN any time you feel it meets criteria, but I would strongly urge you to trim the article's in-universe content and add more secondary sources first. Thanks,
Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs (
talk)23:34, 8 October 2009 (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.