Some suggestions for improvement[edit]

I see that this article underwent a peer review recently and I hadn't noticed. Some things I would suggest doing are if you can find music video information it would be good to add that. Also collaborative work, (which I don't believe I've heard of her doing) would be good to take note of. I have come across a few interviews that's she done in my attempts to make a proper article on a single she's done, and in those there are fleeting amounts of music video information. If she does radio shows or talk shows, then that would be good to include, but I'm unsure of what you'd find there. A good way to find information is searching under the anime series she's worked for rather than under Kawada Mami herself. I do believe there might be some artist talks like they do with seiyuus on drama cds or radio shows.

Also one completely wild idea is that she, like probably every other I've singers, has only two composers for her music and it might be possible to make some comments about that. Personally I've always liked one of the composers more than the other. As of now it's just kinda a mystery as to what she does other than occasionaly compose anime theme music and then that other stuff that make up her ablum, to put it bluntly. AngelFire3423 (talk) 06:14, 29 September 2012 (UTC)[reply]

As requested, here are some interviews. Really any search with 川田まみ インタビュー will lead to good results. You can also include the site parameter in searches for better results "川田まみ インタビュー http://www.famitsu.com/"
  • Joint Famitsu probaly has some good interviews if you search the site
  • Excite's interview list
  • www.barks.jp is a good place to look
  • www.teena.ne.jp is also a good place to look
  • or above google search is the easiest really
AngelFire3423 (talk) 21:13, 26 October 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Info to add[edit]

I've just taken facts and written them in the order they appeared in the articles, but these can be included wherever.

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Mami Kawada/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Wugapodes (talk · contribs) 01:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]


Will review. Wugapodes (talk) 01:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. Currently working on the references (fixing redirects, and more importantly, adding archive links for dead links wherever possible). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 01:26, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Checklist

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose is "clear and concise", without copyvios, or spelling and grammar errors:
    B. MoS compliance for lead, layout, words to watch, fiction, and lists:
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. Has an appropriate reference section:
    B. Cites reliable sources, where necessary:
    C. No original research:
    All in japanese so WP:AGF on those
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:
    B. Focused (see summary style):
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
    B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:

Comments

If the comment is numbered, it must be addressed for the article to pass, if it is bulleted, it's an optional suggestion or comment that you don't need to act on right now.
When I quote things, you can use ctrl+f to search the page for the specific line I quoted.

  1. Do any sources happen to mention what year she was born?
  2. "Kawada announced her retirement from singing in May" You should include the year. Also, reword as I thought she announced that she retired in May, not that she will retire in May.
@Wugapodes: Unfortunately, she keeps her age a secret. While various sources list her year of birth as either 1980 or 1978, neither have ever been confirmed by her, so adding a year of birth at this point would be a massive BLP violation (although outside of Wikipedia, I do use 1980 in casual speech). The original edit did include her year of retirement, but someone else removed the year. Will address the issues in a bit. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:06, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
How is it a BLP violation? Since the information is WP:Verifiable, aren't we allowed to include it? (genuinely asking, I don't often write BLPs so I don't actually know) Wugapodes (talk) 02:09, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
@Wugapodes: None of the said sources (i.e. MyAnimeList) are reliable, as these tend to be user editable. The BLP policy states that contentious content (i.e. those likely to be challenged: in this case, a year of birth) must be cited to a reliable source, and no reliable sources have confirmed her age. This issue has been repeatedly raised in the article's peer reviews, but until the time comes that she reveals her age, as much as I would want to, I can't include it in the article. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 02:16, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]
That's a really good reason! You may want to add that as a footnote (if there's a source that says it) just so people know, but I'm not going to require that. Wugapodes (talk) 02:21, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

Results

On hold for 7 days pending revisions. Very well done article! Just address those two comments and it's good to go! Wugapodes (talk) 01:46, 29 January 2016 (UTC) Listed Well written and came here with almost no problems. I wish more nominations were like this one! I hop to see more from you, so keep up the good work. Wugapodes (talk) 02:22, 29 January 2016 (UTC)[reply]

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified one external link on Mami Kawada. 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:

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: 18 January 2022).

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 12:53, 14 January 2018 (UTC)[reply]

Article reference issues[edit]

This article is listed as a "Good article", is a BLP, and there are sourcing issues that need reviewing.
Having 71 references might "appear" to be well sourced but just a glance shows too many primary sources and other sourcing issues. Notability can be questioned if there is not sufficient secondary sources. A primary source does not count towards advancing notability and multiple uses of a source may look good but such multiple uses count as one towards notability.
I only briefly glanced over the article but there are enough issues it might have to be downgraded to "C-class". Before this article is de-classed and tagged would someone please see if they can address these issues? Otr500 (talk) 07:13, 27 June 2018 (UTC)[reply]