Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Dmartin969 (talk · contribs) 23:49, 2 November 2012 (UTC) I have reviewed this article carefully and found it to be well written and comprehensive, but it still needs a few changes, I am going to place the article on hold until next Saturday (Nov. 11 2012) afternoon CST, at which time I will re-review the article and either pass or fail it. You have until then to fix the issues described below. Best of Luck![reply]

Lead[edit]

The lead seems a bit wordy, seeWP:LEADLENGTH for more specific guidelines, the article is 14,979 character(no spaces) at the time of this writing. I would also suggest linking to the mentioned characters on the Adventure Time page. I would consolidate the info-box labels of family and relatives to a relationships label, I would also say bubblegum is a former friend and former romantic interest.

Role[edit]

Donʻt link to the voice actors every time you mention the character, only mention it the first time, which you did mostly in the lead(but leave bubblegumʻs voice in there because it hasn't been previously mentioned. Don't repeat too much information you already stated in the lead e.g.; we already know the Nightosphere is a Hell-like dimension, so don't mention it again. Explain the concept of the mushroom war when it is mentioned near the Ice King.

Character[edit]

This section seems pretty solid. Relationships section could use some expansion, but other then that itʻs great

Reception[edit]

I donʻt see anything immediately wrong wit this section either.

OK, I removed the whole "relatives" thing in the infobox, since I couldn't find a way to get it to say "friends". I cut down the lede down by removing super-descriptive language, but I left some of the info, as its supposed to be a general summary of the article, so some things will be repeated. I cut out who voiced what characters in the rest of the article. I tried to explain the Mushroom War better. I think I got all the issues. Thanks for reviewing this!--Gen. Quon (Talk) 00:51, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Just put them all under relatives, specifically bubblegum as a former friend and former romantic interest, also the info-box seems shorter, put it back to like it was, and I donʻt think she is "next in line" to rule the Nightoshpere, she clearly doesn't want to rule it. Dmartin969 (talk) 02:08, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Alright, I have restored what I have. I, however, feel that putting "former romantic interest" in the box is overstepping the line (and I don't want to get in a fight here on Wikipedia). None of the major players involved with the show have really taken an officially position on this: Fred Seibert has pretty much denied it was true, Adam Muto was unhappy with the way the "the recap chose to frame that interpretation of the episode", calling it "dumb", he also said that the show doesn't do "official pairings" when asked about the coupling, and Pendleton Ward basically said "no comment". So I think just sticking that in there would be taking allegations and (probably) true implications and presenting them as canonized facts, which, for something as delicate as this subject, is a no-no. I think the conjecture and maybe/maybe not nature should stay in the "Relationships" and "Reception" sections. (Just for the record, I have nothing against the relationship, I just want to make sure it complies with Wikipedia:Verifiability, especially Wikipedia:Verifiability, not truth).--Gen. Quon (Talk) 04:59, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Then again, other people working on the show (such as Rebecca Sugar and Natasha Allegri) have been more positive about the possibility of a relationship in the past. And no one working on the actual show has thus far denied it was true altogether. Not denying something is of course not the same as it being true, but there is also something called spoilers. Admitting a thing as big as this, which will probably be revisited in newer seasons, would count as a major spoiler and producers, as a principle, don't do that. As for Bubblegum and Marceline now being friends, that is also pretty unsure isn't it? The characters have not interacted in an episode together for over a year now. In the episode "What Was Missing" they possibly hinted (subtly) at a past relationship, the nature of which is unknown. But whatever it was it ended on bed terms and they aren't portrayed as being the best of friends all of a sudden. Also the "rival" part was from original pitch documents and has been largely retracted (back then it was the plan to have Princess Bubblegum and Marceline as romantic interests\rivals for Finn) But those documents are from a few years back, before the show was actually made, and they can no longer be seen as completely accurate. The current way it's in the article seems okay. But maybe only relatives should be in the relatives box (which would be Hunson Abadeer and "unnamed mother") and not friends. Mythic Writerlord (talk) 15:04, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Good point about Rebecca Sugar, since she co-wrote the episode. Muto seems to not have a very highly opinion on the situation. From what I've gathered, the two wanted the viewer to be able to interpret the subtext however they wanted, but the mathematical video made it seem that only the shipping angle was the correct viewpoint. Thus, I feel uncomfortable making any sort of grand statement towards either position. And yeah, the two aren't friends anymore, so I removed the "relatives" thing from the infobox and tidied everything up a bit (And unrelated, a Marceline v. Bubblegum episode in which they try to get Finn's attention would be hilarious...)--Gen. Quon (Talk) 16:09, 3 November 2012 (UTC)[reply]