Talk:Shion (Overwatch)/GA1

Lead

• The infobox states that her first appearance was in "Overwatch (2026)", but the lead states she "first appeared in the 2023 video game Overwatch". I understand that she was added in a 2026 update ("Lady Shion first appears in the 2023 video game Overwatch, added in a 2026 update for the game."), but I would personally only use the game's actual release year, since at the moment readers might assume we're talking about two different games. If you'd rather keep it, I'd suggest adding an efn note somewhere for clarification.
  • For consistency I would rather leave this; characters added in post-release for titles like this especially with Overwatch have been tagged with just the year of their addition. I could see adding perhaps update (we'd have to across all the previous articles), but I'd rather avoid a note section for just one thing.
• Could you more clearly define what an omnic is here for the uninitiated?
  • Fixed.
• WP:HOWEVER
  • Fixed this instance, left the other (see below)
• "...how frequently Blizzard Entertainment appeared to develop East Asian female characters with similar aspects that appeared designed to sell in-game cosmetic items for them." I would replace "that appeared designed" with "with the intent".
  • Fixed.

Conception and development

• "In addition, she does not blink, instead her irises change appearance to help her emote." → "In addition, she does not blink; her irises instead change appearance to help her emote."
  • Fixed.

Appearances

• "...whose body has been enhanced with cybernetics." → " ...whose body has also been enhanced with cybernetics."
  • Fixed.
• "She's" should be "she is".
  • Fixed.
• Who is Mizuki?
  • Clarified further in dev/design, added that he's a ninja under appearances for further clarity.
• "'Execution' fires her pistols in an multi-shot attack at a target..." "an" → "a"
  • Fixed.
• "...the gauge was removed and they instead worked on how her attacks synergized with one another instead." "Instead" is repeated twice.
  • Fixed.

Reception

• WP:HOWEVER
  • I'd like to leave it here with the way the sentences are structured, as it's not meant to editorialize, but indicate a point separately alongside the praise (saying despite for example wouldn't be as accurate).
• "...and called it a modern twist on a geisha mask and fit cyberpunk themes of self-modification." Something about the grammar is is off here. I'd rewrite this as "; he called it a modern twist on a geisha mask and which fit cyberpunk themes of self-modification"
  • Fixed, separated the sentences and tweaked.
• "He additionally called out her sadistic personality as shown in the trailer towards the bar patron..." → "a bar patron", since most people won't have seen the trailer.
  • Fixed.
• The last sentence in the second paragraph is missing a period.
  • Fixed.
• I think the Wiktionary entry for "gooner" should be linked here, since most people... probably don't know what it means.
  • Fixed, wikilinked to gooning.
• "...another model off an assembly line." Nitpicky, but this is very closely paraphrased from the source; I feel like it can just be replaced with the exact quote since it's a linguistically unique criticism.
  • Fixed, replaced with quote.
• "He found the story implications around her appearance to be interesting also..." Remove "also".
  • Fixed.

Everything should be addressed or at least responded to, let me know if there's anything else!--Kung Fu Man (talk) 19:04, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Everything seems good! I'll be getting to the spotcheck now. TheBrickGraphic (talk) 21:54, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Kung Fu Man Spotcheck has been added, but I have one more quibble: would it be possible to italicize "Overwatch" in all reference titles? Nothing major, but I've been told that this is semi-required for proper formatting. TheBrickGraphic (talk) 23:11, 11 October 2026 (UTC)

Should be all done. As for the character details, usually unless it's a rather hyper-specific detail or piece of attire that may be questioned (like Tifa Lockhart's hair color), it's been often considered fine to describe the visuals as long as a reference is linked to, following the mindset of WP:SKYISBLUE.--Kung Fu Man (talk) 03:56, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

I guess that makes sense. If that's true, I ought to make use of that in my own articles... lol. Passing the review now, great job! TheBrickGraphic (talk) 10:31, 12 October 2026 (UTC)

Spotcheck

• Earwig Copyvio Detector checks out, same for authorship percentage.

• Ref 2 Esports.gg: (a,b) Looks good

• Ref 3 PlayOverwatch: (a) Looks good (b,c) Looking at the specified timestamp and some 5-minutes afterwards, I'm not seeing where these precise details of her design (like the gynoid-type figure, the color of her metal plating, her belt buckle, etc.) are mentioned.

• Ref 5 Polygon: Looks good

• Ref 6 GameSpot: (a,b) Looks good

• Ref 8 Destructoid: Looks good

• Ref 9 PlayOverwatch: Looks good

• Ref 10 Kotaku: (a,b) Looks good

• Ref 11 Kotaku: Similar to Ref 3, I'm not seeing where the minutae of the skin's design (like the color of her armor and highlights, the wing-like protusions, the sides of her thighs being exposed, etc) are mentioned.

• Ref 22 Esports.gg: Looks good

• Ref 23 Destructoid: Looks good

• Ref 25 Engadget: Looks good

• Ref 28 Esports.net: Looks good