Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Magneto (comics)/archive1

Magneto (comics)
self-nom, article seems worthy of being a featured article to me. zen master T 08:20, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Object – no references =Nichalp   «Talk»=  09:13, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Object—Poorly written and superficial.Tony 14:01, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Just because it wasn't written by snooty english majors doesn't mean it's poorly written. And lack of references seems like a poor excuse to deny something fa status but I digress. zen master T 18:25, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Actually references are a requirement ( see featured article criteria). Without them, the article can't be verified. - Mgm|(talk) 20:57, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Zen, instead of being combative, why don't you read the above instructions here: What is a Featured article; and address the objections? =Nichalp   «Talk»=  05:21, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * I don't care that much about this particular FAC nom, I just think the current FAC policy is biased against certain subjects and is too formal/red tape oriented, among other, separate issues. zen master T 06:07, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Object
 * No references are given
 * There's far too much emphasis on the character history, and the history focuses too much on "Magneto as person in the X-Men universe" and not enough on "Magneto as a comic book character".
 * There are too many non-free images in the article. I'd suggest removing everything but Image:Magneto.png, Image:Uncanny1.jpg, and Image:Magnetomoviex2.jpg].
 * --Carnildo 20:52, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Why is there this requirement for references? A comic book character article isn't likely to have many direct references (except the original source material).  And the majority of reference sections I've seen do not point to free sources so why is there this glaring hypocrisy that separately requires only free images? Is the goal to control what people are reading with the reference sections (regardless of whether the sources are free or not [of course])? zen master T 21:02, 16 September 2005 (UTC)
 * References are required because Wikipedia is an encyclopedia. See WP:V, WP:CITE, WP:NOR, and What is a featured article for more information.  I see no hypocracy about requiring free images but not free references: the images are directly included in the article, while the reference material isn't. --Carnildo 21:22, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Citations are more than enough evidence, the points needing referencing are lost by the time readers get to the reference section and the reference section really just seems like a "book of the month" club for that particular subject. Reference sections should be a sub page of every article perhaps (size concerns). I am somewhat familiar with wikipedia policy but they kind of don't make sense. If free images are preferred over non-free then to be consistent free source content should be preferred over non-free? Why make it easier for people to buy books from amazon.com if a goal or preference is for free content sources? Does it even make sense for a comic book character article to have references? zen master T 21:38, 16 September 2005 (UTC)


 * Zen-master, please take a positive attitude to the reviews; far from being written by 'snooty English majors', they are bona fide attempts to maximise Wikipedia's readability and value. We like plain, crisp, easy-to-read text that flows smoothly and has authority. It's not about intellectual snobbery. Tony 07:46, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


 * I apologize, I nominated the article on a whim while grumpy after an edit war so it was bound to happen like this. I think my point is why are there such specific/strict wiki criteria for featured articles when, for example, something seemingly just as important, the AfD process, is almost totally determined on a case by case basis. Can featured article status also be determined more on a case by case basis? Is the requirement of a reference section not as applicable to an article on a comic book character? zen master T 08:35, 17 September 2005 (UTC)


 * If you take a look at the list of featured articles you can see loads of different topics have been covered. Any possible bias to topics is caused by what people prefer to work on. References are just as necessary for articles on comic book characters as other articles. We need them to back up what's said in the article. - Mgm|(talk) 10:15, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Any serious literary works (this does not include fanguides and fictional canon) should be referenced for an FAC. If no such works exists, I would recommend FAC:ing higher-level articles instead. In this instance X-Men or simply comic book would be appropriate. Particularly the latter is in an absolutely unacceptable state for a top-level article. Wikipedia gains little or nothing from focusing the attention of the average reader on more in-depth coverage of heavily over-represented subjects that concern themselves almost exclusively with the hobbies of young, white, mainly American and/or Western European males. / Peter Isotalo 14:38, 17 September 2005 (UTC)
 * Oppose; too focused on Magneto as a real person in the fictional Marvel universe, but needs to include information on Magneto as a fictional character in the real world. My suggestion is to retool the article away from a fannish fictional history of the character to an objective overview of the character's development in Marvel comic books. For example, devote a different section to Magneto's development under each of the major writers and/or artists who used the character extensively. Concentrate not only on the narrative ("Magneto killed this guy"; "Magneto became a good guy"); discuss Magneto's personality and character development under different creators. The character's biography will thus still be there, but it'll be presented in a real-world context that a non-fan will appreciate. As for sources, I'd wager they exist. There are all sorts of critical analyses of animation available; there's bound to be some stuff on comic books. Good luck. BrianSmithson 11:57, 19 September 2005 (UTC)