Wikipedia:Peer review/1950s Topps/archive1

1950s Topps

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… it is my desire to improve the quality of the article 1950s Topps and related articles in this project (1960s Topps, 1970s Topps, etc.) Despite their lower importance I believe they can achieve a higher place on the quality scale. The progress of these pages has been slowed because of disagreements primarily with style and structure. I have tried to abide by the WP style guides and policies as best as possible. There has also been some content disputes, basically dealing with wether or not to have a more informative articles with predominantly written content or to have a list/gallery type of article. I have, for a time, desired more input from the community on this project. Unfortunately there has been a great deal of attention from disruptive users. IPs and socks have shown interest there and many of them have been banned because of the inability to use talk pages and mediation properly. However, in fairness to anyone interested in this project I think it is appropriate to open it to a broader and hopefully more civil forum.

Thanks, Libro0 (talk) 20:31, 22 November 2008 (UTC)

Comments from casliber
Sorry, I am flat out but I will see if I can see anything to work on from a quick look. I might be able to come back a bit later when I have more time. Apologies I cannot do anything substansive. Fascinating topic. Do you have a book or other offline literature on the material? There is little material currently - how big could a discussion be on market penetration and the rivalry? any good anecdotes? The Topps article is 44kb and so could grow a bit. My hunch would be that if there was not a huge amount more information to add, then focussing on this page as a list is better. If tehre is alot to add on the 1950s, that is whether it was a heyday etc. or loads of controversy, then this may be better as an article. has therer been a book wirtten about this, must have been (??). This would make writing this article a lot easier. Cheers, Casliber (talk · contribs) 01:09, 24 November 2008 (UTC)

Most of the literature on the subject I have listed on the pages already. There is more however, and I am trying to get through it. There actually is quite a long line of litigation with Topps and Fleer and to a lesser extent Donruss. I have been trying to find as much set information to get onto those pages as possible. Libro0 (talk) 03:18, 24 November 2008 (UTC)