Wikipedia:Peer review/El Goonish Shive/archive1

El Goonish Shive
This article was partially re-written in the last few weeks. I think the current version is already in B-Class territory, but would like to clean it up further to get it near GA criteria. Ambi Valent 14:46, 19 March 2007 (UTC)

I would especially like to know the answers to some questions:
 * I've read "statements should be attributed to primary or secondary sources" as main guideline and on the other hand "there are too many links to specific strips" as criticism for an article. I'm slightly confused; should there be only a few general attributions to the primary source instead of specific ones?
 * Where exactly is the line between attributing to the primary source making necessary assumptions and original research?
 * The "Cast" and "Synopsis" sections are the longest of the article, pushing it over 32K. What would be the correct reaction to this: keep almost all of it, cut short and put the rest in extra articles, or cut short discarding the rest? Ambi Valent 10:34, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Nifboy's review

 * Avoid citing a strip for a statement about the strip in general; just because PvP runs strips like this on occasion does not make it an indication of its theme.
 * See above, plus WP:WAF emphasizing the use of sources that are not the work itself.
 * There isn't a "right" answer. Cover as much as is necessary but no more. I would discourage the use of forks simply by virtue of the fact that they tend towards eventual deletion. Nifboy 12:07, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks a lot, I'll work on it. Ambi Valent 20:45, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Is it OK if I used Howard's "Tangents" as a secondary source? He wrote both a lengthy review for the entire comic as some long comments to some storylines/scenes. "Tangents" is nearly as old as "Websnark". And how would I put it best in the article: "According to Howard's 'Tangents' review, ..."? Ambi Valent 07:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

PresN's review

 * I think the synopsis is way too long. I would prefer it to be about 1/3 of the length it is now, covering only the biggest details.  I also think that the order the sections are in is a problem- while a "history" or "development" section does need to be near the top, the section as it is references the story so much that it should be below it in the article- it's very hard to follow right now without it. ✅
 * I was going to say that the cast section was long, but okay as there are so many characters, but then I realized that there is a "characters of EGS" article linked to. If that's the case, you should use summary style, not just a copypaste of the major characters section of that article.  Cut each character down to about half the size they are now, but as this is a webcomic article, save a copy of the "chars of EGS" article in your userspace, in case someone gets in a bad mood and deletes it.
 * The article needs a thorough copyedit, as there's a lot if times where the tone shifts from out-of-universe to in-universe and back within a paragraph. It's a problem that's inherent in fiction articles, but it's hard to notice when you're writing. --PresN 20:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

I've added that to the article's To-Do-List. Cutting may be an easier task than the others, but it will still take a while. Ambi Valent 21:53, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
 * So far, I made two attempts to cut the synopsis in size, which I threw away. I threw way the first one when I noticed it was getting only barely shorter than the current one, while I threw away the second because I cut so much the rest didn't make sense. Now I'm trying to make a new list of what should be in it, and then put it into text form; I hope that will work... Ambi Valent 07:54, 26 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm more than halfway through with the third attempt to cut the synopsis in size, but the parts I cut are just over half as long as before, not cut to 1/3. Maybe someone else can compress it further without losing vital parts, but I think I'm at my limits. I'll complete this and move the sections around, then head for the cast section. Ambi Valent 07:44, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Malkinann's review
All your images need detailed fair use rationales in addition to the templates. Also, your citations need more detail - author, date, last accessed date being bare minimum. Rather than citing the strip itself, cite reviews of the strip. Like, when it talks about the art originally being bad, cite the review that says it was, rather than the first strip. Good luck. -Malkinann 04:27, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Would creator's permissions for the images be sufficient, or are more rationales needed? As for the citations of strips for statements that talk about the comic in general, I will cite reviews there, and will make cite web statements for reviews more detailed. But what about strips I cite as support for an extraordinary statement inside a summary, like a transformation into an anthrofeline? Ambi Valent 09:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'm not sure - ask the Help desk. I had thought that as they were there under Fair Use, you'd need the detailed citations, but if you've got Shive's permission, then that may yet be another kettle of fish. Try and use the reviews and author's comments as much as possible, and only use comics for non-interpretive facts.  You can also make the cite web statements for individual comics more detailed - I've plunked a goodish-filled-out example in the to do list that you can copy-paste and use.  I'm really suprised that the author's commentary isn't more extensively quoted as a primary source in the article. -Malkinann 11:30, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd use more of his commentary, but he mostly comments in EGS forum articles, which I hear are must-not cites. I have already cited "Painted Black Special Features" as well as the early roleplaying sessions of Elliot, Tedd and Sarah. Ambi Valent 11:42, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * I'd gathered from Reliable sources that forums could be cited, as long as it wasn't just shooting one's mouth off about anything. My interpretation of WP:RS is that the author of a webcomic talking about his inspirations on a forum created for the purpose of talking about the webcomic could be considered a reliable source.  Read the policy and judge for yourself. -Malkinann 11:57, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

To answer the above questions, "Use with permission" images should still be tagged fair use with rationale (Image use policy). Citing forum/blog posts by the author is perfectly acceptable (with caution), but the further you get away from "authoritative source", the more care should be used in citing it. Nifboy 17:17, 29 March 2007 (UTC)
 * Thanks, that helps a lot. Up to now I've never been sure if I was actually doing the right thing, or if I tainted every word I wrote with OR, and put it closer to deletion each day. Now I can finally start working with the rules to write an informative article. Ambi Valent 19:44, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

You may also wish to rework the storyline section as it's a bit confusing, (the League of Copyeditors may be able to help you there) and lastly, rewrite the lead. According to WP:LEAD, each section of an article should be represented in the lead in a sentence or paragraph. -Malkinann 10:08, 30 March 2007 (UTC) Another thing.. Maybe swap out that image of silhouette!Grace with an image of non-silhouette human!Grace. It'd give more information to a non-fan. I've stuck in a couple of fact tags, too. -Malkinann 12:15, 7 April 2007 (UTC)