Wikipedia:Peer review/Equestria Daily/archive1

Equestria Daily
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because there is a disagreement over the notability of this article. It is a fansite for My Little Pony: Friendship is Magic.

Thanks, Havermayer (talk) 03:32, 14 September 2011 (UTC)
 * This fan site and it's cousin article are somewhat of a special case. I nominated My Little Pony: Fighting is Magic on the same grounds as Havermayer proposed for Equestria Daily (although he used PROD rather than AfD), with Fighting is Magic having a mind-blowing consensus of keep, leading me to withdraw the nomination. The relevance is that this game is not even recognized by Hasbro, while Equestria Daily has been both documented by reliable sources such as Wired, and has had material sent to EqD from The Hub and Hasbro. I can understand the concerns that Havermayer has made, and I hold no anger with him on his opinion as I believe the creator of the article should remain neutral in such discussions, but I believe I just had to state my two cents.  Rainbow  Dash  !xmcuvg2MH 11:42, 15 September 2011 (UTC)
 * Keep. As mentioned, Equestria Daily has received coverage in mainstream media, and Hasbro/The Hub have acknowledged them as well, sending them exclusives and putting references to the site in official television advertisements. Definitely worth keeping, though I agree that care should be taken to maintain NPOV. -- Cyberlink420 (talk) 21:19, 15 September 2011 (UTC)

I am closing this peer review for two reasons. It has a major cleanup banner (not allowed for articles submitted to PR - fix the major problems first) and this is NOT the place to decide notability/ If you think the article subject is not notable, then take the article to WP:AfD. That said, the article has at least three refs to relaible independent third-party sources, so it is probably notable. In case it is kept, here are some things that need to be fixed (not a complete list): Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 23:42, 17 September 2011 (UTC)
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Once sentence is not enough.
 * Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself
 * The lead needs to be expanded. My rule of thumb is to include every header or major idea in the article body in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Do not bold Shaun Scotellaro, per WP:ITALIC
 * MOS says once someone's name has been introduced in full, only use the last name (so use Scotellaro, not Shaun)
 * Needs a ref As of September 2011, the site boasts over 40 million hits since its creation in January, and continues to be hosted on Blogspot.
 * The article must lose the neutrality banner, so that issue needs to be resolved
 * The notability issue is even more important as this will be deleted if it is not found to meet WP:NN. This has some refs to relaible third-party sources - it needs more such refs, and less material from the website itself.
 * This is especially true of claims like Eventually, the Friendship is Magic production team, as well as the network on which it airs, The Hub, recognized the existence of the site, and have since occasionally sent official material to Equestria Daily, ... Sourcing it EqD is not a valid option.
 * The Wait Wait ref is only a URL. Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)