Wikipedia:Peer review/Man-Thing/archive1

Man-Thing
I have worked very hard revising this article, and would like to know what to do to bring it up to feature calibre. --Scottandrewhutchins 02:55, 7 September 2006 (UTC)
 * It's not bad, but the "Origins" and "Man-thing in comics" assume a familiarity with the material. That can be corrected to some extent by lessening the use of pronouns - spell out what is being referred to. References are few and far between - this isn't bad when you are discussing appearences in the comics, but for claims such as "sometimes erroneously said to be a reprint" or "The Man-Thing has often been described as Marvel's attempt to imitate the similar and more famous DC Comics character Swamp Thing, but this is unlikely" you do need them. A few more images would help and I think a section on critical reaction would add interest. We also don't know the current state of the character. Personally I would bring the comparison between Man-Thing and Swamp-Thing up to the top. There are references to it almost immediately which break the flow of the article and could be removed if the topic had been covered. Dealing with this in the Origins section would not be out of place. I think you also have to decide whther you are dealing with the Man-Thing comic or the Man-Thing character in comics. The majority of the article concentrates on the character but there are sections that deal with the comic when the charcter is not involved. Some more specific comments:
 * it moved been past and present tenses in the comics section - I've tried to move it all to past tense, but it will be worth a check over.
 * "and featured in various Marvel Comics titles, the most prominent of which was written by Steve Gerber." - and the title of the most prominent is? Man-Thing I assume?
 * "...written by Len Wein before his creation of the continuing Swamp Thing, Alec Holland. (The Swamp Thing that appeared a month after Savage Tales #1 was Alex Olsen, whose origin was not very similar to Man-Thing's.)" - difficult to understand and assumes a familiarity with Swamp Thing. I'd stay away from over connection with Swamp Thing in this section as I mentioned above
 * "Issues #15-20..." the rest of this section has little to do with Man-Thing
 * "(led by Jennifer Kale's father, Joshua; Gerber would feature more of Zhered-Na in his "Tales of Atlantis" stories in Sub-Mariner)" - this is awkward, but the whole phrase will need recasting to solve it.
 * Did the Fear series end at #19 or just Man-Things appearances in it? This isn't clear.
 * Everything after "Black Widow" in this paragraph appears irrelevant. We don't need to know about other unconnected characters or Steve Gerber's life after Man-Thing. If it has some connection to Man-Thing it needs explaining
 * "In Man-Thing #7, reality set in"...make it clear whether this is an in-universe reality or "real" reality. Did it reflect current events in the real world or is it a plot device?
 * "whose father sought to kill the current occupant of his shack" - is that Man-Thing? We don't know where he lives.
 * "...rampage as a Mad Viking..." - is a Mad Viking something we should recognize?
 * "Dani Nicolle, his sister, has her sensations on overload and must project them into objects called Nightmare Boxes." - either expand this or drop it - it currently has no connection to the rest of the paragraph
 * "Gerber decided he had to move on to other things" - make it clear whether this is the in-universe Gerber (we know the real Gerber does, but does his counterpart?)
 * "A series of plot holes lead to the end of the project" - this doesn't make much sense as it mixes real events with the storyline of the comic
 * I found the first paragraph of the Chris Claremont section very difficult to follow. It isn't clear in which series or issue the supernatural creatures appear, and nor is it clear whether "Tom Peyer's revival of the character" refers to Man-Thing or D'Spayre. Is Man-Thing destroyed when he combusts?
 * Combining the comic spin-offs and film sections into a "Spin-offs" section might be better than leaving the two line film reference in a section of its own.
 * Hope this helps, Yomangani talk 23:31, 8 September 2006 (UTC)