Wikipedia:Peer review/Marvel Comics/archive1

Marvel Comics
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because as the publishers of such major characters as Spider-Man and the X-Men, it has potential to go all the way to FA. It needs some work, particularly with sourcing, so let's take it one step at a time. Any suggestions you can provide would be helpful (where to look, any books you know of). Anything else you think this article needs to really help it shine, be bold and speak up.

Thanks, BOZ (talk) 17:09, 18 August 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Another comics article from BOZ - many of my comments will be familiar as many of these articles have similar issues that need to be addressed to get to GA and especially FA. So here are some suggestions for improvement. 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; 01:05, 26 August 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD so that it is an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. 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. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. The lead could be four paragraphs long, but the current lead is only seven sentences and three paragraphs.
 * Article has several short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections that should be either combined with others or expanded to improve the flow.
 * One of the biggest concerns preventing this from reaching GA or better is that the article has many unreferenced claims, with whole paragraphs and even sections without refs. Peer review is not generally a place to find refs - WikiProjects are better for that. Have you looked at Google Books or Scholar? My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Many of the existing refs do not have enough inforamtion. For example, 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
 * Per WP:NFCC the article has too many fair use images (nine by my count). See also WP:FAIR USE
 * The article uses cquote but according the documentation at Template:Cquote this is for pull quotes only, and this should probably use blockquote instead
 * The lists of editor and imprints have no refs and in general lists should be converted to text wherever possible for better flow.
 * Per WP:Summary style there should be a summary of the main article and not just a link (so fix things like the Video games section
 * Thanks again! :) BOZ (talk) 12:08, 26 August 2009 (UTC)