Wikipedia:Peer review/Princess Leia Organa/archive1

Princess Leia Organa
I've listed this article for peer review because it right now seems oddly cluttered and, despite a lot of references as of now, lacks reliable source citations. Although I've already requested another peer review, as long as it helps the articles get better, I've got the time. Any helpful comments are appreciated, as this should help me in expanding other Star Wars-centric articles.

Thanks,

— Cinemaniac (talk •  contribs) 03:20, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Evula
For examples of some well-done Star Wars articles, see Darth Vader, which is a GA, and Palpatine, which is a FA. Those might help. EVula // talk // &#9775;  // 15:51, 31 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Nehrams2020
If you want to bring it up to GA class or higher, it is going to need more inline citations, especially for the sections that have none at all (which appear to be from the books after the films). Also throughout the article there are multiple single sentences. These shouldn't stand alone and should either be expanded or merged into another paragraph. For the inline citations, consider using the citation templates at WP:CITET, as you can then include information about the website, title, author, access date, etc. It will make the references easier to read, but if you haven't used the templates before, I'd recommend practicing with them a bit and previewing a lot before saving. If you have any further questions let me know. --Nehrams2020 (talk) 19:36, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Erik
Happy New Year to you, too! I haven't much time on Wikipedia today, what with the Bowl games and all, so here's a couple of brief thoughts: If you have any questions at all, feel free to ask! —Erik (talk • contrib) - 20:35, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * For Princess Leia Organa, I think that there is plenty of room for improvement. One important thing to remember is that this is an encyclopedia grounded in real-world context.  Thus, in-universe information should be downplayed and used to complement the real-world context of the character.  I would suggest reviewing WP:FICTION if you haven't already.  Also, I would recommend the character articles Jason Voorhees and Captain Jack Sparrow (good works by editors I know) to serve as guides.  You can ask them for advice, too.  My thought for this particular character is to find out about its conception, like how Lucas came up with the character and why he designed her the way he did.  Also look at how the character has been publicly received.  I imagine that there's probably some commentary on the sibling kiss and perhaps some feminist studies about her, since she seems to be a major female icon.  She's also been in quite a number of Star Wars books since the original trilogy, so you could look at how reviewers have criticized different authors' portrayal of the character.  Perhaps one author wrote her as independent and another one wrote her as clingy.  This would definitely be a big project, encompassing films and books and probably more.  Like I said about Duck Soup, offline resources may need to be involved.  Nobody said editing was easy. :)


 * Cinemaniac replies: Thanks for your comments! I'll go ahead and start researching the topic in order to find more offline references, so that a balance between offline and online citations can be achieved.  In that regard, however, I may need your experience to help guide me through it.  Thanks again. — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 22:09, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Wrad
I'd have to agree with the above users. Just add a load of inline citations to confirm her story, and afterwards check the writing to be sure everything is clear and organized into coherent paragraphs. Also, I see that the picture of Leia in the Bikini is 350px! I know she's beautiful, but that might be a bit big. Usually, MoS asks that image size fields be left blank. Users can pick how big they want images to be by tinkering with the own preferences. On smaller-resolution monitors, the Leia bikini picture would take up half the screen! Wrad (talk) 20:38, 1 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cinemaniac replies: Sorry about the Leia "bikini" pic's size. At the talk page, though, I can recall consensus being reached that 350 px was fine to illustrate the image.  I'll go ahead and shrink the image anyway, just in case.  And thanks for your comments. — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 22:05, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Huh. That discussion seems to have a consensus for shrinking it to 150px. I wouldn't even agree with that. Just take the size parameter out altogether and let users choose for themselves. Wrad (talk) 22:08, 1 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Cinemaniac replies, to Wrad's comments immediately above: Looks like I'm gonna have to start checking old discussions instead of just relying on my memory. This is the third time already in two months that somebody has caught me in error.  Thanks again, Wrad. :) — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 17:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Only three times! You're pretty good. Wrad (talk) 17:46, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by ColdFusion650
The main thing is the history section. It should be retitled Appearance, which seems to be the standard. The early life should be removed. The expanded universe should be greatly compressed. "The Truce at Bakura", not important. Her marriage to Han Solo, important. You have to make decisions like that. That's priority number 1 to me. The sheer length makes me want to skip the article completely and move on to something else. ColdFusion650 (talk) 00:33, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cinemaniac replies: Yeah, I agree the article is rather lengthy. The various subsections of the Expanded Universe section should probably be compressed to the size of the pre-Expanded Universe section:  One-to-three paragraphs each.  That'd probably help trim it down.  The article also really drags on in those sections; again, undoubtedly because of length and somewhat rambling prose.  I'll do my best to correct that.  Thanks for your comments! — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 00:48, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Euryalus
As you point out at the talk page, fan fiction is neither reliable nor part of the canon. I could add a story to fanfiction.net saying the gold bikini was melted down and used by Vader as a prosthetic limb, but that wouldn't justify the inclusion of this viewpoint in the article. I note that you have a second (more credible?) source to back up the fanfiction story. Could you post it here for further discussion? Without it I would argue the "Leia had sex with Solo while wearing Jabba's bikini" sentence should be removed from the article. Euryalus (talk) 03:57, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Cinemaniac replies: And on that note, the sentence is gone. Thanks for confirming my doubts. :) — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 17:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Cliff smith
The article is in good shape, but there are a few issues, as already mentioned and discussed above. Once the referencing and summarization issues are addressed, I think that the only thing between this article and a GA review would be a general copyedit. It's lookin' good. Regards, Cliff smith (talk) 07:22, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * The whole Expanded Universe subsection is in need of referencing, and a little more summarization would be good. It does mention some of the books from which the information is drawn, but it can be more specific than that. Check out John-117 and you'll see what I mean.
 * Make mention somewhere of what ABY means, since the average reader probably won't know that it means After the Battle of Yavin.
 * Props for pointing out the plothole about how she remembers stuff about her mother.
 * When the section about her Appearances draws to a close, wrap it up with something akin to a "last known whereabouts." Describe what she was doing and what was going on in the latest part of the extended universe, if you know what I mean. (Like with John-117: at the end of Halo 3, he is in the wreckage of a spacecraft and enters cryonic sleep. That's the last thing that is known to have happened to him, in the Halo universe.)
 * Cinemaniac replies: Thank you for comments, and for pointing out some more flaws in the Expanded Universe section. — Cinemaniac (talk •  contribs) 17:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Collectonian
Hmmm....seems I'll be the odd one out wondering how this article achieved B class. It is almost entirely plot summary, with only one section of real world info that would benefit from a renaming, as well as a great deal of expansion. I'm not a Star Wars fan by any stretch, but I'm pretty certain Princess Leia has a lot more real world notability than just her bikini and hair do that would fill the article up much better. How did she influence society? At the time the movies first came out, did her characterization have any affects in the movie industry's depiction of women or with female audiences? The entire plot section needs a great deal of shortening up and summarizing. For a fan, I'm sure it is a useful amount of detail, but I think it would fit better in the Star Wars wikia than as the bulk of an encyclopedic article about this character. The article is also in need of better sources for some stuff. It seems like most of the bikini info is sourced from a fan site for the bikini and a few other sources look a little questionable. The first half of information on the hair style is unsourced at all and needs a wee bit of tone adjustment. As a whole, I'm seeing too many primarily sources and not enough outside sources to establish her notability apart from the films, when even a non-fan like me knows she has some ;-) Collectonian (talk) 09:05, 2 January 2008 (UTC)
 * Cinemaniac replies: Yeah, I'm trying to research more third-party sources on the character.  Unfortunately, by next week my busy schedule will be picking up again, what with the holiday season all but over, so I won't be able to respond quickly to feedback as I have for the week or two.  I sincerely hope that won't hinder the improvement of the article, though.  Oh well, I'm tryin', anyway.  Thank you for your comments. :) — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 17:31, 2 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Darthgriz98
You've done well removing most of the cruft from the Return of the Jedi and Metal Bikini sections; however, it could use more in-line citations. Try a universal format for citations. The Bikini section also seems a little long still. Check out the other SW GAs and FAs like Palpatine to get some more ideas. Darth Griz98  23:42, 2 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cinemaniac replies: Thanks for taking time from your wikibreak to respond to my request for peer review. As I'm sure you know, distinguishing fact from fanboyish-fiction isn't always easy, as you can tell by clicking here.  As that discussion shows, my initial reason for editing this article was nothing more than piqued curiosity concerning the famous outfit.  It's fascinating, because this article was always getting fandalized for this very reason; in fact, it's probably experienced more fancruft explosion than any other Star Wars article.  Fortunately, with the addition of that "Metal Bikini" section to the article, most of that vandalism has come to a halt.  Also, although most of them were limited to the two sections of the article I created, in-line citations are being steadily added to the other sections, so I hope that helps. Once again, thank you for your comments. — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 01:32, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * At one point, the Return of the Jedi section was almost pornographic in nature, going into way more detail than was in the movie or even existed outside of fandom. As long as it keeps true to the story, keeps true to the real history behind it, and brief enough with lots of sources, I really don't have a problem with the Bikini section.   Darth  Griz98  05:52, 3 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cinemaniac replies, to DarthGriz98's comment immediately above: True.  I've had to deal with such vandalism to the page in the not-so-long-ago past. Euryalus, Evula and I had to clean up all the soft-core erotic fanfic that IPs kept on inserting into the article. Obviously, this is still a problem as some horny fans have huge "Slave Leia" crushes. . . Not that that is necessarily a bad thing, mind you, it just doesn't belong here.  — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 16:50, 3 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Ruhrfisch

 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:07, 5 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by Davidovic
I thought Leia's first kiss was Luke, or was that in Return of the Jedi? To be honest I think that the way the 'first kiss' passage is phrased is a perfect example of the overarching problem with this article - that it's far too casual. The article gives a complete summary of the films from Leia's perspective. I'm not sure that chronicling every one of Leia's appearances is the best way to describe her character. If it is, then they should be far more succinct and far less informal. Davidovic 05:16, 5 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cinemaniac replies: You're right; Leia's first kiss (on film, at the least) was with Luke, depicted in The Empire Strikes Back. The most obvious reason for this is because of the natural attraction that Leia had to both Han and Luke (and vice versa), and the tension resulting among them because of this.  If I remember correctly, she kissed Luke because an argument broke out between her and Han, and it was possibly done to make Han jealous.  Han and Leia wouldn't kiss each other until later in the film. Remember, it wasn't until Return of the Jedi that Leia was revealed as being Luke's sister.  I'll try to edit this 'first kiss' passage to make it more succinct.  Thanks for the comment. — Cinemaniac (talk  •  contribs) 00:44, 6 January 2008 (UTC)

Comments by GoodDay
I find this article cool. I sure am happy my real mother concerns have been added. GoodDay (talk) 16:35, 6 January 2008 (UTC)


 * Cinemaniac replies: Thanks for the comment, and I'm glad to see that I addressed your concern over Leia remembering Padme. — Cinemaniac (talk •  contribs) 20:41, 6 January 2008 (UTC)