Wikipedia:Peer review/The L Word/archive2

The L Word

 * Previous peer review
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.
 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed The L Word for peer review because the article has undergone significant change since the last peer review -which was over two years ago-, and we would like to get assessment to improve sections. Most especially "season outlines", "the Chart", and "spin-off" subtopics.

Thanks, --TLW (talk) 22:59, 14 March 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: If I were the main contributor to this article, I would immediately reduce it by at least 50 percent. I would eliminate the "References in pop culture" section entirely as a violation of WP:TRIVIA, which says, "Avoid creating lists of miscellaneous facts". I'd delete the "International broadcasts" on the same grounds, though I'd think about adding one sentence about international popularity to the "Critical reception" section. I would greatly reduce "The Chart" section, which is almost entirely unsourced and may violate WP:NOR. I agree with the earlier reviewers that the plot synopses are too long, and if I were writing this, I would cut them further.

Starting with a much shorter version of the article, stripped of trivia and long plot summaries, I would think about adding something about the show's fan base, and I'd probably expand the "Title" section to include a sentence about the origin of the word lesbian. I'm thinking specifically of Sappho and the Island of Lesbos, something to place the show in a historical context deeper than 1980 or 1898.

After lots of chopping and a bit of adding, I'd re-write the lead. The ideal lead should be a summary of the rest of the article. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of the main points covered in each of the main text sections. WP:LEAD explains all.

In addition, I'd make sure that everything remaining in the article was properly sourced. Every paragraph needs a source as well as every set of statistics, every unusual claim, and every direct quote.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. Finetooth (talk) 21:06, 20 March 2009 (UTC)