Wikipedia:Peer review/The Ren & Stimpy Show/archive2

The Ren & Stimpy Show
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review of the quality of its references. Some, added by myself, reference Usenet groups for lack of better documentation such as TV guides; others seem arbitrary and insubstantial, like Screen Junkies dot com, but removing them myself might seem like edit-warring and article ownership. Removing bad references or replacing them with better ones is much appreciated.
 * Previous peer review

Thanks, IsaacAA (talk) 19:17, 25 September 2011 (UTC)

This article looks pretty good, but here are some possible suggestions:
 * Comments by Sjones23


 * A voice actors section may need to be created in the Production section with the character voice info moved from the characters section.
 * Lead may need to be expanded to three or four paragraphs per WP:LEAD.
 * In the production section, is it possible to detail animation production companies that were involved in the production and their involvement?
 * All redundancies in the article must be removed.
 * Writers for the series may need to be added to the production section with the proper sources.
 * A reception section needs to be added and the Legacy section merged into that section.
 * The controversy section needs to be moved down into the reception section as well.
 * Can we add a possible themes section and settings section to the article if possible?

Hope these comments are helpful. Thanks, Darth Sjones23 (talk - contributions) 18:55, 12 October 2011 (UTC)


 * Thank you, very helpful. More comments are welcome. –IsaacAA (talk) 12:35, 13 October 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Since you asked specificlaly about references, here are some comments on them and other 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; 14:28, 22 October 2011 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many FAs on animated television shows at Category:FA-Class Animation articles. Both Animaniacs and The Simpsons are FAs, though these are also older FAs and standrads have gotten even tighter since they were promoted.
 * References need to be to reliable sources (see WP:RS). I am not an expert on animation refs, but things like http://www.lysator.liu.se/~marcus/ren_stimpy/episode.html look like fan pages and are not likely to be reliable sources.
 * The references that are present need to be formatted consistently and to present all necessary information - some internet refs are just URLs now (see current ref 70) but 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
 * Article needs more references, for example the COmic books, Video Games, and Parodies sections all need more refs.
 * My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. There are many sections listed in the Table of Contents which are not even mentioned in the lead. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Prose is very choppy with lots of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs - these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded to improved the flow.
 * One dead external link here
 * In general I would ask on the talk page for the Animation WikiProject or at WP:RS/N (the Reliable Sources noticeboard) about sources you are not sure about - if there is consensus to remove, that makes life easier.
 * 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.)