Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/First Command Financial Planning

First Command, Inc.
I just wrote an article on an organization that serves primarily U.S. military personel that was found "willfully" violating the section of the Securities Act of 1933 that deals with fraudulent advertising/marketting. Since this organizations primary claim to fame is negative publicity, I want to make sure that it has a NPOV. I am also interested in nominating it for A-Class status, assuming that it looks good here. Right now I know that it needs to be wikified (Eg internal links) but what other issues exists?Balloonman 23:09, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin
Not bad at all, but there are several areas where this could be improved, in my opinion: Kirill Lokshin 18:15, 16 April 2007 (UTC)
 * The lead isn't really a summary of the article so much as an extremely dense background section. The basic information about the company should be in the body of the article.
 * On a related note, said basic information is quite terse. While the company's most notable aspect is indeed the SEC ruling and related issues, the article needs to devote a bit more attention to the basic descriptions typical of company articles—history, leadership personnel, financial information, etc.—before diving into it.
 * Quotes need to be introduced, rather than simply being stuck into the prose inline; the reader should be able to figure out, at a minimum, what the general source of the quote is without needing to dig through the footnotes.
 * Has the company had any media coverage (related to the SEC ruling or otherwise)? Some more variety in the sources used might be helpful, if good ones are available.
 * "Notes" should be "Notes and references", if the two sections are combined.
 * Thanks Kirill, I'll take a look at the article and do what I can to incorporate your recommendations.Balloonman 18:44, 16 April 2007 (UTC)