Talk:Norman Osborn/GA2

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Adamstom.97 (talk · contribs) 04:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

I will take this for review, plan to get round to it shortly. I have seen that the article failed GA earlier in the year, but also that there has been significant work done since then, so hopefully all goes well this time. - adamstom97 (talk) 04:19, 8 August 2017 (UTC)

Issues

Infobox

• The image appears to be missing some information about its original publication that should be added if possible.
• Besides the fact that a character should really only be able to have one first appearance, is it really necessary to have separate first appearances for when he was unnamed and named? That whole section seems like overkill to me.
• Is his affiliation to the Hellfire Club not referenced in the body of the article? If it is, there is no need for a citation in the infobox. if it isn't, then it shouldn't really be listed here at all.

Lead

• Information cited in the lead should again be cited in the body only or not included in the article at all.
• There are two instances where you note that he has been a villain for heroes besides Spider-Man, which is redundant. I suggest removing the line "Although his primary obsession is Spider-Man, Osborn has also fought many other heroes including Jessica Jones and the Punisher."

Publication history

• Ditko and Lee need to be properly introduced here since this is the beginning of the body of the article.
• There is an overuse of blockquotes here. They should be used sparingly, since they are supposed to make a quote stand out to the reader. And honestly, none of the blockquotes in this section seem all that notable to me anyway. They really could just be paraphrased and integrated better into the text.
• This section also becomes more and more like bullet-point paragraphs the further through it gets. I know by the end you are just listing different things that seem like significant publication moments, but they could probably be written in a way that doesn't feel so much like that.
• The line "However, during the "Clone Saga", a retcon..." is information that is discussed properly under the 'Return' subheading. All of that should be together in the same place, not previewed early.

Fictional character biography

• The "college sweetheart" link to Emily Osborn is an Easter egg link.
• There doesn't appear to be any good reason for the image in this section, which makes it fail WP:NFC.
• There doesn't need to be a break between the last two paragraphs under 'The original Green Goblin' subheading.
• The sections 'Return', 'H.A.M.M.E.R. and the Dark Avengers', and 'The Goblin King' are all fine, but could be summarised more and condensed. They also suffer a bit from having lots of short, bullet-point type paragraphs.
• The 'Secret Wars' subheading and the content underneath it doesn't really add anything to the article.

Powers, abilities, and weaknesses

• There is some overlinking in here from characters and the like that are already linked in the biography section.
• I feel that a lot of the "weakness" stuff to do with his insanity would fit more comfortably in a separate section about characterisation. I'm sure there would be plenty of other information and analysis that could be used to make a pretty good characterisation article for this character, and it would really help in making this a great article. A lot of the info is also currently presented as a bit of a history like the biography section, but I think it could be written better by focusing on specific issues rather than revelations over time.
• What would then be left is a powers and abilties section, which I would see containing the brief overview at the top of the current section, then 'Weapons of the Green Goblin', 'Weapons as the Iron Patriot', and 'Powers as the Super-Adaptoid'. I would give the latter a c/e to get it down to a similar size and weighting as the Iron Patriot bit. You should also have a similar paragraph under 'Weapons of the Green Goblin' that gives a summary of the Goblin's weapons, rather than just an empty section with a main article link.

Other versions

• There are a couple writing issues in this paragraph, like "depicts Osborn as the Goblin has a radical trickster" and "version of Osborn was is a written as".

In other media

• Make sure that citations are coming after the next instance of punctuation.
• I would combine the opening sentence of the section with the second paragraph, then have a paragraph dedicated to TV and one for film.
• The paragraph on the Broadway musical appears to be outside of the scope of this article and should be removed.

Cultural impact

• It would be great if this section could be expanded to a much bigger and more general response section. I'm sure there is plenty of critical responses to the character, and how he has been written and characterised etc. Analysis on his impact on comics, or relationship with Spider-Man? Much of the stuff in the section already is lists that he appear on, which I would say should come under an 'Accolades' subheading. An actual 'Cultural impact' subsection would focus more on other writers being inspired by the character, as well as fan cosplay and the like.

Notes

• Do you have a source for the claims in the note, or is that just original research?

References

• All comic citations need to be as full as possible, with writers/artists/publishers/etc. Web sources need to be archived.

Status

Sorry it took so long to get around to this, have been busier than I anticipated when I took the review. I have listed issues in the section above that I believe need to be addressed before this article can be promoted to GA. I am placing the review on hold until that is done. A few of my noted may take a bit more work than others, but I do think they will help make the article much stronger and more appropriate for GA. - adamstom97 (talk) 00:32, 13 August 2017 (UTC)

Done

I have finished what had to be done at Norman Osborn page. I have fixed the infobox reducing the appearances and removed the Hellfire club, it was only issue, not worth including. I had the sources that were in the lead scattered throughout the page to give it more credibility. I dimmed the publication history section of block quotes, I left one because I felt that one was pretty good. In fictional character biography, I removed the secret wars section, fixed that easter egg, added a better image of the Green Goblin, and did combine a lot of the short paragraphs in the Hammer and Dark Avengers sections. In the powers and abilities section, I did fix with the overlinking issue. I added a short paragraph that describes what the Green Goblin's weapons are. I created new section dedicated only to the weakness, which I do agree is more of a characterization of him. Fixed some grammar issues in the other versions section. In the other media section, I combined the TV and film sections, removed the sentences that talked about the broadway musical in-depth. For the cultural impact section, I simply renamed it Reception as it was more of what critics thought of the character. I found the reference for the Notes section. And fixed all the references that needed to be done. Took a lot time finding all the writers and artists.

To think it took me about a week to get it all done. Thank you for being patient and hopefully this time my beloved article baby will pass. Take care bud. Xtremeroller (talk) 00:21, 21 August 2017 (UTC)

You've done a good job Xtreme. There are just a few more things I think should be dealt with before I promote the article:

• My issue with the citations in the lead still stands (i.e. they should not be there).
• The new image in the biography section also serves no purpose. There doesn't need to be one there if you don't have a good one.
• "Weapons of the Green Goblin" should still have the main article link to Green Goblin#Powers and abilities.
• The source you have provided for the Note does not support its OR. It is probably best that you just remove the note entirely.
• The comic references are looking good, but the web ones still need to be archived.

Have a go at those and let me know here when you are done. - adamstom97 (talk) 06:12, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Ok before I start editing can I just say two things. For the references in the lead, can I still have them referenced somewhere in the article or just in all completely deleted. Lastly, can't I just leave the image of Norman as the Goblin in the biography section, I just feel its kinda nice for the reader to have an image of Osborn in full costume, similar to Iron Patriot. Or how about if I move the image in the powers and abilities section? Just want to know before I get back to work. Xtremeroller (talk) 06:50, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Yeah, the content doesn't need to be completely removed, the citations just shouldn't be in the lead. Elsewhere in the article is fine. The image would be fine if the caption focused more on the costume, so that it was clear to the reader what purpose the image serves. - adamstom97 (talk) 08:17, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Thanks Adam, alright then time to finish this. Xtremeroller (talk) 18:20, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

I did it Adam finished all that had to be done, I moved the citations in the lead, made the caption in the image a little more clearer, added the main article link in the Green Goblin powers and abilities, removed the note entirely, and archived all the old references that seemed outdated. Ok, I think this is it tis time. Here we go. Xtremeroller (talk) 21:36, 22 August 2017 (UTC)

Alright, well done Xtreme, this is a good article, and I'm going to pass this review now. Congratulations, adamstom97 (talk) 07:35, 23 August 2017 (UTC)