Wikipedia:Peer review/W.I.T.C.H. (TV series)/archive1

W.I.T.C.H. (TV series) edit

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review to find out what portion is needed to improve it. Over the years, the article got unprofessional, fancruft look. I can't do the task that you suggested by myself alone. So I need someone's help.

Thanks, JSH-alive ^{talk • cont • mail} 07:20, 2 January 2010 (UTC) (Edited 15:31, 3 January 2010 (UTC) )[reply]

Comments by Bradley0110

I have reviewed this revision of the article

First and foremost, this article does not currently use any secondary sources that establish the notability of the topic. This is very important!
The general format of the article is quite unorganised. Have a look at articles on animated series that have reached featured or good status, such as The Simpsons and Avatar: The Last Airbender, to get an idea of a good layout.
The first section of the article ought to be a "premise" section; what is the series about? There is a brief sentence in the lead about the series protagonists and the catalyst for their adventures, but it isn't enough to give someone like me, who has never heard of the series, a good grounding of what it is about.
The production and development section needs to be expanded with information about how the series was conceived, how it is written, and how it is animated (again, look at the model articles above for ideas). Information may be found in animation magazines, reliable websites, or books.
The characters section ought to have a very brief "in universe" summary of the characters' roles and motivations in the series, followed by an "out of universe" summary of the characters' development by the producers over the course of the series. Again, this information may be held in secondary sources. See also the guideline Wikipedia:Writing about fiction.
The lead states that this is a French television series but the infobox states it is French and American. Am I right in thinking that this series was made and originally broadcast in France, then purchased by an American company and dubbed into English by American voice actors? If so, the article must reflect the series as originally made (i.e. less emphasis on the American dubbing; see Wikipedia:WikiProject Countering systemic bias).
- The best way to present this information would be to create a section entitled "Broadcast" with two subsections; the first subsection would be named "French broadcast" and would detail how the series is broadcast in France—networks, ratings, etc—; the second subsection would be named "International distribution" and would detail how the series is presented in other countries such as the US and the UK. This is where you would detail how characters are redubbed by English-speaking actors, etc.
The article currently lacks a reception section; what do reliable critics think of the series? Is the animation well-received or slated? Is the storytelling viewed as imaginative or derivative? Has the series won any major awards? In order to present a balanced view of the reception, analysis from both French and international critics should be incorporated.

I hope this review has been of some help. Bradley0110 (talk) 14:44, 3 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]