Wikipedia:Peer review/Controversy over Harry Potter/archive1

Controversy over Harry Potter edit

This article's been a GA for a while; I was wondering what it would take to get it up to FA. Thanks. Serendipodous 11:57, 6 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is looking good. I only have a few nit-picking things. The first image seems a little out of place. It's caption seems over-long and does not relate to anything around it, and also seems a little non-NPOV. The lead could be a little longer. It also ends with the sentence "a number of free speech groups have organised protests against them", which is not expanded upon at all in the article except for the KidSPEAK thing, so either get rid of the sentence or expand more upon it. Finally, you mention once a comparison to LOTR and Cinderella, and I think that might want to be expanded on. Who has said "Well if you ban Harry Potter you might also want to ban ..." It might lengthen the article a little too much, but it seems neccesary to draw comparisons to better illustrate the point. It also puts the controversies in context. Again, I'm just nit-picking, overall a very good article. --kralahome 00:50, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]
- I completely forgot to mention. I think the title should be changed to something along the lines of Controversy over the ''Harry Potter'' series of books as the current title seems to be talking about controversy surrounding the character itself. --kralahome 03:10, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, issues addressed; the only thing I'd disagree with is your comment that the article doesn't say who claimed that the school would have to remove Macbeth and Cinderella; the line is attributed to Education attorney Victoria Sweeny. Any ideas on how I could expand the lead? Serendipodous 08:14, 8 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]

- I'm sorry about the miscommunication with the removal of other stories line. What I meant to say is that who else has said it. I mean it seems like it would be a widely used-counterargument. Expanding on that could help put the controversies in context. In the lead you have several items in parathenses. If you made those into their own sentences and expanded on them, it would probably make the lead as long as it needed to be. After that I can find nothing else. Good job! Sorry I forgot to sign! kralahome 04:36, 11 June 2007 (UTC)[reply]