Wikipedia:Peer review/Fusion Energy Foundation/archive1

Fusion Energy Foundation[edit]

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is a brand new article and I'd like to get some outside opinions. My aim is to bring it to Featured Article standards. Most of the sources are temporarily quoted at Talk:Fusion Energy Foundation/Sources.

Thanks, Will Beback talk 21:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: I having a hard time with this one because it doesn't seem to have a center. One set of paragraphs doesn't seem to lead naturally to the next. Why, for example, does the list of personnel come first, right after the lead? I really was expecting something like a description of the founding of the think tank and a summary of its first meetings, goals, and actions. The first date mentioned in the lead is 1974, but the first date mentioned in the first text section is 1983. What follows in the subsequent sections is a kind of hodge-podge of anecdotes (some of which like the Kissinger and Fonda incidents are quite interesting in themselves) and lists and examples that seem strangely uncoordinated. I get no sense from the article of how the FEF began and evolved over time or what exactly it was. What background did LaRouche have that made him an expert on fusion? Was the FEF a think tank? Was it a fund-raising machine? Was it a scam? Was it a political movement? Did it have any consistent political core? Who got the money? Were the think-tank members the same people who raised funds and insulted people at airports? Was it a cult? What did membership entail? How did people join?

Sorry, I can't get my head around this.

Lead

"It was known for soliciting subscriptions to their magazines... " - "its" rather than "their"?
has been described by many writers as a "front"... - I'd drop the scare quotes. They are easily confused with direct quotations.

Images

The license page for Image:Ibykus Farm combined.jpg is incomplete. It lacks a description, a source for the original(s), and the date or dates of creation. What does "on behalf of XLCR" mean? Was XLCR the photographer?
Image:Winterberg.jpg has similar problems.

In the Reference section, the words in all caps should be written in title case even if the source uses all caps.

I hope these brief comments are helpful. Finetooth (talk) 01:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Those comments are very helpful indeed. Piecing together a narrative for this group is difficult, but you've pointed out specific problems that I can address. Thanks for giving your time and attention to this article. Will Beback talk 07:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]