Talk:X-Men: God Loves, Man Kills

X-Men: God Loves, Man Kills has been listed as one of the Language and literature good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 14, 2025. (Reviewed version).

Comics: Marvel Low‑importance

	Comics portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Comics, a collaborative effort to build an encyclopedic guide to comics on Wikipedia. Get involved! If you would like to participate, you can help with the current tasks, visit the notice board, edit the attached article or discuss it at the project's talk page.ComicsWikipedia:WikiProject ComicsTemplate:WikiProject ComicsComics
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by Marvel Comics work group.

Influence on X2

UtherSRG, it looks like you added the comment "The novel was the main source for the second X-Men film, X2." That comment implies that the movie strongly resembles the novel. I strongly disagree with that suggestion. The movie lifted a few components from the novel, but the cores of the two stories differ significantly. This link illustrates my point. Let's discuss. John Rigali 15:05, 21 October 2005 (UTC)[reply]

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:X-Men: God Loves, Man Kills/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

PROMOTED

This article meets the good article criteria. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 15:26, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The following discussion is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Nominator: Thebiguglyalien (talk · contribs) 21:01, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Reviewer: ImaginesTigers (talk · contribs) 21:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I've been reading X-Men comics since I was a kid (Grant Morrison's New X-Men). It'll be my pleasure to pick this one up. Review forthcoming (1-2 days). — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 21:19, 8 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hello!

Article is judiciously supported with a range of appropriate sources. I have few issues to raise regarding 1(a), which is about structure and organisation. I'll present my feedback as a series of bullet points.

Reviewer: Of the 316-word 2-paragraph lead, almost 40% is plot. What would you say to splitting up the lead into, say, 3 paragraphs and only briefly summarising the plot?

Nominator: I've rearranged the lead a little, trimming the plot summary.

Reviewer: Including all of the Genesis citations feels like a bit much. If you think it's valuable to keep them all, what about bundling them up in footnotes? Would it be ridiculous to provide the text of the passages he's manipulating?

Nominator: I was thinking the same thing. A footnote is a good idea, I've added an efn.

Reviewer: Could we include when Claremont said it best captured X-Men? This isn't in breach, but I think it's odd to start with Claremont here. Would you consider starting with a more generic topic sentence? It feels odd and ageless, when Claremont is anything but ageless.

Nominator: The 2014 source says "a recent interview", so I added "decades later". I've also rearranged the paragraphs of this section and moved Claremont's statement to the end of its paragraph.

That's about all I can see, and that is pretty rare for me. Great work and looking forward to your responses. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs) 22:17, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

ImaginesTigers That should be everything. Thebiguglyalien (talk) 23:11, 14 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Promoted. — ImaginesTigers (talk∙contribs)

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.

Lede

I'm not gonna partake in the GA review as I don't have the time, but one thing I wanted to discuss is the lede. Specifically, why is there an entire paragraph dedicated just to the graphic novel's plot summary? We don't need everything that happens in a story from beginning to end. What is stated near the beginning of the first paragraph is more than enough. Perhaps the sentence could be a little longer, or have one more sentence there, but that's it.

The sections in the lede on Publication, Themes, and Reception, should ideally also be separate paragraphs. Admittedly, not everything from the body can or should be in the lede, but it may not be a bad idea to try and expand them. PanagiotisZois (talk) 22:52, 10 February 2025 (UTC)[reply]