Wikipedia:Peer review/Apples and oranges/archive1

Apples and oranges

Any advice for this article? -- Zanimum 15:10, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 21:00, 10 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't read the article, but these are some suggestions:

Use the template:This as a hatnote.
the word "idiom" is used a lot of times in the first sections, replace it sometimes with other words.
Use the template:cite web instead of those external links.

I'll read the article on the next days and then I'll give you other suggestions. Cheers. No-Bullet (Talk • Contribs) 02:40, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Question, before I get down to brass tacks... how is template:This relevant? The article isn't protected, and doesn't use any templates. -- Zanimum 14:32, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Template:This isn't about protection, it's the template itself that is protected. It's for other uses of the word; in this case, Template:For was more applicable and I've added it to the article. Trebor 18:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Generally seems pretty good, a few thoughts:

The lead could be 1 paragraph, there's no point in putting one extra sentence on its own
There's no need for a "see below" - it's assumed anything mentioned in the lead will be gone into later on.
Repeating the above comments - "it" will be fine instead of "the idiom" each time, and use Template:Cite to find the appropriate referencing template
Is there any known history to the idiom? First recorded usage, usage in literature, stuff like that?
There are a lot of stubby 1-2 sentence paragraphs, which breaks up the flow a bit

Trebor 18:17, 11 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Consider finding/creating/requesting a picture of an apple and orange next to each other. That may be more effective than separate pictures. —ShadowHalo 04:48, 17 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]