Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/October 2010

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This page contains the Peer review requests that are older than one month, have received no response in the last two weeks, are not signed, have become featured article or featured list candidates, or did not follow the "How to use this page" principles in some way. If one of your requests has been moved here by mistake, please accept our apologies and undo the archiving edit to the peer review page for the article.

Roger Waters

[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 prior to going forward with FAC, because I want the help of previously-uninvolved-copyeditors.

Thanks for you time, — GabeMc (talk) 06:01, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • There are views that a group of 5 or 6 reference tags should be clumped together in the Reference section rather than left alone; i.e. enclose the citations within a single pair of ref tags than have each enclosed within its own pair.
Can you give me a specific example of how this works?
For example, <ref>{{cite book 1}}</ref><ref>{{cite book 2}}</ref><ref>{{cite book 3}}</ref> can be replaced with <ref>{{cite book 1}}; {{cite book 2}}; {{cite book 3}}</ref> Jappalang (talk) 05:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How do I so this with the cite method currently in use, {{Sfn|Doe|2010|pp-110-120}}?
Replace Sfn with Harvnb; i.e. {{Sfn|Doe|2010|pp=110-120}}{{Sfn|Joe|1999|p=11}} -> <ref>{{Harvnb|Doe|2010|pp=110-120}}; {{Harvnb|Joe|1999|p=11}}</ref> Jappalang (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I now have all the groups of 5 or more cites clumped together. Thanks for the great advice.
  • Dablinks (toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows 6 disambiguation links; please fix them.
Fixed disambiguation links.
Added caption.
Removed file from article pending OTRS.
  • What makes pinkfloydz.com, roxyrama.com, pink-floyd.org (whose reprint of the interview if authentic would constitute copyright violation, which is not allowed on Wikipedia; if the interview is authentic, cite to the newspaper), nfo.net/usa/365a.htm, everyhit.com, pinkfloydfan.net (which is also a dead link and a forum), www.intifada-palestine.com, www.pulse-and-spirit.com, www.davidgilmourblog.com (which is a blog not by David Gilmour or his representatives), www.brain-damage.co.uk (again if the article is in Mojo magazine, source it to the magazine rather than linking to a copyright violation), www.chartstats.com, www.rogerwaters.org, www.rogerwatersontour.com, and the "Tributes to Rick" Facebook entry (how does a dead man collate tributes to himself) reliable sources? Please refer to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-28/Dispatches on how sources are generally judged at FACs.
Removed cites to dubious sources.
The links (I have not checked all) were removed (including copyvio link below) but the information they previously cited for remains. This results in uncited information (the dangers of removing links); reliable sources have to be found to back these information or they have to be removed as well. Jappalang (talk) 05:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe everything is properly sourced now, unless I missed something.
There are some still in the article; what justifies their existence? Note that WP:EL discourages fansites unless they help futher encylopaedic content that cannot be put inside the article. Jappalang (talk) 16:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
They are not there on purpose, I just can't find any dubious sources, can you point them out in the notes? Note numbers?
Okay, I see, I kept lookiong for cites, you meant external links as well, I agree and have removed them. — GabeMc (talk) 00:36, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The "Roger Waters and Eric Clapton – Wish You Were Here at Tsunami Aid: A Concert of Hope" Youtube link is a copyright violation (not uploaded by the copyright owner) and should be deleted.
Deleted link.
  • Structurally it seems good, but why lump all in a Biography section?
I think I resolved the issue, correct me if I am wrong.
The issue to me is that the entire article is the biography; hence, Biography is sort of redundant and incorrect. That heading can most probably be done away with. Jappalang (talk) 05:36, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good advice, I think it is fixed now. — GabeMc (talk) 08:24, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why is Astoria in single quotes ("... recorded on Gilmour's studio/houseboat the 'Astoria',")? As a houseboat, I think it should be in italics. Furthermore, the vessel/home was linked earlier in the article via the word "houseboat", which was in a quote. I think this is a bit misleading, goes against the MOS (which advises against linking words of quotes), and could be avoided (clarified) by naming Astoria to the quote; i.e. "... a summit meeting on the houseboat [the Astoria] with ...". Note that the MOS also recommends that very long quotes (those with four or more sentences) should be in blockquotes. Jappalang (talk) 23:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Good advice, I think it is fixed now. — GabeMc (talk) 00:17, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am a bit doubtful over the flying pig and laser effect photographs. Do they qualify for works of art that warrant copyright protection? If so, derivative copyright issues could result? They are non-permanent installations, so freedom of panorama would not apply to photographs of them. Since they are the primary focus in these photographs, de minimis cannot be called on in defense. Not certain though... Jappalang (talk) 23:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I swapped them out of the article to be sure. — GabeMc (talk) 00:17, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have not yet gone deep into the prose, but the source reliability issues are most concerning FAC-wise. Jappalang (talk) 11:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your time and valuable insights, unless I missed one, all the sources are now WP:RS. — GabeMc (talk) 02:05, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
After reading a bit more, I believe the prose is quite good. Waters's personal relationships section seems a bit skimpy though. Did he get along well with his family (considering the number of divorces)? Overall, I think it can be taken to FAC. Jappalang (talk) 23:15, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As per, "Waters's personal relationships section seems a bit skimpy", yes, it is skimpy, sources on Waters' personal life are scarce. I would gladly expand the section if a suitable bio were ever written, but to my knowledge, none exist of Waters outside his inclusion in books about the Floyd. — GabeMc (talk) 00:17, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bring Us Together

[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 because… although it is rather short, I'm considering sending it to FAC, and I'm wondering if it's just too short to be appropriate there. Additional issue is the large photograph, which I am very proud of getting (it took a fair amount of detective work by me and a Nixon Library staff member) and which is big, but would be a shame to crop or reduce.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 03:34, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: This is a really interesting and well done article (which I am not surprised by, given the quality of your other work I have seen). I was already somewhat familiar with the story, but think there are a few places where a bit more information could be added to flesh things out. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • I love the large image of the float and Nixon in the reviewing stand and definitely think it should be kept in the article. I also like all of the images (kudos for finding the float image and for the road trip to beautiful Deshler, Ohio). However, I do not think any of the current images are a great lead image. I see there is already a cropped version showing just Cole and Nixon at File:Cropped Bring Us Together.jpg and think this would make a great lead image. It shows Cole and Nixon and a replica of the original sign, and I think using it as the lead image would help the reader find Nixon more easily in the large image later in the article (I had to look a little bit to be sure I'd found him). I have no problem with having the crop and the original both in the article.
  • If for some reason the cropped image is not used as the lead photo, what about an image of Nixon, either on the day of his victory speech (if a free image is available) or from his inauguration day? As it is, Deshler is not mentioned in the lead (but should be), and then the lead image has only the cryptic caption "Deshler Elementary School (previously Deshler High and Grade School)" My guess is that most people read the lead or look at the images first, and having an image of Nixon's face as the lead would identify the article pretty quickly.
  • I like the caption for the fire station as it relates it to the article nicley. I would try to do that for the school image, and the station image too - looking at Google Earth, the double tracks lead west, the single track in front of the station runnning left-right is the north-south track (right is north). The north-south track is the one which a train coming from Lima would have taken, so my guess is Nixon's train came in from the left on the tracks running across the image and departed to go north to Toledo by pulling out to the right.
  • I also note that there was a news photo of Cole and her (redone) sign from the AP in several newspapers, such as this one after the election and before the inauguration. I have no idea if that would be justified as a fair use image (it may be the copyright was never renewed and it is free). If it could be used, this might be a good lead image.
  • I see the upright parameter is used for the Deshler images - I think this makes them look too small, especially with the enormous float image in the article. Can they just be thumb sized?
  • As mentioned with captions, I would include Deshler in the lead. I think I would probably include the day of the whistle stop tour in the lead too.
  • I think the article could use some more background to better provide context to the reader. These are probably only a sentence or maybe two for each point, but I think they would help make the article comprehensive (a FAC criterion).
    • I would identify who Nixon's opponent was, and explain who LBJ was too (since he's in the quote). Otherwise someone not very familiar with the era might imagine Nixon was running against LBJ instead of his VP, HHH.
    • I would also give some background information on Nixon's campaign and the whistle stop tour that day. Campaigning by train was something of an anachronism even then, and there is a nice contemporary New York Times article from page 1, describing the whistle stop tour Nixon Intensifies Blows at Humphrey On Ohio Train Tour, R. W. Apple Jr., Oct 23, 1968. Again this could be two sentences - the article describes the distance covered, the number of cars and engines in the train, the number of people on board and stops made, even gives what Nixon's speech was about in Deshler (crime is bad).
    • The Safire entry has some nice material on how the slogan resonated in a time of civil strife and division, and I think it would be worth including a little bit on that. It also mentions how the Democrats thought to use a similar slogan early in the campaign and abandoned it, which be worth including. Again, to someone familiar with the story, this is clear, but it is over 40 years ago now and many people will be fuzzy on exactly what the social scene was like then.
    • I also think it could be made a bit clearer that Nixon was on the last car of the train when he spoke, facing the crowd from the train and somewhat above it, and that the ropes to hold the crowd back also let the train pull in safely.
    • I would say that Deshler is in northwest Ohio and perhaps give the distance to Toledo, as Joe the Plumber is also from northwest Ohio, specifically Holland, a suburb of Toledo. The Greene ref points out the geographical closeness of the two incidents.
    • I also think that I would call Bob Greene a columnist rather than a reporter - this may be just be because I do not like the man, but he is mostly known as a columnist and seems to do relatively little hard news reporting
    • When I looked to see if I could find a photo of the rally / whistle stop, I found the NYT article and the picture of Cole linked above. I also found that there were a few brief stories where her opinion on Nixon was reported afterwards. I think it might be worth while to include these somehow - not only did Nixon's opponents use the phrase against him, but reporters checked on this young woman's opinion every so often and published it.
  • This is just an odd coincidence, but Truman made a whistle stop in Deshler in the 1948 campaign. Not sure it is worth including in the article, but thought you might like the tidbit - see here

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog. I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:21, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I will work on these. Yes, I had been thinking a background/campaign section would be in order. I've found Cole's opinion as late as 1977, in the LA Times. I don't really want to focus on her, I want the focus to be on the slogan. She is a large part of it, of course (by the way, I am a little skeptical about her story, personally. Why did no one ever interview the classmate who laughed at the sign? Did she/he exist?). Nixon also visited Deshler in 1960, btw., he was very fond of these train tours (which he did in 1952 as well and possibly in other years). The reason Deshler was such a popular place to visit was because of the intersection of train lines. Excellent and well focused comments. I will probably not run this article at FAC until around November 1, as I am planning to go back to the Nixon Library in October and want to see if they have more clippings on this whole thing.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:30, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If you keep only the current images, I would make the train station the lead image, as that is the most relevant of the Deshler images (IMO). I think a sentence or two on Cole's subsequent history would be useful - perhaps something like "After the inauguration, Cole was interviewed at least six time for her opinion on Nixon between 1969 and 1977. Although she was invited to work on Nixon's reelection campaign in 1972, she was not invited to his second inaugural." It seems like people did not question her story then, so they did not ask her alibi witness(es). If she was going to lie, I suppose she could have just said she wrote her own sign all along. The world may never know... Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:01, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This looks great - I have two very minor nitpicks.

  • In the lead the sentence The sign was seen by Nixon or a member of his staff, and, after the election, President-elect Nixon mentioned the sign and adopted the phrase "Bring Us Together" in his victory speech as representing his administration's initial goals. might be objected to in FAC as it seems to indicate Nixon only mentioned the sign after the election (when the article makes it clear that he did so before at Madison Square Garden about a week after the Deshler stop).
  • I understand the Joe the Plumber sentence, but it is a bit long and a bit awkwrd and I stumble a little every time I read it. Could it be smoothed out somehow? Not sure if it needs to be split or not. Please let me know when this is at FAC, and thanks for teaching me a lot about a subject I only knew a little about. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ethernet

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is frequently visited technology page and an important subject. Recent work on the article includes improving organization, adding citations and pushing highly detailed material to other articles. I'd like to know what needs to be done to get this article to a B rating.

Thanks, Kvng (talk) 13:54, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jebus989

The article has a good amount of content but a lack of reliable sources is currently an issue. There are two additional references which do not have inline citations, if inline citations were added for these references they could be more useful Jebus989✰ 18:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

One ref was moved inline. Another was moved to a different article. The remaining two are general references which may be helpful to readers for alternative perspective and further investigation. --Kvng (talk) 01:21, 11 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Whistler Sliding Centre

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because even though it is GA, it was not promoted as an FA. I would like to see that needs to be done with this to get it to FA. This could involve anything from minor editing to serious rewrites. Any help on this would be appreciative.

Thanks, Chris (talk) 18:24, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jappalang

Lead

  • It feels like the first sentence is having too much physical location squeezed in. The second is particularly long. Perhaps this can be restructured by taking out the Fitzsimmons Creek from the first sentence, combining it with the front few clauses of the second to form a new second sentence (describing the Centre's location in the Creek).
    • - Done. Chris (talk) 13:27, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Best check the grammar, the creek is a mountain?
        • The creek is adjacent to the mountain. Fixed. Chris (talk) 14:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • Umm, I do not see the fix... Regardless, I suggest changing
          "Located on the lowermost slopes of Blackcomb Mountain near Fitzsimmons Creek, one of two ski mountains forming the Whistler Blackcomb resort, this venue hosted the bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton (individual sport where you slide down the track head first) competitions for the 2010 Winter Olympics, which was co-hosted by Vancouver and the Resort Municipality of Whistler."
          to
          "The centre is part of the Whistler Blackcomb resort, which comprises two ski mountains separated by Fitzsimmons Creek. Located on the lowermost slope of the northern mountain (Blackcomb Mountain), Whistler Sliding Centre hosted the bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton (an individual sport in which the racer slides down the track head first) competitions for the 2010 Winter Olympics."
          We should not be addressing the reader ("you") and I think the co-hosting of the Olympics is superfluous to this article (which should be focusing on the centre). Jappalang (talk) 01:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... and skeleton with the top speed for all World Cup events set by German luger ..."
    I do not think the "with" construct is gramatically sound here... Replace it with a semi-colon or period and cast the information after it as a full sentence. See below for another issue with unexplained "skeleton".
  • "Safety concerns have affected the track design for the Russian National Sliding Centre that will be used for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi."
    So how is this related to Whistler? See also below.
  • "... track design for the Russian National Sliding Centre that will be used for the 2014 Winter Olympics in Sochi. A 20-page report was released by the FIL to ... on 19 April 2010. Constructed on part of First Nations spiritual grounds, the track ... while the refrigeration plant earned Canada's ..."
    All those sentences pertain to the Russian Centre?

Awarding and construction (2004–07)

  • "On 15 November 2004, it was announced that Stantec Architecture Limited, which designed the 2002 Winter Olympic bobsleigh, luge, and skeleton track in Park City, Utah in the United States, would provide detail design and site master plan of the track based on track design of German designer Udo Gurgel of IBG in Leipzig, Germany."
    A long sentence, perhaps, best broken down into shorter ones.
  • "During its building peak in the summer of 2006, more than 500 workers were involved both at the ..."
    "Building peak"? I believe "peak of construction activities" is a more common term. Furthermore, "involved" in or with what? The entire sentence could be recast to use active phrasing.

General, no longer going into specific sections or details

  • I am fairly certain that when we address a city and its state, the notation is "... he visited city, state, in 1993." Note the comma after the larger location (state or country). It is missing in several sentences in this article.
  • Does "2010 Winter Olympics" need this much information on the competitions? I can understand the issues that surround Kumaritashvili, but the races? Would that not be better covered in the Olympics article instead?
    • Luge and skeleton covered on this. Reviewing bobsleigh now and will cut this section down accordingly. Chris (talk) 14:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • Bobsleigh has also been cut down. Chris (talk) 13:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • I do not think it has been cut down enough. To me, it still reads as if every effort has been expended to cram all events into this section (why should disqualifications "for violating the total weight rule" matter for this track). I think it might be better to structure and summarize this section in a way that speaks of how many crashes there were, why they were due to the track, and what effects the crashes had on the track. Jappalang (talk) 14:41, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
        • Skeleton disqualifications removed per request. Bobsleigh further analyzed and weight disqualifications removed per request. Other parts of the section reviewed and tweaked. Chris (talk) 13:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
          • "Strămăturaru's sister Raluca, who had completed her run before her sister and made it through without issue, rushed to the end of the observation deck to know about her condition as the public address announcer directed medical personnel to the scene. Violeta later withdrew before the event while Raluca finished 21st.": Does Raluca's actions warrant this much detail when the article's subject about the track and not the event? Jappalang (talk) 03:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • If abbreviations are only used once (when the full name is mentioned) in the article, then they do not need to be abbreviated in the first place.

Image

According to the Summary listing, it was based on the track map listed at the 2010 Winter Olympics website of the track map itself. Chris (talk) 13:04, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somehow, I feel that perhaps omitting certain specifics could make for a more compact yet accessible article. Much is already there for FA, but polishing is perhaps what it needs now. Jappalang (talk) 09:28, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Michelle Branch

[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 because I think the article covers a variety of information abut the topic. The singer's history is well referenced and the topic covers all the major milestones theyshe had in her career.

Thanks, Tr33 swalow (talk) 20:24, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This was opened by a user now blocked as a sockpuppet of the main contributor, who is banned from Wikipedia. Per discussion at Wikipedia talk:Peer review, this has been archived. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:38, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Better in Time

[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 because I would like to nominate it at WP:GAN, but I would like to know what is missing, esecially with the prose. Many thanks, TbhotchTalk C. 05:30, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This isn't quite ready for GAN, but it can get there. Here are a few suggestions for further improvement.

  • I've never written an article about a music single, and I don't know exactly what the criteria are. Even so, it appears to me that the existing article has too many tables and that some of the information in them is repetitious or unnecessary. For example, "Credits and personnel" includes details about two songs other than "Better in Time"; if you deleted those details, the list would become much more succinct.
  • It's often helpful to look a featured articles to see how other editors have handled similar topics. WP:FA#Music has quite a few articles about singles. I've looked at several to examine the tables and charts, and they tend to be fairly simple and straightforward. See Hey Jude, for example.
  • Passive voice. The article includes passive-voice sentences that would be stronger in active voice. For example, "Background and composition" begins with "On 29 January 2008 the announcement that "Better in Time", along with "Footprints in the Sand", would be launched as double A-side singles on 10 March 2010 was made by Lewis's website." Much punchier would be: "On 29 January 2008, Lewis announced on her website that "Better in Time", along with "Footprints in the Sand", would be launched as double A-side singles on 10 March 2010." The next sentence reads, "Later the next month, they were selected as the official singles of the 2008 Sport Relief, a biennial charity organized by Comic Relief and BBC Sport." Better would be: "Later the next month, 2008 Sport Relief, a biennial charity organized by Comic Relief and BBC Sport, selected them as their official singles." I'd suggest going through the whole article looking for similar passive constructions and re-casting them in active voice.
  • I found and fixed a few small errors, but I'm sure I didn't catch them all. It would be good to enlist the aid of a proofreader or copyeditor before heading to GAN.

Lead

  • "It was written by Andrea Martin and J. R. Rotem, and produced by the last." - Active and slightly more clear might be "Andrea Martin and J.R. Rotem wrote the song, and Rotem produced it."
 Not done "and Rotem produced it. It was..." the double "it" does not sounds good. TbhotchTalk C. 03:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Lyrically, "Better in Time" tells the history of a girl who cannot forget her ex-partner, and after all she knows that "it will all get better in time. - Maybe "and who knows that... " would be more clear.
    added TbhotchTalk C. 03:38, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The single achieved to be certified gold... " - "Achieved to be" is a bit awkward. Maybe just "was"? Ditto for the same construction a couple of sentences later?
  • "after all she knows that "it will all get better in time". - Direct quotations, even if they are repeated in the main text, need in-line citations. One way to avoid having to source them twice is to paraphrase them in the lead and use the direct quote only once, with an in-line citation, in the main text.
The lead should summarize the article, sources are not needed there because it is supposed that they are in the text. TbhotchTalk C. 03:54, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "it shows how Lewis performs in front of 'unrelated photographic set-ups' and shows what goes on behind the scenes." - It's not clear what the meaning of "unrelated photographic set-ups" might be. It's also not clear what "shows what goes on behind the scenes" might refer to. Specific examples would help make these two concepts more clear.
    I'm not an English speaker, but I understood the term "unrelated photographic set-ups"— in words of the BBC—. The writter tried to say, like television or a film set, that it was based on what's going on the set while Leona is in it. Personally, I would add this description, but is WP:OR. TbhotchTalk C. 03:05, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Chart performance

  • "Better in Time"/"Footprints in the Sand" - The Manual of Style suggests using something other than the front slash for combinations like this. Would "Better in Time" and "Footprints in the Sand" be OK?
  • "While "Better in Time" entered to the country chart... " - "Entered to" sounds odd. Delete "to"?

Images

  • The image of Lewis with the horse is awfully dark. Is it worth keeping? Couldn't the concept of "unrelated photographic setup" better be explained in words? What is the point of these setups? What are some of the others?
  • try the previous .TbhotchTalk C. 02:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Track listings and formats

  • Replace front slashes with "and"?

References

  • Something is missing from the title in citation 3.

Notes

  • This probably should be renamed something like "Works cited".
  •  Not done Unneeded. 02:53, 18 September 2010 (UTC)
  • The book data should include the place of publication.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Third Anglo-Maratha War

[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 because… I would like to areas of improvement for getting this article listed as a GA. Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 05:37, 2 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AustralianRupert

[edit]

Looks pretty good to me. I have a few style comments:

  • there are a few disambig links that should be fixed: [3]
  • one external link appears to be dead: [4]
  • the capitalisation of the titles in the References section should be in accordance with WP:MOSCAPS#Composition titles
  • per Wikipedia:MOS#Dates ordinal suffixes with dates
  • the peer review script indicates that there are some contractions in the article such as "weren't". Generally contractions shouldn't be used unless they are direct quotes;
  • the References should be sorted into alphabetical order by author's surname;
  • there is an inconsistent date format in the article. For instance, "January 1, 1818", or "1st of January 1818" in the Flight of the Peshwa section. Consistency is the key, but you need to bear in mind that ordinal suffixes shouldn't be used, so I suggest "January 1, 1818";
  • "suzerainty" should be linked, as it is a word that some readers might not understand;
  • the final part of the End of the war and its effects section should have a citation;
  • do you have any casualty figures? If so, they should probably be added to the infobox;
  • the End of the war and its effects section is very large, could you perhaps split the paragraph a bit?
  • the time format is not consistent with the WP:MOS#Times, for instance in the Subjugation of Holkar section, "nine AM" should be "9:00 am" (making sure to include the non breaking space). AustralianRupert (talk) 08:13, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Magicpiano

[edit]

Looks like a good start. Things to work on:

  • Assume your reader is a 12-year-old American child with a modern atlas. Does this person know who Shivaji (mentioned in first paragraph without explanation) is?
  • I think you need at least a paragraph describing in a little more detail the history of the Marathas (and specifically their relations with the British) in the 18th century. Presumably there are roots of conflict that are deeper than the proximate casus belli mentioned? (At one point you mention the war as "mopping up" after the second war, but give little background on the nature and course of that war.)
  • The article needs maps depicting campaign movements, not just geographic maps. File:India british expansion 1805a.jpg might be a good starting point, but I have no visual sense of what part of the subcontinent is the actual theater of war, and how forces moved within it.
  • This period in Indian history uses terminology that will be unfamiliar to casual readers from other cultures. Brief clauses explaining for example that the Peshwa was the nominal ruler of the empire, and what a "resident" is are necessary; do not assume that readers will click through to a linked page for these and other terms, like Pindari and Nizam (neither of which is explained or linked at first mention).
  • You use "third anglo-maratha war" several times in the article; this is unnecessary, we already know the name of the war. (If you have to distinguish from other wars, use a phrase like "this war" instead of "the war".)
  • A war (or campaign) article should provide context for specific actions, and (in my opinion) be short on battle details, unless strategy or larger outcomes hinge on those details. Many campaigns consist of movements with few or no major battles; this is what you need to tell about here. The section "Subjugation of Holkar" is lacking in context; if I want a detailed description of the battle, I'll click through to the battle; tell me where Holkar is and why, and how and why the British came to target him and bring him to battle. I have no sense of where British and Maratha forces were concentrated to begin their campaigns, and where they went, or were intending to go when battles were engaged.
  • In a good way, many or most of the Indian leaders are named. Less so with the British, who are often faceless and nameless. Who led the forces against the Pindaris?
  • The British are sometimes referred to as "English".
  • In "The Pindaris" you say that Shinde and Holkar lost their territories in the second war. In the next paragraph you say that Shinde and Holkar are sheltering the Pindaris in their territory. Something is not right with this...
  • You never actually link in text the first two wars.
  • Were there internal disagreements among the Marathas that are important to mention? the British?
  • I don't know how strong your English is; the article definitely needs thorough copyediting.

--Magic♪piano 17:02, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hchc2009

[edit]
  • A lot of work's clearly gone into this.
  • The Khadki battleground is described, but the article could usefully tell the reader more about the general terrain of the campaign - is the region mountainous, desert, jungle etc.?
  • You mention that there were infantry, cavalry and guns, and that the British had higher technology, but the article might usefully explain a little bit more about what the armies were equipped with or what that higher technology was.
  • The British East India company is mentioned in the infobox, but in the prelude you talk about the British Empire - I think the two were different entities?
  • I'd echo the recommendations above for getting some help with the copyediting - a lot of the language being used isn't quite right and detracts from the considerable research that's gone into the article.

Hchc2009 (talk) 17:57, 4 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TRFasulo

[edit]

I think you have already received enough suggestions, so I won't burden you with many more. I really looked at the article as I am fascinated by the British Raj. Then I saw the phrase:

"...the armies lost battles and got slaughtered when a(<-delete) they encountered a river, unable to discover fjords or locate boats."

I wondered about that. I suggest that it needs a bit more explanation. Perhaps dates and who the enemy was. Not too much though, as the article isn't about that. On the other hand, it might be better to just delete that phrase completely.

You also use the term "fjords." Is that appropriate to India? I though that term was just applied in Scandinavia?

My major criticism, and I didn't look to see if this was already suggested, is that your Reference section is not alphabetized by author. This makes the references difficult to find. Thomas R. Fasulo (talk) 02:43, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

AustralianRupert's Recommendations

[edit]

I've made all of the recommended changes except:

  • do you have any casualty figures? If so, they should probably be added to the infobox;

Separate numbers for the various battles of the war are available but I thought adding them to obtain a casualty number for the war might amount to OR. I will keep looking for a source that gives a direct total number for the entire war. Zuggernaut (talk) 23:05, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Magicpiano's Recommendations

[edit]

I've made all the recommended changes except the following two items:

  1. The article needs maps depicting campaign movements, not just geographic maps. File:India british expansion 1805a.jpg might be a good starting point, but I have no visual sense of what part of the subcontinent is the actual theater of war, and how forces moved within it.
  2. A war (or campaign) article should provide context for specific actions, and (in my opinion) be short on battle details, unless strategy or larger outcomes hinge on those details. Many campaigns consist of movements with few or no major battles; this is what you need to tell about here. The section "Subjugation of Holkar" is lacking in context; if I want a detailed description of the battle, I'll click through to the battle; tell me where Holkar is and why, and how and why the British came to target him and bring him to battle. I have no sense of where British and Maratha forces were concentrated to begin their campaigns, and where they went, or were intending to go when battles were engaged.

I'm currently working on these and will continue looking for a map. Zuggernaut (talk) 03:17, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The background material is significantly improved, I have a much better sense of who the players are; good work. For maps, if there are not period campaign maps to be found, you may have to make your own, using a more general roughly-period map either as a background, or something from which to trace boundary lines on a more schematic map. This can be done using Inkscape; see Battle of Ridgefield and Battle of The Cedars for maps I made using these techniques. Magic♪piano 18:52, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've provided the context for the Holkar sub-section and locations/headquarters of all other Maratha leaders. The only item pending now is:
  • The article needs maps depicting campaign movements, not just geographic maps. File:India british expansion 1805a.jpg might be a good starting point, but I have no visual sense of what part of the subcontinent is the actual theater of war, and how forces moved within it.
I will look at Inkscape and make the maps over the next week or two.

Hchc2009's recommendations

[edit]
  • The geography was vast - I've made some changes and added terrain information for each Maratha leader's territory separately at the beginning of this section Third_Anglo-Maratha_War#Commencement
  • I could not find too much information on the technology of the weapons of Marathas but I found some saying what they didn't have and that they mostly imported artillery. I've made those changes here -- Third_Anglo-Maratha_War#Prelude
  • One subtlety that is often glossed over in histories of 18th century India is that some of the forces used were in fact British Army regiments; they were certainly present in some Indian conflicts of that time. I don't know if this is true of this conflict; I'd suspect it to be so. This would mean that the UK (and not just the BEIC) was also a participant in the war at some level. (P.S. the commanders in the infobox need fixing. I don't think Warren Hastings (d. 1818 in England) was involved; perhaps a different Hastings?) Magic♪piano 20:09, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I'm slightly confused about the whole UK-EIC-English-British nomenclature because I've found that some sources even refer to them as "English". To my knowledge using "English" is incorrect. Buy maybe it has to do with the history of the UK at that time? It looks like it was the different Hastings you've linked to. I will make that change. Zuggernaut (talk) 20:16, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"English" is definitely deprecated usage, at least for events since 1707. As far as EIC vs. UK, my understanding is at best incomplete, but goes like this. Before the passage of the India Act 1784 the EIC operated nominally independently of UK policy, but the need for Crown troops and collateral effects of company actions on diplomacy led to that act, which effectively put the government in control of the company, which continued to exist (until the 1857 rebellion, I guess). I don't know if or when the distinction between Crown and company troops was erased; it was certainly not at the time of Cornwallis in the 1790s, when the difference (over relative rank and pay between the two) was one of the problems he left behind. I'd be surprised if the large number of troops Hastings amassed did not include Crown or former Crown troops (this was peacetime in Europe, just after Napoleon). It should at some point be clear that such troops were present in India; details are of course for campaign or battle articles. Magic♪piano 20:43, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

TRFasulo's recommendations

[edit]

Diannaa

[edit]
  • I would like to see a little information about the Bombay Council and the Calcutta Council. What were these councils, and why were they at odds with each other?
  • You mention the "foresight and persistence" of Warren Hastings but we are not told what exactly he did. Could you provide some details? --Diannaa (Talk) 17:13, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • You state the Peshwa fled until January 1, but the battle was also on January 1 so that cannot be correct. Please check your sources and fix the date. I have marked the spot with a {{contradiction-inline}} tag.
  • What do the words "inam" and "watan" mean? You do not define them, and we have no articles. --Diannaa (Talk) 22:07, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • A lot of the material in the last three paragraphs appears to have been lifted directly from the sources. This is of course a copyright violation. Please re-work this material and put it in your own words. The last paragraph appears to have been lifted directly from MacDonald. And some in the first has come directly from Hunter and some from Black. I have removed the entire last section and it will all have to be re-worked, so sorry.
  • Copy edits are now completed. --Diannaa (Talk) 04:31, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The last three paragraphs have been rephrased or removed. Explanation for Watan and Inam has beeen provided in the form of footnotes. I will work on the remaining (first 3) bullet items over the next few days. Zuggernaut (talk) 04:34, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Keep up the good work. Regards, --Diannaa (Talk) 05:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

YellowMonkey

[edit]
  • In the 18th century were the places called Bombay, Chennai, calcutta. Had the British taken them over and renamed them yet?
  • Article talks about Maharashtra as though it existed in the old days
  • Page format in the footnotes were inconsistent wrt p and pp, and also things like 216-7 and 226-227. Also some of them need to be switched to ndashes YellowMonkey (new photo poll) 08:13, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Sources confirm the names Bombay Council, Calcultta Council and administrative units such as Bombay Presidency, Madras Presidency are mentioned for our time period of interest (1817-1819).
  • Maharashtra is mentioned independently twice - I will change that to Maratha Empire or something more appropriate. It is mentioned in conjunction with phrases like "modern state of Maharashtra" in 1 or 2 more places which doesn't seem inaccurate.
  • Will fix the p/pp, numbering and dashes. Any links/help on how to run scripts to fix dashes? Thanks. Zuggernaut (talk) 15:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Watts Up With That?

[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 because this article was nominated for GAR in July, but has been unstable since then. I want to get this article in good shape so that it can go through the GAR process and pass. There is work to be done on this article, and it needs a fresh look from editors who have not been involved in editing it and who are familiar with peer review and GA criteria. I was not the nominator for GAR, and I did not create the article.

Thanks, Minor4th 00:12, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Polargeo

This article is not too far from GA but appears to be part of a general battleground which a current arbcom case is looking at Wikipedia:Arbitration/Requests/Case/Climate change. This does not really require peer review but meditation before GA status can be conveyed. Polargeo (talk) 13:50, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article, but I think it needs somewhat more work before it is ready for WP:GAN, aside from any edit wars / arbcom cases, etc. Here are some suggestions for improvement and thanks for working on this article.

  • Per WP:LEAD, the lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. However, there are somethings in the lead like the year the website was founded, that are only in the lead and infobox, but not in the body of the article itself.
  • Similarly, as a summary, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but I do not really see how the "Temperature records project" section is in the lead.
  • I think it is important in a History section to focus on the creator of the website and the mechanics of the website itself too. A bit of background on Watts would help to provide context to the reader, and how can this be a history if it does not include the start date?
  • I would also include, if they are know, Watts' reasons for starting the blog in the first place - what motivated him to begin this? As it is, the History section begins in media res
  • I would also include things like the structure of the website - when were moderators added? Who are the contributors besides Watts? What kind of traffic does it get? What kinds of forums are available for readers or for people to post at? We are told about a moderator in the Climategate section and Alexa rankings in 2010, and some is mentioned in the lead, but any more details in the article body would help.
  • The article should not include URLs in the text (surface stations) - that is what refs are for
  • The 2010 and Reception sections are very choppy - almost all one or two sentence short paragraphs, and almost no narrative flow. Can these be made into more of a story as to what is going on?
  • Some refs are incomplete - 9 is just a title and 20 just a URL. Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Make sure the refs used meet WP:RS - I have no idea if they do, but that is one way to avoid some controversy. Newspaper refs seems good, not sure on the others.
  • Any chance for a free image? I looked at the article on Mr. Watts to see if there was one of him, and see he runs the Surface stations website too - this should be clearly stated in this article.
  • WP:NPOV issues will be crucial here - are there repsonses to the websites' positions on all this that critque them?

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:12, 12 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments Ruhrfisch. I think the editors of that article do not have this page watchlisted. I am going to link to this page on the WUWT article talk page and copy this post of yours for more exposure among the editors who are active on the article. Minor4th 07:15, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Geometry guy
  • Both the lead and the article have "In addition to its creator/founder, the blog..." which mismatches the noun clause with the subject rather than the object of the sentence.
  • Wikilinks do not need to be repeated within a section: this happens with Christopher Monkton and Judith Curry for example.
  • It does not seem helpful or encyclopedic to describe Christopher Monkton as "outspoken". (There are spacing problems here too, and elsewhere in the article.)
  • The reader may first discover that Watts is a TV and radio meteorologist in The Times quote. The principle of least surprise may be a good guide.
  • The article is poorly structured. For instance "Reception" and "History" should not be conflated. (This would be a clear GA fail.)
  • Patrick Michaels' credentials are misleading in that he is sceptical about AGW.
  • The first paragraph of "Temperature records project" is not well sourced; the second paragraph goes off-topic. (This would be a clear GA fail.)

In terms of general disagreements about the article and related topics, I have two comments:

  1. Wikipedia is an encyclopedia, not a political journal or a news source; encyclopedic writing involves stepping back and looking at a topic from a distance (try to imagine how it would be viewed in 5 years time);
  2. In an article written from the neutral point of view (which is a point of view) it should be hard to tell what the point of view of the editors is (beyond their support for the neutral point of view).

Geometry guy 20:57, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. Can you expand a bit on the "history" and "reception" -- I don't think any of the other editors are working on these items, and I'd like to address them as much as I can. I was starting to work on the structure and moving things around a bit, and I was thinking of making the "History" section more of a background section or general information section but didn't know what to title it. The reviews, awards, reception, criticism was all dumped in one section that served as a catch-all for one sentence bits that didn't fit together well. I'd like to work these items throughout the article if I can find a place for them. Further comments would be welcome. I have never worked on GA or addressing peer review. Minor4th 21:23, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The first step would be to start a new section, entitled "Reception" or something similar. Move to that section both objective and subjective reviews of the site: objective reviews include webtraffic statistics, while subjective reviews include comments on the quality or popularity of the site in other sources. The history section could be retitled "Background", "Origins", or something similar. Geometry guy 22:10, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, so would the History/Background section then just be info about how the blog started and when it moved to a new host, added contribs, etc? Where in the order of subheadings would you put the Reception section? And what about notable content or notable guest writers? I'll figure it out if you dont care to keep commenting, but your input is appreciated. Minor4th 00:15, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Taurus-Littrow (lunar valley)

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I am of the belief that this article may meet the criteria for B-class. I would like a second opinion verifying this.

Thanks, Tyrol5 [Talk] 20:56, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: In my view this article as it stands is probably borderline for a B. Assuming you want to lift the article's quality beyond that, here are some suggestions for you to consider:-

Choice of title
  • The name "Taurus Littrow" means nothing to the great majority of people - it could refer to anything. If they knew the article was about a lunar valley they would much more likely be drawn to it. Have you considered adding the words (lunar valley) to the title?
 Done - Added "(lunar valley)" to the end of title.
Prose
  • There is rather too much reliance on links to explain names or terms which will be unfamiliar to the general reader, e.g. "Tycho", "regolith", "ejecta" etc. Readers shouldn't have to keep leaving the article to follow links in order to maintain their understanding. Some technical terms are unavoidable, and I'm not suggesting that every one be explained, but a little more clarity would be helpful.
    •  Done
  • Some of the prose needs polishing. The following are samples and should not be taken as a complete list of required prose fixes:-
    • The first sentence is under-punctuated and has too many clauses, yet neglects to give a date for the Apollo 17 mission, information which is pretty vital for the sense of the sentence.
      •  Done
    • The last sentence in the lead reads: "The valley was named by the crew of Apollo 17, and was subsequently adopted by the IAU in 1973." That reads as though the valley was adopted by the IAU. Needs rephrasing. IAU should be spelt out.
      •  Done
    • Overall the lead is very brief, and needs to be expanded so that it is a more complete summary of the article.
      •  Done
    • The first sentemce of the "Formation and geography" section reads: "The Taurus-Littrow valley is geologically diverse in that during its formation, lavas welled upward from the Moon's interior." It will not be obvious to the general reader why lavas welling upwards from the moon's interior leads to geological diversity. The next sentence begins "As a result of this..." It's not clear what "this" is referring to. Also in this paragraph you should mention that Cernan and Schmitt were members of the Apollo 17 mission.
      •  Done
    • Later in the article, in the Composition section, we have: "There are several geologic deposits on the valley floor originating from several different events in the geologic timeline of the Moon. One of these, the light mantle,..." Again, what does "these" refer to? I imagine it means the geological deposits, but as written it seems to be referring to the "several different events".
      •  Done
    • Clunky: "As Apollo 17 was the final lunar mission of the Apollo program, several scientific objectives were identified and several sites previously considered were given consideration again."
      •  Done
Images
  • I liked the photographs very much. However, the geological map, in the absence of any description or key, is not useful.
    •  Done Color key added.
Citations
  • The article is rather lightly cited. The first two paragraphs of the Formation and geography section have no citations at all, and the same is true for the main paragraph in the Landing site selection section.
    •  Done - Citations clarified.
Dablink
  • Your link on Copernicus goes to a disambiguation page.
    •  Done

It is for you to decide how far you want to take this article. I believe that attention to these points could certainly bring it within range of Good Article. Please contact my tlpage if you wish to raise any questions on this review, as I am not able to watch peer reviews at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 18:06, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Haflinger (horse)

[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 because I would like to take it to FAC in the relatively near future, and would like some more feedback on it before that. It went through a GA review back in 2008, but has been significantly expanded since then. Comments specifically on excess horse jargon and prose would be appreciated.

Thanks, Dana boomer (talk) 17:38, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: Well-done article, excellent images. Being a non-horse person, I can't say for sure that it's comprehensive, but it seems so to me. I found and fixed some small errors and MoS glitches, and I have just a few other suggestions, as follows:

Lead

  • "and by 1904 the first breeder's cooperative was formed" - Should that be "breeders' "?
Fixed. Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The breed is well-muscled, but with an elegant appearance." - Tighten to "The breed is well-muscled but elegant"?
Fixed. Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "as well as various under-saddle disciplines" - "Under-saddle" is linked to "equestrian" in the "Uses" section. Should it be linked here?
Flipped wikilinks to first appearance. Montanabw(talk) 07:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

World Wars

  • "a Sardinian/Arabian cross stallion" - The front slash and the word "cross" are a bit awkward. Would "a crossbred stallion (part Sardinian and part Arabian)" be better?
Made a hyphenate; Sardinian-Arabian. Montanabw(talk) 07:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The year 1931 saw another breeders' cooperative established in East Tyrol, and the achievement of Haflinger breeding having spread throughout the entire Tyrolean province." - Since years don't literally see, a slight re-write might be better. Suggestion: "In 1931, a breeders' cooperative was established in East Tyrol, and Haflinger breeding spread throughout the entire Tyrolean province."
Fixed. Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "All crossbred horses and colts not of breeding quality were able to be sold to the Army" - Tighten by changing "were able to be sold" to "could be sold"?
Fixes. Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

21st century

  • "where state studs own the stallions" - Word missing? Can studs own stallions?
A "stud" is a facility (i.e. a farm). A stallion "stands at stud" -- so yes, a stud can own a stallion. Hope that clarifies matters. Montanabw(talk) 07:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC) Also wikilinked. Montanabw(talk) 07:44, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "found that although there was a very proportion of inbreeding in the population" - Word missing"
Did a minor rephrase (Dana, double check my edit on this, hope it's OK) Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yup, looks good. I added a "very" before the "small" that you added because the amount is infintesimal. Dana boomer (talk) 01:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "although other nations' registries have not yet entered a decision on the topic" - Is that still true in 2010?
Dana needs to verify this one. Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As far as I can tell, this is still true. I'm basically trying to prove a negative, because so far none of the other registries have said anything about the topic. It's like they're all sticking their heads in the sand and hoping no one actually tries to register such as horse. Dana boomer (talk) 01:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Breed characteristics

  • "athletic with a natural tendency to be off the forehand" - I'm getting more familiar with horse terminology by reviewing horse articles, but "off the forehand" is one I haven't encountered before. Could it be linked or briefly explained?
The concept here is that horses are more athletic if they are light in the front, shift their weight back and use their hindquarters more for impulsion...the source probably phrased it that way, which is a little weird even by horse lingo standards. Dana may have to see how the source uses the phrase; we may be able to make it a little less awkward. Montanabw(talk) 07:16, 20 September 2010 (UTC) Rephrased to "light on the forehand." Might still be gibberish to the non-horse crowd, but more standard lingo within the horse world. May be room for further improvement, others sure can fiddle with it some more. Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Linked to forehand (horse). Does that clear up the confusion? Dana boomer (talk) 01:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Other

  • The Commons link should be moved down to the "External links" section.
Fixed Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The dab tool finds three dabs.
Which ones?? Oh, got it, fixing... Montanabw(talk) 07:40, 20 September 2010 (UTC) DANA: Check my fix on Bozen, I think the correct one is the one now in northern Italy, not the one in Switzerland. Montanabw(talk) 07:47, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:26, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Finetooth! Great review, as always! Dana boomer (talk) 01:02, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Juwan Howard

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because this article failed at WP:FAC, but had no opposition. I intend to renominate it on October 6. However, constructive feedback would be helpful.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:59, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh. Maybe then you should add some material explaining the interest. I would understand if he had been in court over it or the accused crime was something serious, but as it is, I'm reading this material about a random basketball player and a minor youthful misunderstanding about shoes and wondering why it's in there. ('FAC wanted it' isn't a really satisfactory answer.)
  • The high school section is very long. I had a hard time keeping the chronology straight - perhaps you could sectionize it into 4 sections, 1 for each year, since there seems to be quite a lot of material for each one.
Looks better.
--Gwern (contribs) 14:14 3 October 2010 (GMT)

Ni Es Lo Mismo Ni Es Igual

[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 because I really need help with the article. I can't seem to find enough information on the Internet regarding recording and production. The only listed is that the musician's record company allowed him to make his own schedule. Additionally, I'm not sure if some of the sources are verifiable and one of the links just died. Any other suggestions be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Magiciandude (talk) 19:51, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brief commant: The title is completely meaningless to anyone who hasn't heard of this album. Titles should indicate what an article is about; this looks like a complete riddle. At the very least you should add (album) to the article, as is done with other album articles. Brianboulton (talk) 23:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

According to the naming style under WP: Albums: When there is no other encyclopedic use of the album title, the article should reside at the normal name e.g. London Calling, not London Calling (album).. Magiciandude (talk) 23:47, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That might work OK for English language titles, but what you have here is a Spanish phrase that not that many people will recognise even as that. I am suggesting that you give your readers some help, rather than simply complying with standard album naming guidelines. But it's up to you. Brianboulton (talk) 00:01, 16 September 2010 (UTC) (By the way, ref. 5 is a dead link)[reply]
Okay, I took into consideration and decided to take your suggestion to rename this article into "Ni Es Lo Mismo Ni Es Igual (album)". Magiciandude (talk) 20:06, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I personally think that is a wise decision. If the consensus is insistent otherwise, it can always be changed back. I will try and review the article in the next day or two. Brianboulton (talk) 22:54, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A few more comments

I have read through the article, and it obviously needs expanding; at present it is about a quarter of the length of the better album articles. A few examples: Be Here Now (album) 3,573 words, In Utero (album) 4,773, Debut (album) 2,270, Bad (album) 3,007. I took these at random from the FA and GA listings (all have (album) added to the name, incidentally).

As am not well-informed in this field I am unsure where you will find new sources dealing with this album, but why are you limiting youself to online sources? Other album articles use journals (Rolling Stone, Melody Maker, Entertainment Weekly etc.). Some use reviews in newspapers, some use books. I think the key to expanding this article is to look beyond the internet – and perhaps to make fuller use of the sources that you have. For instance, this longish article could surely be used to provide more interesting background information. This looks to be another underused source.

Sorry I can't help more. Brianboulton (talk) 21:30, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Well can anyone else lend a hand please? Magiciandude (talk) 20:22, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RAF Uxbridge

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I think this article is ready to be listed as a good article although there is a big backlog on the military history nominations list. I'm keen to hear where improvements can be made.

Thanks, Harrison49 (talk) 21:34, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article - thanks for working on it. I think this owuld have a hard time at GAN in its current state, so here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to GAN.

  • The disambig links tool on this page finds two dab links in the article that need to be fixed
  • The lead does not really meet WP:LEAD and needs to be expanded to be a better summary of the article. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
  • The article has a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that impede the flow of the prose. They need to either be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
  • Article needs more references, for example the last two paragraphs in Hillingdon House have no refs (and the one on the ghost especially needs a ref). There are also paragraphs with refs early, then some sentences following the refs which are not themselves referenced (but should be). For example The house and gardens, together with the surrounding parkland and artificial lake, created by damming the River Pinn, comprised over 200 acres (81 ha).
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Some of the current refs do not have enough information. For example, internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. Please see WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Per WP:ITALIC and WP:MOSQUOTE quotations should not be in italics and should be in "quotation marks" (Churchill's quote)
  • I think this is a WP:WEIGHT issue - the amount of material on WWII seems fairly slight, especially compared to the previous history. I think the WWII material should be expanded - how many aircraft were stationed there? How many sorties did they fly? What was the casualty rate for aircraft and pilots during the Blitz?
  • Some of the material is organized by subject now, but I wonder if it would flow better if organized more chronologically? For example, a big chunk of the WWII section is about what happened to the facilities long after the war (museum).
  • Make sure to provide context to the reader - this could use a year RAF Uxbridge became part of No. 22 Group. Units stationed at Uxbridge included the Headquarters Music Services and also the Queen's Colour Squadron of the RAF Regiment.[18]

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:38, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Silver Reef, Utah

[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 because I want to upgrade it to GA status. I would like the entire article reviewed, and I would like advice on how to improve the article and get it ready for a GA nomination.

Thanks, The UtahraptorMy mistakes; I mean, er, contributions 02:40, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting article, and in general it is easy to read. It's broad in coverage but might not be quite broad enough yet for GA. For example, is anything known about the history of the area before the mid-19th century? The biggest problem I see, however, is that the article relies heavily on sources that are probably not reliable as defined by WP:RS. Personal web sites, blogs, and dot-coms like Legends of America and Utah Travel Center, for example, are usually not considered reliable. It may be that the same or similar information might be found in the four books you list in the "Further reading" section. Those are most likely reliable sources per WP:RS and may include other valuable information about the town.

I made a small number of proofing changes to the article, and here is a short list of suggestions about prose, style, and other matters.

Geology

  • "This area features a variety of plant species not seen in any singular region." - I'm not sure what is meant by "singular region". Does it mean that these species are found together only in this region?
  • Some of the material in this section has little to do with geology. Perhaps the Geology and Geography sections would do better combined as "Geology and geography", and repetition of material about Red Cliffs Recreation Area could be eliminated. "Climate" could be its own section.

Discovery of silver

  • "During its first year, Silver Reef did not have a smelter." - Link smelter?

Town

  • "Immediately following the initial silver rush, a town site was plotted, and the town was hastily built." - "Platted" rather than "plotted"?
  • "Despite the fact that it was surrounded by Mormon settlements," - Tighten to "Although it was surrounded by Mormon settlements... "?
  • "Despite the fact that Mormonism was not Silver Reef's main religion," - Tighten?

Crime

  • "Despite the fact that it had good relations with other towns," - Tighten?

Decline

  • The Manual of Style advises against extremely short sections and subsections. I'd suggest removing the "Closure of the mines" subhead and just allowing it to be the last paragraph of the "Decline" section.

Tourism

  • This section has repetitious material and short subsections. I would suggest removing the subheads and the bolded, bulleted list, and re-writing this section in straight prose. For example, the section could still open with "Silver Reef has since become a popular tourist attraction." The next sentences might say, "After Silver Reef's mines closed, the Wells Fargo office was used as a residence until the late 1940s. After that, it was placed on the National Register of Historic Places. In the 21st century, the office is used as an art gallery and a museum." That it faced Main Street may not be important enough to include. The next paragraph could discuss the Rice Bank Building. And so on.

Notes

  • Some of the citations are incomplete, citation 13, for example. A good rule of thumb for citations to web sites is to include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and access date, if all of those are known or can be found.

Images

  • The image licenses look fine except for the File:View of Silver Reef.jpg and File:Cosmopolitan Restaurant 1800s.jpg. It's not clear where the originals for these two came from. The immediate sources listed on the licensing pages are not the same as the original sources. If you can find out from the immediate sources where they got the photographs, you might be able to find them (in old books maybe) and fill in the missing information. They are probably public domain because of their age, but that's not certain from the information provided.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 00:12, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'll get started improving the article. Thank you for your review. The UtahraptorMy mistakes; I mean, er, contributions 00:16, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hong Kong

[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 because this article failed 2 FARs this year already and I want to make sure all WP:FACR have been satisfied before I submit for its 3rd FAR this year.

Thanks, Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 04:18, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments, first installment: Here are comments from the top through the "Geography" section. I will add more later but thought it might be helpful to post these now.

  • The dab tool at the top of this review page finds two links to disambiguation pages rather than their intended targets.
 Done fixed the second dab link, I think the first one is an intended dab link since it's at the other use line Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 06:13, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "Hong Kong's population is 95% ethnic Chinese and 5%... " - It's generally preferred to use "percent" rather than the symbol in simple cases like this and to add a no-break space between the digits and the word "percent" to hold them together on line-break. WP:NBSP has details about the no-break code. Ditto later in the article, in the geography section and elsewhere.
  • "The Hong Kong dollar is the 9th most traded currency in the world." - Numbers from one to nine are usually written as words; i.e., "ninth".
  • "now Aberdeen Harbour/Little Hong Kong" - Front slashes are ambiguous. Better would be to use "and" or "or" or a hyphen, whichever makes most sense.
 Done fixed in the lead paragraph. Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 06:13, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Etymology

  • MOS:COLLAPSE advises against using collapsing boxes in the main text, including captions. The hide-show pronunciation guide will fail FACR, I'm pretty sure, and should be changed to just "show".
 Done had to relocate the template, since it messes up the layout after set to always show... Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In this case, I think I gave bad advice. Since I posted the note above, I've realized that the weather box is also collapsible, and I've never heard anyone complain about the hide and show nature of weather boxes. The collapsible pronunciation guides may also be OK. I agree with you that the "show" mode messes up the layout. However, I don't know what the fix is. A third opinion might help. Ruhrfisch, Jappalang, or Brianboulton, all frequent PR reviewers, might be willing to look at this specific question if asked. Finetooth (talk) 15:07, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Pre-colonial

  • "Eight petroglyphs were discovered on surrounding islands dating back to Bronze Age during the Shang Dynasty time period, which are believed to have been used to pacify bad weather." - A bit awkward. Suggestion: "Eight petroglyphs, believed to have been used to pacify bad weather, were discovered on surrounding islands dating to the Bronze Age during the Shang Dynasty."
  • "incorporated the territory into imperial China for this first time" - "The first time" rather than "this first time"?
  • "Military clashes between China and Portugal ensued resulting in the Portuguese expelled." - Doesn't quite make sense as written. Suggestion: "Military clashes between China and Portugal led to the expulsion of the Portuguese."
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Post-war

  • "When the People's Republic of China" - Add the abbreviation PRC here too so that it will make sense by itself later; i.e., "People's Republic of China (PRC)".
  • "With the development of the manufacturing industry in southern China beginning in the early 1980s, Hong Kong's competitiveness in manufacturing declined and its economy began shifting toward a reliance on the service industry, which enjoyed high rates of growth in the 1980s and 1990s, and absorbed workers released from the manufacturing industry." - A bit too complex. I'd recommend breaking this into two sentences.
  • "a high degree of autonomy for at least fifty years after the transfer" - Numbers bigger than nine are usually written as digits unless they start a sentence; i.e., 50.
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Modern times

  • "Since 1997" might be a better head than "Modern times" since "modern" is less specific.
  • "In 2009, Hong Kong hosted the fifth East Asian Games competed by nine national teams." - "Competed by" is not used as a verb form. Suggestion: "In 2009, Hong Kong hosted the fifth East Asian Games, in which nine national teams competed."
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Governance

  • WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists suggests using straight prose rather than lists whenever feasible. My suggestion here would be to use prose paragraphs without the bolded subheads or bullets. You might have to combine one-sentence items with other items to make paragraphs of reasonable length.
 Done compressed the list to single paragraph Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Defence

  • "As a British Colony and later as a territory, defence" - Dangling modifier. Suggestion: "When Hong Kong was a British Colony and, later, a territory, defence... ".
 Done not sure if the comma after "and" is necessary Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Geography and climate

  • "Hong Kong's long and irregular coast line provides" - Tighten by one word by deleting "line"?
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Finetooth (talk) 17:25, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments, installment 2: Here's the second batch. The article seems comprehensive, and the prose is generally fine. Minor prose, layout, and Manual of Style tweaks are in order, as noted. Be sure that the FACR concerns about images and sources have been addressed, and you should be OK for FACR 3. Good luck.

Text sandwiches

  • The Manual of Style advises against sandwiching text between two images. The "Post-war" section has a text sandwich. "Governance" has a slight one that could be eliminated by moving File:HK Government House 2005.jpg down a bit. Education has one that could be fixed by moving File:HKUST Sundial.JPG down a bit.
✗ Not done ... maybe done? I edit in large resolution, it still looks sandwiching to me, but not sandwiching in lower resolution... is there a resolution standard? Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The standard is the thumb setting, but there are many exceptions based on what you think looks best. Images in the infobox and in maps and panoramas generally need to be bigger than thumb, and the settings are somewhat arbitrary. I generally aim for one image per section or more than one in sections big enough to accommodate them. If possible, I arrange images so that they don't overlap sections or interfere with edit buttons or make text sandwiches, and I try to place directional images so that they face into the page. Sometimes, though, there's an overriding reason for doing otherwise with one image or another, and a complicating factor is that the layout looks different on different screens. I'm working today on a laptop, which is all I have available to me at the moment. What looks slightly scrunched to me may look just fine on a bigger screen. Not sure. I suppose the best test is to see if any other readers mention the layout. Finetooth (talk) 15:29, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Education

  • "including government aids and grant schools" - Should "government aids-and-grant schools" be hyphenated?
 Done i think it should be hyphenated Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Transport

  • "handling 3.74 million tonnes" - I'd probably give this in short tons as well.
 Done added 4.12 million tons conversation Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Footnotes

  • Rather than linking directly from the footnote text to external sites, I'd suggest creating in-line citations just as you have for the main text. I don't think the direct external links will pass FACR.
 Done replaced bare links with citation templates Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Further reading

  • "pp. 293" - The abbreviation for a single page is "p". Ditto for all similar instances in this list.
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 05:57, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

FACRs

  • Two issues that came up during the most recent FACR involved image licenses and sourcing. I did not re-check the image licenses or look at the sources closely. However, it would be a good idea to make sure that the objections raised at the FACR have been addressed. It's fine to ask those reviewers to take another look.
 Done I checked all images and sources, but I'll also request previous reviewers to take a look as well. Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 03:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 20:07, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another Finetooth comment: I forgot to mention that the lead does not now conform to the WP:LEAD guidelines. The lead should be an inviting summary of the whole article. The existing lead covers only the top sections, but the sections from Geography on down have been neglected. I'd suggest a re-write that devotes less space to history and governance and includes something about Culture, Transport, and so on. A good rule of thumb is to include in the lead at least a mention of each of the main text sections. Finetooth (talk) 18:23, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

✗ Not done I have rewritten the lead section, but now I'm not sure if it will satisfy criteria 1(a). Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 03:57, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That seems better. Finetooth (talk) 15:37, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Nikkimaria's comments on sources and referencing (per request)
  • Source for percentage of water area?
  • What figures are you using to calculate that population density? Neither of the populations listed in the infobox give that result
  • "British merchants grew rapidly in the region" - what caused this? Growth hormones? Change in diet? Did they grow taller or wider ;-)?
  • "The World Health Organization reported 1,755 infected and 299 deaths in Hong Kong." - source?
  • "recent growing public concern has prompted the severe restriction of further land reclamation from Victoria Harbour" - source?
  • "one of the greatest concentration of corporate headquarters in the Asia-Pacific region" - source?
  • "Much of Hong Kong's exports consist of re-exports" - source?
  • "while industry constitutes 9%. Inflation was at 2% in 2007" - source?
  • "Hong Kong is one of the most densely populated areas in the world, at 6,200 people per square kilometer." - source? This figure contradicts the one in the infobox
  • "Other objects like Ba gua mirrors are still regularly used to deflect evil spirits, and buildings often lack any floor number that has a 4 in it, due to its similarity to the word for "die" in Cantonese" - source?
  • "with a focus on sensationalism and celebrity gossip" - source?
 Done added sources to all of the above Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in how you refer to government departments - for example, you include both "Census and Statistics Department, Hong Kong Government" and "HKGov Census and Statistics Department"
 Done all gov departments references use the same format for publisher name Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 11 - retrieval date?
  • Ref 16 - page(s)?
  • Include page numbers for multi-page PDFs
  • Ref 22 - title?
  • Use "pp" only when including a page range or multiple pages
 Done all fixed Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in formatting title translations
✗ Not done I'm not sure what to do with this one because the {{cite web}}, {{cite book}}, {{cite journal}} templates all place the "trans_title" and "title" parameter in different locations. Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 06:17, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It seems like the "work" parameter was messing up the order (maybe intended?) Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 06:27, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Just to clarify, using ref 32 as an example: "Tang, Chung (2005). "[Archaeologist help find Hong Kong's Roots]" (in Chinese). 考古與香港尋根. Volume 32. New Asia College. pp. 6–8. http://www.cuhk.edu.hk/ics/ccaa/linkfile/cuhk_uc.pdf. Retrieved 21 August 2010." Does the Chinese script represent the article name or the journal name? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Ah... I see what you mean now, I finally figured out what's wrong with the Chinese references. It seems like {{cite journal}} doesn't like it when you don't give it a "work=" or "journal=" parameter, after I added those, it displays just like the other ones. Now they all look nice and consistent Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 03:44, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Use a consistent formatting for journals (for example, compare refs 30 and 31); include page numbers
  • Be consistent in italicizing or not italicizing publications like "People's Daily" or "The Economist"
 Done the format matches now Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 71: page(s)?
  • Ref 82: is there a less promotional source?
  • Refs 96 and 97 - titles and pages?
  • Refs 101 and 102 - retrieval dates?
  • Ref 115 - missing information
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Hong Kong Yearbook or Year Book? Use a consistent formatting for these - for example, compare refs 38 and 119
  • Be consistent in whether the "Education Bureau" is listed as the author or the publisher
  • Refs 135 and 137 should have the same publisher
  • Ref 139 - don't repeat date
  • ref 140 - retrieval date?
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • What makes Hiking Hong Kong a reliable source?
  • Leisure and Cultural Service or Services?
 Done replaced with different source Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Be consistent in linking publisher name on first occurrence, always, or never
✗ Not done taken on the "first occurrence" approach to link the publisher names, but I can't find wiki page for some of the less notable publishers... should I use external link or leave them un-link? Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well, I would leave them unlinked, but that's more of a personal preference. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:50, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ref 156 - publication date?
  • Ref 159: how did you manage to retrieve it several months before it was published?
  • Ref 162 - don't repeat publisher name
 Done Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done removed those external links Ta-Va-Tar (discuss–?) 21:15, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Darth Vader

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because it has gone through changes after merging and we want it to be better than before.

Thanks, Jhenderson 777 00:11, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Sjones23

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your efforts here so far - unfortunately I think this needs a lot more work, before it would pass at WP:GAN. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • The disambig links tool on this page finds 4 dab links that need to be fixed.
  • There are seven (7) WP:Fair Use images in the article, which seems to me to violate WP:NFCC (the montage of Jake Lloyd, et al counts as three). The two biggest problems are the two images each of Hayden Christensen, and two each of Sebastian Shaw. The image of Jon Stewart wearing the mask also seems doubtful - what understanding does the reader gain that could not be conveyed by text alone?
  • I agree that the lead does not follow WP:LEAD. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
  • Another serious concern is a lack of references - My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Some of the refs used lack sufficient information - one is just "Newsweek", which does not help the interested reader find the source very well. Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • I also am concerned that many of the sources used are not reliable sources and may not meet WP:RS or that better sources may exist. For example there is an interview with Jonathan WInzler about two books he wrote, but the books themselves are not used as sources.
  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. Emperor Palpatine is a FA and seems like it owuld be a pretty good model to follow. Look at how much more detail is given on things that are not just "this is what the character did in the movies". This needs more material like that that is written from an out-of-universe perspective. Homer Simpson and Bart Simpson are also FAs and may be good models as fictional charaters.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:02, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Have you investigated Wikipedia:WikiProject Films/Resources for more sources, or asked at WP:FILM for help finding more sources? --Malkinann (talk) 21:39, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No I haven't yet. I will see what I can do when I have the time. And anyone else is free to do it too. − Jhenderson 777 14:28, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And I am going to use Palpatine and Jabba the Hutt as examples of how it should be done. − Jhenderson 777 14:30, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I recommend having "References" below "Notes" and using the {{Harvnb}} style. See Featured Article American Beauty (film) as an example that does this. A reader can follow the footnote, click on the author's name, and find the full reference. I think that the "References" section should include multi-page publications, so it appears Kasinki's book should be listed there. (If you cite one page from a book, we do not need a full reference, just the footnote.)
  • In addition, I think there could be further critical analysis of the character as a step toward comprehensiveness. Referring back to American Beauty, you can see a similar section for the film and the academic references cited for it. There are a couple of ways to look for such references. One is Google Scholar, and it helps to look for "Darth Vader" in article titles. This shows this as a potential reference. There may also be articles about Darth Vader without the eponymous title, but they're not readily apparent. You may need to mash up keywords to find relevant results. Also, if you use WorldCat.org, you can search for "Darth Vader" and filter for non-fiction or performing arts books. Books with "Darth Vader" in the book title or in a chapter title (where listed) will be displayed. 1, 2, and 3 are such examples. Erik (talk | contribs) 15:43, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
To be honest, Erik. That References/Notes recommendation sounds like something you can do. If so, go for it, if you feel like doing it! ;) − Jhenderson 777 15:54, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done! :) Erik (talk | contribs) 16:10, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks! :) − Jhenderson 777 19:46, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Giro d'Italia general classification winners

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm nominating this list for Peer review, as I'd like a few suggestions on how to improve the article before I take it to FLC. Cheers NapHit (talk) 18:32, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Comments Sandman888 (talk) 15:25, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image of the pink sweater might be a derivative, but I'm no expert on the rules.
  • table:
    • "Sponsor/team" Surely it was not Italy who were the team, but the Italian cyclist association or similar?
    • Consider removing the years it was not held and add a note to the previous and subsequent year. It'll make it much better sort-wise.
    • "time/points" what is the first couple of entries? Hours? They don't sort right either.
    • "stage wins" doesn't sort properly on Firefox on XP; if you sort it thrice it messes up.

Ruhrfisch comments: This looks fairly good to me - in addition to Sandman's comments, here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • Does the first sentence really meet WP:LEAD? The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject. The general classification winners are not even mentioned in the current first sentence
  • I think of neighboring countries as being adjacent, or perhaps no more than one country away. The Netherlands does not meet this criterion in The race usually covers approximately 3,500 kilometres (2,200 mi), passing through Italy and neighbouring countries such as the Netherlands.[2]
  • I would change the caption to something like Fausto Coppi, who won the Giro d'Italia five times between 1940 and 1953.
  • Could the last sentence of the lead be more concise as something like The current champion is Ivan Basso of the Liquigas-Doimo team , who won the 2010 Giro d'Italia.[6]
  • Where possible, the article would benefit from switching from passive voice to active voice, so for example The Giro d'Italia was established in 1909 by newspaper La Gazzetta dello Sport, after the success of the Tour de France which was inaugurated in 1903. could just be In 1909 the newspaper La Gazzetta dello Sport established the Giro d'Italia, inspired by the success of the Tour de France, which started in 1903.
  • Per WP:MOSQUOTE, this needs "quotation marks", not single quotes as in: Nicknamed the 'Iron Man of Tuscany' for his endurance...
  • I think this needs a general copyedit - this needs at least some commas, and it might read better in active voice and it would also help to say who offered him the 22,000 lire So dominant was Binda that in 1930 he was called to the head office of La Gazzetta dello Sport where he was accused of ruining the race and was offered 22,000 lire to be less dominant which he refused.[9]
  • Problem sentence: Spandiard Alberto Contador of Astana was the winner in 2008, he chose to focus on the Tour the following year, Denis Menchov was the victor.[22] Spandiard is not spelled correctly, and it is not super clear if Contador actually raced in the Giro in 2010 or not, and the year Mnchov won is also less clear than it could be. Perhaps somethng like Spandiard Alberto Contador of Astana was the winner in 2008; the following year he raced in the Tour de France instead, and Denis Menchov was the Giro victor.[22]

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:27, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thurisind

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
As part of my plan of expanding articles on late antique/early medieval "Barbarian" European kings I've created this article with in mind of making it a GA. Concerning the completeness and objectivity of the article I'm confident it's OK; the articles difficulties may eventually manifest themselves in the quality of the prose. Most importantly I'd like a careful evaluation of the lead and if the article is ready to stand up to a GAN. Thanks for any help, Aldux (talk) 18:30, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jappalang

I had this big problem with the article right from the start: Who are these guys? I was basically confused (even though this is supposed to be a biography of the subject) because I have no idea who are the Gepids and Lombards nor where is Pannonia or whatever else location is mentioned. The only thing that seems familiar to me is the Byzantine Empire. Sure there are links, but it is likely the reader is already lost (like me) and would not bother to read further or click them and go to another article (thus disrupting the reading experience) to find out.

I suggest giving a familiar location in where (continent or general location, e.g. Middle East, Persia, Egypt, or something) this is taking place. Give the reader some familiar ground to grasp at and with which he or she can associate the subject.

Images

  • File:Prefecture.png
    What public domain (or appropriately licensed) base map or data was this map derived from?

I feel these are serious issues that should be resolved. Jappalang (talk) 10:14, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Just a fast answer, regarding the images: 1) isn't a problem anymore 2) I think the issue is hardly all that dramatic: Ant83 has only uploaded images under a PD license, so it's highly unikely now should be any different; but if you have doubts, you can contact an admin 3) the map is adeguately sourced through multiple sources: there is no need that these sources be PD, and I don't see any clear grounds to suspect it of copyright violation 4) as for the last, oh no, he DID upload from the original, only the link doesn't send to the original but instead the German translation; the original was Latin, and here it is [5], page 368. I'm afraid several of these mistakes in the uploading of the Nuremberg chronicle illustrations may have been made.Aldux (talk) 01:17, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It is not for any other user to keep going to administrators to verify the images. The information should be visible to assure re-users of the veracity of the images. This rule applies to all images. See WP:IUP. As for the map, it is not the sources, it is the base map (the geographical outlines) that is at issue. For the Nuremburg image, such an old book would unlikely be in the hands of the editor. If he or she found the image on a website, then the source should be plainly stated (see WP:CITE#IMAGES. Jappalang (talk)
I forgot to add that I've worked on the context, show it should be clearer even if one is not all that well versed in the period. I solved the issues with the Nuremberg image, but I must admit I have some difficulties understanding the map's problems: shouldn't the sources guarantee the geographic outlines? Thanks for your help and ciao, Aldux (talk) 23:08, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by Mike Christie

I'll add comments here as I work my way through the article.

  • The first thing that caught my eye was some debris from copyediting; things like "was to had assassinated", "just had been the case", and "was now close to expire" are examples. I'll point others out as I go through, but I recommend reading the article out loud -- it can help you notice this sort of thing. I also some infelicities in the prose; I am happy to copyedit as I go, but it's often best to delay a copyedit till there is consensus that the content is more or less right, so I wouldn't worry too much about that yet.
  • I am not at all sure where the Gepids are located. They're "east Germanic" according to the lead; given the movement of peoples through Europe in the early middle ages, this doesn't help me much. With my limited knowledge of continental Europe I'd guess they're somewhere between modern Denmark and modern Bulgaria. Then the mention of Pannonia -- few modern readers will have heard of this; I had heard of it but can't remember where it is -- somewhere between modern Italy and (ex-)modern Yugoslavia? The maps aren't much help either. I think the Carpathians are in the north Balkans, or a bit further north than that, in Romania/Hungary or thereabouts. The first map gives me almost no information because the topographical features have no scale and the borders shown are unlabelled. The second map is a bit better, because at least the rivers are labelled, and I can guess we're looking at the north Balkans here, but without some of the surrounding geography this is a very unhelpful map. Could we at least expand this so we can see the Adriatic and/or the Black Sea, or overlay it with modern country boundaries? Or inset a tiny map showing the location of the larger map? Also, again, there is no scale. (By the way, for map work I can recommend user:Kmusser, who is skilled and helpful.)
    • Comment I've added a map of Pannonia in the context of the whole Roman Empire so one can see where the province was. In the first paragraph I mentioned which modern countries the Gepid kingdom lied on. I've removed the map of the Pannonian basin as ultimately useless. I'm really sorry for the map of Gepidia, but the first map I used for the Gepids (in another article) has been discarded as unsourced while the other deleted. This is the last one still around, and yes, it's not all that great, and unfortunately, I don't know how to create or modify images. But thanks for the input, I'll try asking putting this map in a larger context, as you suggested.
  • This is just a suggestion, but it might be good to start with a short section discussing the sources for the period. See Ælle of Sussex for an extreme case from the Anglo-Saxons; there are very few sources for Anglo-Saxon history and the secondary sources almost always start by talking about the available sources and the limitations they place on a historian. It may be that there are numerous sources available for this period for the Gepids, but if, for example, the primary source is really just Paul the Deacon, and there is little to corroborate details he provides, then in that case an introductory note describing Paul's work would be helpful to the reader. If there are lots of primary sources and the secondary sources pay little attention to this issue then I think you can ignore this comment.
    • Comment If you think there are few sources for Anglo-Saxon England, than you should see the central European sources for this period ;-) But luckily, the situation isn't as desperate here because while Paul is a key source he is often supported and integrated by the last of the classical historians, the contemporary Procopius (when the Byzantines pop up in the narrative, you can be pretty sure that's Procopius, and you may have noticed how often the Byantines do in the article). Where saga plays a role (the initiation of Alboin) I put it clear. The problem isn't so much an absence of sources as that these sources have very little interest for Thurisind in particular.
  • Some more initial context would be useful at the start of the article. Currently you start with "Thurisind rose to power amongst the Gepids, a powerful east Germanic people, in about 548"; the only context this gives us is the date, the name of his people, their ethnicity and the fact that they were powerful. Where in Europe were they located, and how long had they been there? What is known of Thurisind's origins, or at least of the origins of the earlier Gepid kings? Take a look at Eadbald of Kent (sorry to use my own articles as examples, but they come readily to mind); the introductory material there tells the reader something about the state of Kent at the time of Eadbald's accession, plus information on Christianization, sources, Eadbald's ancestry -- all before we get to Eadbald himself. I don't know what source material is available to provide context, but a couple of sentences at least would be useful here; more if you have it.

-- Mike Christie (talk) 00:25, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment I really can't thank you enough for finding time to drop by and help me with your valuable assessments. As for the prose, you're all too correct, I often do mistakes. Thanks for spotting some. Regarding the context I've worked hard on this and inserted a brief history of the Gepids, their faith and where they were settled. As for Eadbald's example, sadly much more is known of his origins and ancestry than of Thurisind or Elemund. The issue here is that our two sources didn't care much, to put it plainly, about the Gepids so Elemund is just a name (he may have ruled either 40 or 1 year(s) for all we know), and nothing is known of Thurisind's age or origins, and it's the same for all kings after Ardaric. You may have noticed that Elemund is ared link: well, it's no surprise as I would have difficulties writing an article on him. Even christianization is all very vague: we only know that by the 6th century they were Arians, how this happened is unclear. Still, I hope the context I've added can be of some help. Hope it sounds better know.Aldux (talk) 19:40, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Nev1
  • "he succeeded King Elemund by excluding from the succession the dead king's son Ostrogotha": while I'm not sure if there's anything wrong with this arrangement, I think it might be clearer to say "he succeeded King Elemund by staging a coup and forcing the dead king's son into exile" (it's perhaps not necessary to name Ostrogotha in the lead).
    • Done it.
  • "Thurisind's kingdom, known by its people Gepidia": should this be "known by its people as Gepidia"?
  • At the moment, the lead doesn't make it clear if Thurisind was dead when Cunimund ascended to the throne; did Thurisind abdicate, or did Cunimund take over because his father died?
    • Regarding the first part on Gepidia, I must agree that it's quite confusing: what I meant is that the land inhabited by the Gepids was called Gepidia. As for the second part, we really don't know anything about the Gepid kingdom between 552 and 565, so we don't know how Cunimund succeeded his father, but he's presumed to have taken power after his death, since nothing is said of Thurisind after 552.
  • "After Turismod's death it will be the turn of his second son Cunimund to become commander in Sirmium and thus new heir apparent": in contrast with the rest of the paragraph, this is in present tense rather than past. I would have changed it myself, but it might be referring to a theoretical situation where the heir apparent dies, so I wasn't quite sure how to phrase it. I'd recommend something along the lines of either "In the event of Turismod's death, Cunimund would become commander in Sirmium and thus heir apparent" or "After Turismod died, his younger brother Cunimund became commander in Sirmium and thus heir apparent".
    • Have to agree, quite confusing; corrected now.
  • "for this reason Justinian wanted to be able to rush troops in Italy if they were needed": as Justinian was securing the route from the Balkans to Italy, shouldn't this be "rush troops to Italy"?
    • Corrected now.
  • "According to Procopius, Justinian...": I think it would be useful to mention which of Procopius' works he says this in (I assume it was the Gothic Wars). While on the subject of Procopius, Ilywrch makes an interesting point. I like the way things are currently done and support the status quo, but one possible route would be to mention the book and chapter of the ancient source when it's mentioned and say which modern source it is quoted in (eg: <ref>Procopius The Germanic Wars III:12, quoted in Pohl 1997, p. 90</ref>). The original research concern stems for editors putting their own interpretation on the sources, however as long as the interpretation is sourced to a modern RS it shouldn't be a problem.
    • You're correct, it's the Gothic Wars; made it clear. Also, gave a try to your idea, seems a good compromise.
  • "The Ostrogoths acted this way because they were too occupied with the war in Italy to maintain their possessions out of the peninsula": this is a little unclear. Did the Ostrogoths wish to keep their lands in Italy? If so I recommend rephrasing this to "The Ostrogoths acted this way because they too were occupied with the war in Italy and sought to retain their possession in the peninsula".
    • Done.
  • It needs to be explained whose side Calluc was on and who lost Dacia ripensis and Singidunum.
    • Expanded, made clearer.
  • Perhaps merge the last paragraph of the section first war with the Lombards with the previous paragraph as they seem related and the second doesn't really seem long enough to stand on its own.
    • Done.
  • The article refers to "battle of the Asfeld" whereas Wikipedia's article on the battle itself calls it "Battle of Asfeld". It's "the" that's the problem. Does the article on the battle need changing or is either acceptable?
    • It's something I've asked myself too. The site of the battle is mentioned only once in sources, when Paul the Deacon speaks of the clash in campum Asfeld: this is translated as "to the field of Ashfeld", but also "to the Asfeld". So I'm not sure: they're probably both more or less correct.
  • "both kings secretly murdered their respective hosts": this doesn't seem quite right, do you mean the kings murdered their guests?
    • My crappy English hits again, I'm afraid ;-) Corrected.
  • "Thurisind died in an unrecorded date esteemed to be around 560 and was succeeded by his son Cunimund": esteemed seems to me to be an odd word in this context.
    • Made simple.

Overall, a very good article and covers the main points are far as I can see. I've made some of edits you'll want to check over to make sure I haven't unintentionally changed the meaning of anything. The prose could do with a bit of polishing, but I think addressing the above points should address that. I'm sorry this has taken me so long to get round to properly; my time on Wikipedia has been limited recently. Nev1 (talk) 21:47, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment Thanks a lot for examinating the article; I've corrected the shabby parts you indicated. Once the peer reviews are archived, think I'll put it up for an A-review to see what the good people at MILHIST think of the article. Thanks again for your help. Ciao, Aldux (talk) 21:57, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tracheal intubation

[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 because I would like to eventually submit this as a FAC, and I would like to get constructive feedback beforehand. Thanks, DiverDave (talk) 00:06, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Impressive work. The quality of the references are outstanding. I'll give a few first impressions then see if I can dig in for more. Remind me in a day or so if you want. 1) There is too much space given to the history given that subtopic's importance to the overall idea. Try to summarize it so space is properly prioritized in the article. In fact do that for everything, but I don't have the clinical knowledge to say whether that's been done for other subtopics. Don't throw away the history material since it's interesting, instead move it to a daughter article ala WP:SS 2) The very last paragraph should be merged in with other related material. It's not separate enough to stand on it's own. 3) When the Barash reference is cited specifically, it's used as "... in Barash & al. (2009)". There are only three authors on that work and in all the reference standards I know of, et al is not used unless there are more authors than that (5 I think in APA). Also, I've never actually seen & al. used. In this case, probably all three authors names should be spelled out. - Taxman Talk 14:31, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Thanks for the recommendations, Taxman. I have made the following changes:
  • transferred text relating to history into new article:History of tracheal intubation;
  • merged last paragraph into previous paragraph; and
  • corrected Barash reference as per your suggestion.

Thanks for the pointers, and please let me know if there is anything else I should do to get this article up to FA quality. DiverDave (talk) 02:50, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No problem. It's a really good article and you made good fixes. You may get a little flack about the lead section not really summarizing each of the parts of the article, but it does give a good intro to the topic, so it's not bad IMO. I can't say I'm totally up to date on current standards for FA's but if you have access to your sources I'm confident that you'll be able to make a successful run at FAC and handle whatever comes up. You may need to have some time available if somebody finds something difficult to fix. Taxman Talk 23:00, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, also the alt text tool link to the right showed that all images have alt text except one. I didn't check them against the alt text guidelines, but you should. Those are really critical for people that need them. - Taxman Talk 23:03, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks for another excellent suggestion, Taxman. I did not know about the alt text tool until now. I have just added alt text to all the image files in the article. I don't know if I did this correctly, because no text appears when I hover over the images with a mouse. However, when I use the alt text tool link, the text does appear in the gray boxes for all except the image file included in the infobox. My guess is that the infobox template probably suppresses alt text, or something like that. Anyway, thanks again for helping me to improve my wiki skills! DiverDave (talk) 14:23, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2 cents by Casliber

[edit]
  • Okay, when writing prose, I generally try to avoid parentheses unless necessary (except when writing scientific names after common names, where I feel they are nicer looking than commas) - so the beginning I'd rather see the segment in the first sentence demarkated by commas. I am wondering whether "usually simply referred to as intubation" is better as "usually abbreviated as intubation" - more succinct.
  • is the placement of a flexible plastic catheter into the trachea. "+ maintain an airway?" maybe needs to be in the first sentence as that is why we do it (as I am in psychiatry, I haven't had to do this in a loooong time)
Thanks for the helpful suggestions, Casliber! I have modified the first sentence a bit to reflect your suggestions. I think of abbreviations as not being real words (e.g., acronyms), so I am not sure that "intubation" is really an abbreviated term in the strict sense. Still mulling it over.... DiverDave (talk) 06:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Otherwise looking pretty good - nothing glaring jumps out at me as not being there - the main issue which is commonplace with these types of articles is the balancing act between precise medical terms and plain english - i.e. trying to introduce the latter as long as exact meaning is preserved. I'll scan again for that but am a bit blind to jargon when I use it daily :) Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:09, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, you do mention proximal and distal somewhere - that'd be good to link or explain. Casliber (talk · contribs) 20:10, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The terms "proximal" and "distal" are both linked in the 2nd paragraph of the lead section. DiverDave (talk) 00:51, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts on the lead from RexxS

[edit]

Having no formal background in medicine, I often find problems with jargon in medical articles. I wonder if you might consider looking again particularly at the lead, to see if there are places where more common English words might benefit the casual reader more than the precise medical term.

  • An example:
    • "... is the placement of a flexible plastic catheter into the trachea ..."
    • "... is the placement of a flexible plastic tube into the windpipe ..."
    It's fine to link a medical term to allow a non-expert to find out what the term means, but having to do it too often disrupts the flow of reading, so using a commoner word (even if less precise) is something to consider for the lead.
  • Have a look at:
    I'm not uneducated (AGF that one!), but without a detailed knowledge of anatomy, I struggled to make sense of what was happening. The link to oropharynx gives me "The Oropharynx (oral part of the pharynx) reaches from the Uvula to the level of the hyoid bone. It opens anteriorly, through the isthmus faucium, into the mouth, while in its lateral wall, between the two palatine arches, is the palatine tonsil." That article isn't your problem, but I was none the wiser after following the link. Anyway, isn't the point that the tube goes in through the mouth, via the throat to the airway leading to the lungs? Is the nasotracheal procedure the same thing but starting from the nose?

Depending on who you think the target audience may be, I think it might be possible to rephrase some of the lead to be more summative (if less precise) in order to allow a wider range of readers to understand it more easily. By all means, be precise and detailed in the body of the article, but I'd recommend looking for phrases in the lead like "the distal tip of the tube" and considering whether something like "the far end of the tube" would convey the same summary information, without "dumbing down" the article too much.

Apologies if you've already considered the above, and I do know that medical articles in an encyclopedia are likely to require technical terms, so feel free to make whatever use of my thoughts above that you wish. I'll look harder at individual sections later. Regards --RexxS (talk) 16:16, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your suggestions, RexxS. These will be difficult to implement, as it is impossible to write an article about tracheal intubation without using certain specific anatomical and medical terms, such as catheter, oropharynx, nasopharynx, glottis, larynx, trachea, distal, proximal, pulmonary aspiration, gastric acid, etc.. My original approach was that since I have to use these words, why not use them and link them all right up front, as we do with most articles? However, your point is well taken. Although I find it painful to replace precise terms with less precise ones, I have done my best to colloquialize the lead section. At present, I cannot think of a way to replace the words "distal" and "proximal" that is not awkward. Plesae take a look at the changes I have made, and by all means let me know if you can think of other ways to make this article more accessible to lay people. BTW, you will not be hurting my feelings in the least if you go ahead and make these changes yourself. :) Regards, DiverDave (talk) 17:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks Dave. To give you some idea, I asked my son to read the lead as it was, and tell me how he understood it; then to read it as it is now. He was quite clear that before the first reading he thought intubation always involved an incision in the neck; after the first reading, he still thought that, and couldn't see that the text contradicted his belief; after the second reading, he understood the difference between orotracheal, nasotracheal, and a tracheotomy. I'd say that was mission accomplished! I'm sorry I haven't looked at the other sections yet, but I'll try to find time this week. --RexxS (talk) 19:12, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1997 Michigan Wolverines football team

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because this was previously at PR and it took our copyeditor two months to complete a copyedit. I would like this to get another review here now that the copyedit is complete.

Thanks, TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I sort of disagree with a couple of content deletions by the copyeditor and request a third party opinion:

  • Week 9: I continue to feel that "The day was notable as only the fourth time in the 62 year history of the AP Poll that 4 of the top 5 teams in the poll were facing each other as 8–0 Florida State and North Carolina met in an Atlantic Coast Conference battle." adds context to the season by describing the landscape of 5 unbeatens about to be whittled down to 3 late in the season.
  • Week 11: Similarly with Since 1935, when the annual Michigan – Ohio State rivalry game was moved to be the last game of the Big Ten season for each team, 36 previous games had the potential to determine the conference champion, making this game the 37th time. This was the eighth time that both schools were ranked among the top five entering the game. In each of the prior two seasons underdog Michigan teams beat undefeated Ohio State teams to conclude the Big Ten season.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:34, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Natural gas in Romania

[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 because i would like to try for a GA and i want some oppinions about it.

Thanks, BineMai 18:50, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments:

Lead
  • At present this is not carrying out its function as required by WP:LEAD. It is rather a hotch-potch of detail, most of which is not appropriate lead material. Needs to be rewritten as a concise summary of the article's content.
  • Various prose glitches:p
    • "cubical" - no such word. It's "cubic"
    • "country's" → "countries"
    • "proven" and "proved" in same sentence. Former is correct in this context
    • What does Tcf mean? Needs a link or explanation.
    • I wonder if it would be possible to find a more interesting image than the production chart? Lead images are a way of drawing people into an article, and a production graph may not be the best way of doing this.
History

Section very piecemeal, unintegrated.

  • There are a few problems with the general prose, including some awkward constructions and the use of non-idiomatic words and phrases. For example, the first sentence should read: "The first natural gas deposit within the present-day territory of Romania was discovered in 1909, in Sărmăşel, Mureş County (then part of Austria-Hungary), during geological researches on potassium salts."
  • I can't go through all the odd usgaes, but "prodigious" is definitely the wrong word. Attention for a good copyeditor would be very beneficial.
  • The chronology is strange. After discussing things that happened in 1941-42 you jump back to 1919.
  • The Second World War is not mentioned; surely this has some impact on gas production and transmission?
  • More strangely, the history ends 30 years ago. According to your lead chart, production peaked in the early 1980s and is now at less than a third of its peak levels. What's the story here? Surely the rise and fall in production of gas in Romania should be a major feature in your story?
Production
  • Map caption is misleading ("Romania in red") Lots of countries are indicated in red, and on this scale Romania isn't identifiable.I presume the intended meaning is "Romania is one of the countries within the highest production band, indicated in red".
  • The section is overdetailed with production figures and market share percentages.
  • "Romania ranks fourth in the European Union in terms of natural gas production just after the United Kingdom, Netherlands and Germany." This needs to be reconciled with the lead statement that Romania ranks third in the EU for natural gas reserves. The statements are not contradictory but they need some explanation.
Other matters
  • There is an over-emphasis throughout the rest of the article on figures, which makes for very tedious reading. The prose needs to be made more interesting.
  • A few format points within the references needs attention. For example, sources in non-English languages need to be indicated; printed sources, e.g. Wall Street Journal need to be italicised; retrieval dates need to be in a consistent format.

Enough, then, for you to get your teeth into. As I am not able to watch peer reviews at the moment, please contact me at my talkpage if you want clarification on anything arising from this review. And good luck with the article. Brianboulton (talk) 11:59, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Annerys Vargas

[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 because I have done intensive review/add to the article, but need outside ideas to promote it to FA

Thanks, Oscar987 00:51, 18 September 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I don't think that this article is ready for a peer review which, as the WP:PR page makes clear, is "intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work." This article has a self-awarded B rating which is unwarranted; nothing above Start-class is justified. I appreciate that a lot of work has gone into collecting information, but the article is still in its early stages of development. Here are a few suggested areas thay should be worked on:-

  • The lead should be a summary of the whole article, rather than a brief introduction to the subject. Consult WP:LEAD for further guidance.
  • The article needs to have a proper structure, rather than one single prose section. I suggest you look at other sports person articles, particulary those that have achieved Good Article of Featured Article status. Take eamples from WP:GA or WP:FA.
  • The article has absolutely no personal information about Vargas beyond her birthplace and country of birth. At present it is no more than a listing of results and awards. You may need to find additional sources.
  • At present the writing is exclusively in very short paragraphs, and ofetn with incomplete sentences. For example "Won the 2008 CEV Challenge Cup with Vakifbank Gunes Sigorta Stambuł and was awarded "Best Blocker". The prose needs to develop a flow, and have some element of narrative. Again, look at other articles, and see what they do.

Until there is some progress along the above lines, the "B" rating is inappropriate, and I am changing it to "Start", as this is the level the article is presently at. There is no reason, however, why it should not be improved. Brianboulton (talk) 22:14, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Benjamin Franklin

[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 because there are some unsourced statements that need to be addressed by people familiar with the topic, the article doesn't yet satisfy all the GA Criteria so I'm listing it for Peer Review first so that any suggestions for the improvement of the article can be taken onboard and any issues addressed.

Thanks, —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 9:37pm • 11:37, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nikkimaria

Hello again! Some comments on this article:

  • Please do take a look at those automated tools in the box on the side of the review, they are quite helpful for large-scale articles like these
  • Try to combine some of those shorter paragraphs together to improve flow, and also merge some of the shorter subsections
  • Some tangential material could be cut to tighten the prose. For example, some of the info on Puritans is superfluous (although some should be kept)
  • I could go through and list every point that needs a citation. However, I'm instead going to provide some general rules:
  • In general, one citation per paragraph should be considered a minimum (except in the lead)
  • All quotations, statistics, opinions, and material that is likely to be challenged should be sourced
  • Avoid stacking images and sandwiching text between images

This is obviously not an extensive list, but it should give you enough to get started on. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 01:11, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh ok, thanks for the comments Nikki, I'll take them onboard and try and fix what I can :) Regards, —Ғяіᴆaз'§Đøøм • Champagne? • 6:03pm • 08:03, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

DJ Hero 2

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Looking to get some comments and review of this article in anticipation of its release and for maintaining the Guitar Hero topic.

Thanks, MASEM (t) 15:23, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs
  • "DJ Hero 2 was officially announced in June 2010 for release in the last quarter of 2010, featuring more than 70 mashups from over 85 artists." is redundant with "DJ Hero 2's setlist will include over 70 mashups from songs of over 85 artists." later on in the article. Also, it's somewhat difficult for uninitiated readers to figure out what mashups are.
  • "These actions are presented to the players through on-screen notation that scrolls in time with the music, and players score points by performing the actions correctly, with a scoring multiplier gains through a string of successful actions" - I'm confused as to what the verb "gains" is acting on; if its a noun, the sentence makes even less sense.
  • "DJ Hero 2 will add a more detailed single player career mode, called "Empire", that provides more structure than the previous game. " This paragraph bugs me; I assume it's elaborating on the increased "structure" and "detail", but there's no clear relationship between the topic sentence and what comes after.
  • File:Djhero2-screen.jpg could prolly use an expanded rationale explaining why an image is needed for illustration of the game interface.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 18:04, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I only see two things that seem bothersome with the article. The first paragraph is a bit large at first glance and may detract the reader, and the one provided gameplay image seems strange sitting under the infobox. --Teancum (talk) 19:20, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fixed these; first image on left now, and split that para in two. --MASEM (t) 19:45, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Mount Rainier

[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 because it is very sleek looking and improvements to it have been added for since it reached GA. Please review so we can consider upgrading it to A or even FA

Thanks, Novus Orator 06:09, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Checklinks (link in the toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows a deadlink and a soft 404 (both federal sites); please fix them.
  • "Its earliest lavas are over 840,000 years old ..."
    Is this statement correct? Aside from the curious possessive wording (does a mountain own lava), this conjures an imagery of 840,000-year-old molten rock that is still flowing over Washington's countryside.
  • "Its lahars have reached all the way to Puget Sound."
    Would be much better to add the distance (not everyone knows where Puget Sound is in relation to Mount Rainier).
  • "... which went all the way to the site of ..."
    "... which reached the site of ..."?
  • "According to Cory Zellers, ..."
    What makes Zellers a respected expert that we should listen to?
  • "... a geologist with RH2 ..."
    What is RH2?
  • Several uncited statements in the Human history, Subsidiary peaks, and Climbing and recreation sections.
  • "... under most strictly prominence-based rules."
    "... under most strict prominence-based rules."
  • "About three mountaineering deaths each year occur due to ..."
    "Due to" is wrongly used here; please rephrase the sentence.
  • What is the whole point of a single-sentence (that is 17 words long) section for the state quarter?
  • Check your inline citation format. I am seeing mistakes such as periods after cites and spaces in between, e.g. "... that would threaten the whole Puyallup River valley.[8].", and "... is accessible only via the caves.[12] [13]".
  • Be consistent in the formatting of the sources. Some do not have the level of details as others, e.g. ref 29, which is simply listed as Rainier.
  • What makes Peakbagger.com, howbert.netherweb.com, and www.skiingthebackcountry.com reliable sources? What makes Cory Zellers, an undergraduate,[6] a respected source of information?
  • Please give the publication details of The Great Northwest (1888) to let others verify the nature of File:MountTahoma.JPG. If the book is not a US publication, then the laws of its country of origin (publication) has to be considered for its placement on Commons.
  • Per http://www.usmint.gov/policy/?flash=yes&action=TermsOfUse, "Designs of the new quarter-dollar coins issued under the 50 State Quarters Program may be derivative works of designs covered by third-party copyrights licensed to or assigned to the U.S. Mint, or in some cases may be covered by third-party copyrights assigned to the Mint. You should not assume anything on this site is necessarily in the public domain." Although the engraver of this coin (File:2007 WA Proof.png) is Charles Vickers, a US Mint employee,[7] the design is purely Washington State Quarter Advisory Commission's (a state body, not federal).[8][9][10] The coin's design is copyrighted to the state; thus, it is not in the public domain.

Structural-wise, I felt this article was a bit "cold". Reading Rainier in such technical terms at the start just made me think of a big lump of rock. Perhaps, the article should start first by introducing where Rainier is, in terms of location to a human populace and recent events, then go into definition of the mountain, history, and such. Regardless, please fix the more serious concerns (reliability of sources, image copyrights, citations), then get a copy-edit before attempting higher level of assessment. Jappalang (talk) 05:10, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

PTV (Family Guy)

[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 because I belive it may have what it takes to pass the FAC criteria.

Thanks, Pedro J. the rookie 03:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jappalang
  • Checklinks show two expiring links (Chicago Tribune) and one dead link (Emmy); please fix them.
  • "The episode sees the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) the shows on television after a controversial wardrobe malfunction at the Emmy Awards."
    1. An episode is not a sentient being; how can it "see"?
    2. There appears to be a missing word.
    3. "Wardrobe malfunction" is a neologism (newly coined expression even though it has been a few years). Not everyone is going to know what that means, and it could be disruptive to one's reading experience if he or she is expected to go to another article just to know the basic meaning of it.
  • "... his own TV network which he calls PTV which broadcasts classic shows unedited and uncut ..."
    "... which ... which ..." is repetitive.
  • "The episode contains a sequence that shows various scenes of different episodes from the previous episodes."
    What?
  • "In a lengthy sequence completely unconnected to the main plot of the episode, after preventing Osama bin Laden from sending a hostile message to the United States, Stewie Griffin, parodying the opening scene for The Naked Gun, rides off on his tricycle, cycling through scenes from various movies and video games."
    Overly long, fragmented and is the thwarting of Bin Laden's scheme part of the sequence?
  • "The episode was shown in the William S. Paley TV Fest, which various writers, directors and voice actors of the show assisted to."
    Aside from being unsourced, "assisted to" what?
  • MacFarlane's quote need not be 8 sentences long; only his first two sentences are unique enough.
  • Similarly with Povenmire; why should there be such a long quote from him? Quotes should only be used if they cannot be rewritten without losing the intent or flavour of the message. I do not see much of MacFarlane's or Provenmire's statements that could not be rewritten in an encyclopaedic manner.
  • What is the whole point of Cultural references section? I fail to see an encylopaedic purpose to this. If they inspired some significant critical remarks, then the article should be mentioning about the commentary. At best, this section is just a list of trivial matters masked with prose.
  • File:PTV Homer Stewie.jpg fails WP:NFCC. It is merely showing Homer Simpson; a lot of people are aware of what Homer Simpson looks like and he has his own article on Wikipedia (illustrated). What is this image showing that no words can relay?

I believe this article still requires quite a bit of effort to make it of FA quality. Based on the sentences I pointed out above (which are just a few examples), a heavy copy-edit is needed. One might also restructure the article, presenting the material that would be encyclopaedic to the common reader in an orderly manner. Jappalang (talk) 06:59, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs
  • Please please please find another image of McFarlane than File:Seth MacFarlane by Gage Skidmore 5.jpg. It's just plain overused on dozens of articles. On that note, File:PTV Homer Stewie.jpg fails WP:NFCC. File:FamilyGuyPTV.jpg doesn't seem to have much of a justification, because what it illustrates is adequately covered by text in the article (getting censored by black bars.)
  • "In a lengthy sequence completely unconnected to the main plot of the episode..." - my question then, is why is this important? It's badly written with lots of comma splices and is by own admission irrelevant. It can be referenced in the relevant references or production section instead.
    • On that note the article really needs a copyedit. There's lots of extraneous words and awkward phrasing that you can chop out (ex., "Peter is anticipating to watch the Emmy Awards, but Lois forces him to go to their daughter Meg's play"; "The next day, a news report about David Hyde Pierce's wardrobe malfunction is reported and Peter gets angry at Lois for missing the Emmy Awards for not being able to see that part"→"The next day the news reports David Hyde Pierce's wardrobe malfunction; Peter blames Lois for making him miss the event." or whatever.
  • The reception section doesn't work for me because the critics are only quoted for superlatives; why did the Hartford Courant give a overall bad review? What were specifically mentioned?

Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 17:39, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Spanish toothcarp

[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 because this article is a Good Article on Spanish Wikipedia and I'd like it to be considered the same here.

Certain sections of the article confused me, especially scientific details (like "Divergence between populations"), so it needs revision by someone more experienced than me.

This was a large translation and I may have made a few mistakes. If you speak Spanish please look at the original as well :)

Also, I'm having trouble finding sources in English.

Thanks, XRDoDRX (talk) 13:36, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Jappalang
  • Dablinks (toolbox on the right side of this peer review page) shows 6 disambiguation links; please fix them.
  • Lists are discouraged, please convert Conservation status to prose.

The lack of citations would be the biggest hurdle to attaining higher levels of assessment. Jappalang (talk) 02:01, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Old St Paul's Cathedral

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm not quite sure if this is the correct category, but as it is an article about a historic lost building of London in which several historic events took place, I thought it would probably be the most appropriate. Old St Paul's Cathedral has been a "Good Article" for a while, but I've been significantly expanding it recently, and would quite like some feedback as to whether there are any additions or improvements that would be required for it to stand a chance as as FA candidate. Thanks, Bob talk 19:58, 5 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Dablinks (toolbox on the right of the peer review page) shows two disambiguation links; please fix them.
  • Checklinks show 2 dead links; please fix them.

Lede

  • "... third longest church ..."
    I heard of largest or tallest buildings but longest (in which sense/direction) seems a bit weird. Could this be elaborated?
    Not really sure how to put it any other way. It means from end to end, in the same way that a bridge can be the longest.
  • "... with the nave aisle "Paul's walk" becoming known as the centre of business and the London grapevine."
    Aside from the noun plus -ing construct, is there really a marketplace within the church (seems a bit incredible on first reading)?
    Haha, it's rather a wonderful image isn't it? It certainly appears so. I especially like the 14th century account of people firing arrows at crows nesting in the roof.
    Leads me to think of how incredulous it seems the bishop would be holding a sermon at one end while vegetable vendors and butchers ply their business at the other end, but since it is the "third longest church"... Jappalang (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... the churchyard, St Paul's Cross became the stage for ..."
    I think there is a missing comma...
    Corrected.

Construction

  • "Bishop Maurice began the building, although it was primarily under his successor, Richard de Beaumis, that work fully commenced. He was assisted by King Henry I, ... He also gave Beaumis tithes on fish ... Beaumis also gave ..."
    Note the ambiguities: who are the "he"s?
    Corrected.
  • "Henry of Blois, Bishop of Winchester, was appointed to administer the affairs of St. Paul's, and almost immediately he had to deal with the aftermath of a fire which broke out at London Bridge in 1135, spreading over much of the city, damaging and delaying the construction of the cathedral."
    Long sentence that can likely be broken down into two sentences (also note the several segments in the second train of thought; it could be rephrased).
    Corrected.
  • "Following complaints from the dispossessed parishioners, until the reign of Edward VI the east end of the west crypt was allotted to them as their parish church."
    There seems to be a missing comma, which would have made this a clearer sentence.
    Corrected.
    Umm, I do not see it... Jappalang (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I've rephrased the sentence now anyway.
  • "... however, Wren judged that an overestimate ..."
    Who is Wren? He should not be introduced later in the last part of the article if earlier sections mention him.
    Clarified.
    I think it would be better to introduce him as the king's surveyor here as well. Jappalang (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Mentioned.
  • "Benham notes that the cathedral ..."
    Similarly, who is Benham?
    Clarified.
  • What makes John Harvey an authority on churches or architecture (state so)?
    Small note (although he doesn't have a WP page).

Interior

  • "The walls were lined with the tombs of mediæval bishops and nobility. In addition to the shrine of Erkenwald, two Anglo-Saxon kings were buried inside; Sebbi, King of the East Saxons, and Ethelred the Unready."
    Source? See also issues below.
    Merged with later paragraph (and cited)
  • "... with the tombs of mediæval bishops ...", "... several incidents of mediæval intrigue ..."
    Why is it "mediæval" and not "mediaeval"?
Corrected.
  • "The riot was only halted by Hubert Walter, Archbishop of Canterbury."
    How did he stop the riot? Physically, with a speech, or just by showing up?
    It's not entirely clear, due to the slightly infuriating "Victorian Establishment" opinionating by Benham. (I assume the Archbishop just turned up and told them to clear off, or there would be dire consequences in the next life!)
    Well, it cannot be helped if we have no source that explains what happened. Leaving this unstruck in case someone can help. Jappalang (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Several kings of the Middle Ages lay in state ..."
    A short two-sentence paragraph that could be merged with the Anglo-Saxon kings mentioned earlier or have the two ideas merged with the last paragraph.
    Merged, as above.

Paul's Walk

  • "... the first reference to the nave, "Paul's walk", being used as a marketplace ... , with the bishop issuing a letter ..."
    Two noun plus -ing constructs in a sentence...
    Revised - I think it reads better now.
  • Why are there spaced ellipses, and ellipses without spaces between them and surrounding words?
    Corrected (it's because that section was borrowed from the Paul's Walk article)

Decline

  • Why is St Paul's Cross linked here, whereas previous mentions as Paul's Cross are not? Linking should be for the first mention of the term.
    I've put in an earlier link, although I have kept the link here as it was really in the Reformation that it became an important preaching site.
  • "... the scrofulous practices ..."
    Any simpler word to describe the practices?
    Slightly disappointed to lose this!
  • "... original purpose as a religion building."
    Religious building? Place of religion?
    Corrected.

The Great Fire

  • "Building work on the new cathedral began in June 1675."
    Not a great way to end the story; did anyone bemoan the passing of the church? What was the new church? Did it invite comparisons with this old cathedral?
Good idea for a new section - I gather quite a lot of Londoners still regret the Wren cathedral (I don't like it much either, but that's nothing to do with it). I suppose I originally didn't want to regurgitate stuff from the main St Paul's page, but a short section with a few contemporary opinions might be good.
I have added a small section here, mainly using material from the main St Paul's page. I didn't want to go overboard, though. Bob talk 23:22, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think it is fine. It does not leave one hanging over what happened next. Jappalang (talk) 22:54, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • File:St Paul's old. From Francis Bond, Early Christian Architecture. Last book 1913..jpg
    Did Francis Bond draw this? If so, when did Bond die? If not, who is the artist? Page, publisher, location?
    I didn't upload this, so I'm not entirely sure if Francis Bond is the artist (it looks like an older engraving, if anything), but Bond died in 1918, so his book is safely in the public domain.
    Not quite; without knowing who the author is and with the book's publishing in 1913, the PD-old tag is wrong. What it can unequivocally qualify for is {{PD-1923}}, which implies public domain in the United States. Images on Commons must be public domain in both United States and the image's country of origin (which in this case is the United Kingdom). United Kingdom does not care about publishing before 1923; it is more concerned about authorship, and in this case, if the author lives beyond 1939, then the image is still copyrighted in the United Kingdom. Moving the image to Wikipedia and using {{PD-1923}} (with a {{Do not move to Commons}}) would solve this issue. Jappalang (talk) 00:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Old St Paul's.jpg
    Who says this is a PD-old image? Bob Castle claims he is the author and he is certainly not dead beyond 70 years to have uploaded it.
    Bob, you need not put a GFDL statement here; now the issue is where can it be verified that this is Hollar's work? Jappalang (talk) 04:04, 8 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I cannot seem to find the correct attribution for this, so I've decided to remove it. Annoyingly, the original C.17 book about the cathedral doesn't seem to have been digitised yet, so I'm not sure if this is Hollar's work or not. The little plates around the top suggest that it is. Anyway, to replace it, I've made my own "photographic reconstruction" based on a 1908 model. Do you think that works better? (best to view it at the smaller size - the scale problems are quite significant at higher resolution!)
    Unfortunately, the photographs are derivative works of the model (see commons:Commons:Derivative works). We need to know when JB Thorpe died as well (for the reasons explained in the above image). It might be that this photograph could qualify for freedom of panorama (UK rules that photographs of 3D works installed in the public do not violate the copyrights of the subject's author); however, it seems that this model's location in the museum is not permanent.[11] Jappalang (talk) 00:32, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    JB Thorpe was the manufacturer (a bit like Bassett-Lowke, for example), so it probably would have been created by unnamed craftsmen working for that firm. The UK certainly has freedom of panorama (so there's no problem in photographing, say, The Angel of the North), and if it was produced in 1908 for the Franco-British Exhibition that's over 100 years ago.
    The UK duration for copyright of a corporate (anonymous) artistic work (non-photograph) is 70 years after first publishing, 70 years after it was first made public (after 1969), or until 31 Dec 2039 (See National Archives Copyright leaflet). Publishing involves the public distribution of several copies, and as there is only one scale model, it has never been published. Since it is made public (exhibition) before 1969, it would be copyrighted until 2039. Is JB Thorpe still operating today? It would be better to contact them and establish who was the craftsman, whether he was doing a work for hire or still retains copyright, and his lifespan. Jappalang (talk) 09:56, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    If they do exist, they certainly don't have a website. I gather they were an architectural firm with a sideline in making models. It doesn't sound like they operated after WWII, though, and the only other evidence I have for their company is another Great Fire related exhibit and the 1930 model for Lutyens' abandoned Roman Catholic cathedral in Liverpool, as well as brief mentions here and here. If the Lutyens model is anything to go by, a group of craftsmen probably created the Old St Paul's model, rather than just one. The Museum of London, who own the model, appear to encourage photography for educational purposes. As it's a photograph of a model "first made public" in 1908, it would seem to qualify for freedom of panorama, though - Wikipedia has lots of pictures of public Henry Moore or Eric Gill sculptures, for example. Alternatively, I could always send an email to the museum to see what they think? Bob talk 18:06, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Freedom of panorama is given only to permanent installations (i.e. the work could only or is only intended to exist at that location). Evidence to support this might be required at FAC (see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Tosca/archive1). As for claiming corporate or anonymous authorship, a reasonable amount of effort is often wanted (see Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Rivadavia class battleship/archive1). Also see User talk:Elcobbola#Work for hire - UK for corporate copyright. Jappalang (talk) 23:47, 9 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I sent off an email to the museum earlier this evening asking about photograph permissions, etc, so I guess we'll have to see what they say as to whether it stays or goes. I'll post the reply once I've received it. Bob talk 00:01, 10 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I'm still waiting to hear back about this. Bob talk 23:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:StPaul'sCross.jpg
    Who is the artist? When did he die? How else do we verify that the painting is in public domain due to 70 years after the passing of its artist (especially since the named source is restricted to members only)?
    I'll look into these on Commons.

Much of the prose is good with a few niggles above. Regarding the noun plus -ing constructs, a read of User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing could help. The non-compliance with MOS (ellipses, old characters) should be resolved. Perhaps get a non-involved editor to polish the article with a copy-edit. The image issues would become a concern at FAC. Jappalang (talk) 11:04, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This is a really useful review - thanks for all your suggestions. Bob Castle claims he is the author and he is certainly not dead beyond 70 years to have uploaded it. Whoops, obviously used the wrong template. "I'm not dead yet!" Bob talk 12:26, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I have hopefully been able to implement most of Jappalang's suggestions, but feel free to make other suggestions. Thanks Bob talk 14:18, 7 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've put forward a copyedit request, although somebody did wave an automated wand over it last night. Bob talk 23:12, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment In the first section, is this the 4th church on the hill and the fourth to house saint Erkenwald? —Preceding unsigned comment added by WikiCopter (talk • contribs) 16:55, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ah yes, that is confusing. Clarified. Bob talk 17:40, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Oh, and thanks for giving it a copy edit. Bob talk 20:22, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment
Engraving of Old St. Paul's prior to 1561, with intact spire
With regards to this picture, dates have been used in a way that can only be described as a little lax.
  • The caption reads "Engraving of Old St. Paul's prior to 1561, with intact spire". The implication here is that the engraving is earlier than 1561. The caption needs to state clearly that this represents St Paul's as it appeared prior to 1561.
  • The alt caption reads: A 17th century engraving of Old St Paul's cathedral seen from above. The building is in a cross shape, architecturally rectangular and very long west to east, with flying buttresses along the quire. In the centre is a square central tower, which in this picture has a tall spire. The building looms over the old City of London before the Great Fire.
How do we know this is a 17th century engraving? If this is a fact, then why isn't it included in the regular caption?
  • The illustration itself is taken from a book published in 1913 (the last of a series). Since the illustration is very typical of 19th century encyclopedic illustration, and demonstrates the Victorian passion for archaeological reconstruction, why does the alt caption propose a 17th century date for this artwork?
Amandajm (talk) 01:04, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comment concerning length, English cathedrals tended to be very long compared with those elsewhere, possibly because of the weather, so that processions could be held inside, around the cathedral, rather than outside, as would be the case in Italy. In consequence, England produced the longest medieval cathedrals and abbeys in the world, Winchester, St Albans, Old St Paul's, Lincoln, York, Ely, Canterbury and Durham all being over 500 feet long.
"St Paul's was now the third-longest church in Europe.[11] Excavations in 1878 by Francis Penrose showed it was 586 feet (179 m) long (excluding the porch later added by Inigo Jones) and 100 feet (30 m) wide (290 feet across the transepts and crossing)."
What I want to know is this: The statement "St Paul's was now..." refers to a date in the 1300s. If St Paul's was indeed the third longest at that point in time, then which two churches were longer? Not Old St Peter's, and not the newly built Florence. Not Seville, which has the largest area, or the mighty Milan which is 515 feet and very wide. Not Cologne, which didn't have a nave. It seems a very odd statement.
In the 1600s Old St Paul's was surpassed by St Peter's, and then in the 20th century, by Liverpool. But from the early 1300s until the building of the nave of St Peter's, it must surely have been the world's longest church.
Amandajm (talk) 01:17, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Replied on article talk page. Bob talk 18:22, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Washington & Jefferson College

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because…it has recently passed GA and I'd like to nominate it for FA.GrapedApe (talk) 16:13, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for asking. I've been pretty active for years on Internet forums discussing college selection and college admission, so I'm glad to take a look. The article already has a lot of facts and great sourcing of most factual statements. My friendly suggestion would be to move more of the citations of demographic facts such as SAT score ranges and student ethnicity from U.S. News (a Common Data Set data source perceived to be somewhat commercial in orientation) to College Board (a nonprofit) or to the federal government IPEDS database. For most of those purposes, the College Board database is more user-friendly. Good work on the whole. I don't know what distinguishes a good article on a college from a featured article on a college, but I wish you well in finding out. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 02:19, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you. Good suggestion, too. I'll see if I can find a better source for that data.--GrapedApe (talk) 21:22, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Copyeditor Comments The prose is looking good so far, but can you use the {{convert}} template in the future for measurements? It is a standardized format from what I've seen. WikiCopterRadioChecklistFormerly AirplanePro 02:43, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Also, can you apply the citations in the table in Student body to the specific numbers, or do they all have the same table? WikiCopterRadioChecklistFormerly AirplanePro 18:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Famine in India

[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 because…

  • I would like critique on what needs to be done in order to make this a GA
  • POV tags have been added unsuccessfully in the past by mostly editors originating from UK - how can this be tackled without compromising historical facts presented in the article?

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 22:56, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unsuccessfully? Only because you removed them. This editor has a track record of introducing POV to articles, relating to his own strongly held views against the British Empire. He's been turning his article into a one-sided essay arguing that it was the British who caused famine. I would suggest that this article is in too much of a state of flux for a peer review. Better to join in on the talk page. The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick t 10:10, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Here's the history of the NPOV tag added on two occasions now:
  • User:The Red Hat of Pat Ferrick added a POV tag to this article on September 19, 2010. [12]
  • I took the matter to the NPOV noticeboard on September 27, 2010 which said this wasn't a matter of POV. [13]
  • Based on the NPOV noticeboard responses, I took off the POV tag on September 28, 2010. [14]
  • The same user added back the POV tag on October 8, 2010. [15]
  • Diff between the very 1st wrongly alleged POV and the currently alleged POV is here. [16] No specific reasons have been provided by the user on the talk page about why the POV tag was added back. Zuggernaut (talk) 16:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


This article is in an absolutely terrible state thanks to Zuggernauts POV insertions which other people have questioned. Id recommend restoring the text to before Zuggernaut started his "improvements" then there probably would be no need for tags. He is giving undue weight to views that seek to blame problems on a lack of democracy and one mans point of view specifically, when in fact there are many issues. To give the democracy point undue weight is clearly problematic and also misleading. And sadly there is a growing track record, where he seeks to make alterations to many different articles clearly based on his negative views of Empire. BritishWatcher (talk) 17:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Peer review is not a forum for dispute resolution. The article has a neutrality banner (which disqualifies it from PR) and there is much current discussion on this issue on the talkpage. Until the article is reasonably stable, with the main banner removed by consensus, it is not appropriate that this review should continues, and I have closed it. Brianboulton (talk) 23:28, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Commander (song)

[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 because… I feel like it makes an excellent use of the available information. When I began editing the article this is what it looked like, to its current state which not only achieved GA status but was also survived a GA Reassessment. I accept that if the article suffers from anything its probably prose which is of a good standard but in doubt it could be better. It is my candidate to nominate for FA and so it would be good for those already experienced in FA's to comment on it.

Thanks, -- Lil_℧niquℇ №1 | talk2me 22:06, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Checklinks (toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows two dead links; they should be fixed.
  • R&B, EP, UK, MTV, etc
    All abbreviations (and there are more than those pointed out above) are to be named in full on the first mention (WP:MOS#Acronyms and abbreviations).
  • "In 2009, before Rowland and Guetta collaborated ..."
    Better to start with full names. The lede is a summary of the main body (and some readers ignore the lede to jump into the main body). As such, the main text should also be structured to start off introducing the reader to the events that follow. I recommend a slight rewrite to the start of this section.
  • "These claims would be denied by the singer who said that ..."
    Ambiguity here: who is the "singer", Rowland or Knowles?
  • Themes should not be based primarily or exclusively on primary sources. There should be secondary views who would be more detached or coloured in their opinions about the song. The same goes for the meanings and interpretations of the song.
  • "... when the Ne-Yo-penned ..."
    A name does not need a definite article.
  • Long quotes should be block quoted instead of left inline in paragraphs (WP:MOS#Quotations), and there seems to be quite a number of long quotes here.
  • "... promo clips ..."
    "Promo" is an informal word, unsuitable for an encyclopaedia.
  • "When Robbie Daw of 'Idolator' saw ..."
    Why is Idolator in single quotes? What is it, a television show or a band?
  • "Sic" should be in square brackets.
  • The fair use rationale for File:Kelly Rowland - Commander (feat. David Guetta).ogg should state what specific qualities mentioned in the article it would help readers to understand. Furthermore, "may contain part of the song's chorus" is banal; either the uploaded file has it or not.

Overall, my biggest issue with this article is the predominance of opinons of the primary sources (singer, composer, and producer); the article comes across as a promotion piece, espousing possible self-interests without a detached view of the song and its meaning. Jappalang (talk) 15:14, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from TbhotchTalk C.
  • Infobox
(see release history) -> I'm against this because you are sending the reader to the bottom of the page. As I always say "If you are reading the article, you'll find them anyway".
Format = Digital download -> and CD single? In Germany it was.
  • Lead
"Commander" is a song performed by American recording artist Kelly Rowland from her self-titled third studio album, Kelly Rowland (2010). -> maybe -> "Commander" is a song performed by American recording artist Kelly Rowland from her self-titled third studio album, in 2010.
The song was premiered at the 2010 Winter Music Conference and subsequently garnered acclaim from contemporary critics for Rowland's vocal performance as well as Guetta's musical production -> comma -> The song was premiered at the 2010 Winter Music Conference, and subsequently garnered acclaim from contemporary critics for Rowland's vocal performance as well as Guetta's musical production

2010 Winter Music Conference and -> Is it an album, a book, a film or a TV show?

the UK and...released in the United Kingdom -> maybe it should be inverted
  • Background and context
collaborated for "When Love Takes Over" -> link
hers -> hers'?
Ref 4 "Kelly Rowland has no qualms with Beyoncé" -> Kelly Rowland hat keinen Zoff mit Beyonce Knowles is the correct title, use the |trans_title= instead.
there's Ciara putting something out and GaGa -> Who?
  • Composition
"Commander" is an electro-house-R&B[6][7] song written-> maybe -> "Commander" is an electro-house-R&B song(, maybe a comma)[6][7] written
Guetta, Sandy Wilhelm and Rico Love[8] -> different topic -> Guetta, Sandy Wilhelm and Rico Love,[8]
"there's no other who do it like I do it" and "you won't find no lady who does it like I does it". -> I am not an English speaker, would you specify where are the errors, or maybe add a [sic], LilHelpa would change it later. Also the BBC review would be used as source.
been looking on Twitter and -> wikilink
darker" than her previous material but still fun. -> maybe a comma, "previous material, but still fun"
  • Release
June 28, 2010 May 19, 2010 June 29, 2010 -> June 28, 2010, May 19, 2010, June 29, 2010,
for an urban mix of the song[22] -> for an urban mix of the song,[22]
American rapper Nelly heard the new version in its early stages and asked if he could be featured on the remix. -> Nowhere in the sources state that Nelly heard the new version nor he asked for a feature.
was confirmed when the Ne-Yo-penned, "Shake Them Haters Off"[28] -> {{xt|was confirmed when the Ne-Yo-penned "Shake Them Haters Off",[28]
to impact in thew United States -> typo
  • Critical reception
The site's other reviewer -> needs a better wording
Muhammad Ali -> who?
Kelis' 'Acapella', for example ... collaborations with Kelis ("Acapella") -> something is wrong with it, would you guess it?
she felt that "[David Guetta] -> already mentioned
jam of the year"[36] whilst -> jam of the year",[36] whilst
  • Chart performance
May 18, 2010 (the day of release) -> May 18, 2010, (the day of release)
number 36;[38][dead link] -> You know
added to urban music radio[44] and UK's -> comma
on the UK Singles Chart at number 167[47] supported -> different topic, comma
station BBC 1Xtra[48] as -> id.
nine on the UK Download Chart[54] and -> id
the single was one of rowland most weeks -> ???
Whatever in the world you tried to said above most weeks on chart in UK TOP 70 with 16 weeks.[55] is not supported by the source.
In Asia, the single receive successful impact in the Philippines Media on Television (MYX) either the Radio Stations which one of the most requested song of September 2010. -> [citation needed]
twenty-four[56] before peaking -> comma -> twenty-four,[56] before peaking
It debuted in Australia on the Singles Chart at number sixty-four[58] and -> It debuted in Australia on the Australian Singles Chart at number sixty-four,[58] and
and has since peaked at -> so it peaked once and it will peak again?
number thirty-nine[61] before falling -> number thirty-nine,[61] before falling
Wallonia and Flanders Ultratip Charts[64][65] as well -> Wallonia and Flanders Ultratip Charts,[64][65] as well
It also reached top-twenty in Norway[67] and the Ukraine [68] in addition to top-thirty in Denmark[69] and Sweden.[70] -> It also reached top-twenty in Norway,[67] and the(¿?¿?) Ukraine,[68] in addition to top-thirty in Denmark and Sweden.[69][70]
  • Music video
on May 5, 2010 -> on May 5, 2010,
in the video[74] whilst Fatima Robinson -> different topic, comma
On June 1, 2010 -> On June 1, 2010,
UK music channels MTV[77] and MTV Base[78] began to play the early version of the video on June 8, 2010[79] -> maybe -> UK music channels MTV and MTV Base began to play the early version of the video on June 8, 2010,[77][78][79] -> still the same topic
June 21, 2010 -> June 21, 2010,
WP:ALT missed
dancing shoes (sic)." -> dancing shoes [sic]."
July 6, 2010 -> July 6, 2010,
'Idolator' -> before it was Idolator, typo?
Janet Jackson saying that it had "old-school Janet vibe- > overlinked
according to Martin -> only Martin?
'TeenToday' -> is in ' ' because
their hair" (sic) -> their hair" [sic]
  • Promotion
live at at Cathy -> typo
June 25 -> 2010? 2012? 2001?
promotion tv -> television or TV
promotion -> promotional
Miss Universe 2010 -> wikilink
Las Vegas. -> id.
  • Track listings
David Guetta, Extended play, Rico Love and Nelly are overlinked
  • Charts
Why a "spam" link appears at the Ukraine Airplay (UMRL) chart?
  • References
61 and 62 -> RIANZ. Media Sauce Ltd.. -> blame the template
77, 78, 79, 81 -> mtv.co.uk. -> maybe other worker
  • General
"whilst" throughout -> American subject
lacks of commas throughout, especially after mdy dates
Consistency with the ". / ."
Maybe all the "kellyrowland.com" on the references would be renamed to Kelly Rowland Official Website

Those are my comments, hope they help you. TbhotchTalk C. 03:39, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Fehlandt Lentini

[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 because WP:GA is currently backed-up, so I am hoping this will give me some constructive feedback to work with before trying to get it reviewed there.

Thanks, Brian Halvorsen (talk) 19:02, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: Good solid effort. My main concern is that, in common with many sports articles, it may be difficult for the general reader to follow. Of course you can only go so far in explaining terms that are inherent to the sport but, as indicated below, there are areas in the article which I believe could be improved in that respect.

Lead
  • You refer to the "Astros organisation" Is this the same thing as the Houston Astros? If so, you should make it clear that the six different tems he played for were allpart and parcel oh the Houston Astros. It is clarified later in the article, but it needs to be clear here too.
  •  Not done It is clarified. Before that it reads, "...was signed by the Houston Astros as an amateur free agent. In the Astros organization..."
  • "During the 2004 season, Lentini would begin his tenure..." Wrong tense. Should be "began his tenure..." Likewise, "That season, he would be named..." → "...he was named..."
  •  Done
  • Is there a link that could help explain "independent league circuit"?
  •  Not done It is already addressed before that, "...has played with many different minor league and independent teams over his career..."
  • The phrase "selected to play" occurs in both the first two lines of the second paragraph. Try to vary, e.g. "was chosen"
  •  Done
  • The sentence "Also in 2009, Lentini was named the Golden Baseball League's Player of the Week for the week of June 1 to June 7 as a member of the Calgary Vipers, who won the league championship that season" has too many clauses. I suggest you breakit up: "Also in 2009 Lentini, as a member of the Calgary Vipers, was named the Golden Baseball League's Player of the Week for June 1 to 7. The Vipers won the league championship that season".
  •  Done
  • The last sentence in the lead, "Lentini bats and throws right-handed" looks like an afterthought, and should be included earlier. It is not necessary to link "right-handed".
  •  Done I simply removed it.
Amateur career
  • "He was one of ten attendees of Napa Valley College to be selected in the history of the Major League Baseball Draft." First, "attendees" is the wrong word to use in this context; why not "students"? Secondly, what is this sentence conveying to the reader? What is the noteworthy information? I have absolutely no idea whether ten students from one college is a remarkable number, or how long a period the history of the Major League Baseball Draft covers, so the sentence is at present somewhat confusing.
  •  Not done I really don't see your problem. Ten is a particularly small number of players.
  • "He did not attend the school for the next two years..." Better to give the years (presumably 1999 and 2000) Any reason why he apparently dropped out?
  •  Not done I can't give the information if it is not known.
  • "returning instead" - the word "instead" is redundant, should be removed.
  •  Done
  • "All of those numbers [plural] stand as a single-season school record [singular]." Grammatical inconsistency as indicated. Also clarify if you mean school records for Sonoma State rather than for all schools/colleges."
  •  Done
Professional career
  • Please remember that this is a general encyclopedia article which will be read by people unfamiliar with baseball terminology. Thus information such as "he batted .283 with eight runs scored, 13 hits, one double, one triple, one home run, four runs batted in (RBIs) and 11 stolen bases in 12 games played" needs to be written in more accessible language. As you have it, there are eight links in this part-sentence; it is not reasonable to expect your reader to jump out of the article eight times to find out what your wording means.
  • This is as simple as it gets. All stats are linked to their specific article, there is nothing more that I can do to help the reader. If it is an article about a baseball player, presumably there will be baseball stats.
  • There is too much detail relating to Lentini's performances, which makes for dreary reading. Limited figures within a prose summary which touches on some of the high points of this season, would serve better.
  •  Not done Again, I don't see what the issue is. The player's season stats are listed, as well as notable events in the season (i.e. all-star appearances and playoffs).
  • "On defense, played all of his 54 games in the outfield, committing no errors, seven assists 78 putouts." word and punctuation missing?
  •  Done
  • File:Fehlandt Lentini press shot.jpeg: You will need to show proof of permission to use this image.
  • I thought this was an assume good faith area. As I no longer have the e-mail, I can't report that it was ever granted.
  •  Done Luckily I found the e-mail.
  • The permission seemed to be lacking. I sent an e-mail to the author to re-confirm permission. In the mean time, I moved for a speedy delete of the images, as it is very likely the offices are closed until Monday. I also removed them from the article. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 07:28, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Personal information
this seems very skimpy. Surely a trawl through the various sources available would yield information to enable you to flesh the section out?
  •  Not done Typically, a player like this gets little-to-no coverage outside of baseball. Often, big name players get little personal coverage. If you are implying that my research is lacking, you are mistaken.
External links
do these provide any information not available in the sources you have cited? If not, are they really necessary?
  •  Not done This is consensus at WP:WPBB. The sites offer a list of the players stats, something not provided in the article.

I hope these comments are helpful. As I am not atching peer reviews at present, please call my talkpage if you have any queries, or if you want me to look at it again. Brianboulton (talk) 17:09, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

No further comments. It is up to you how you respond to my review points, which are given for your guidance. Good luck with the article. Brianboulton (talk) 21:01, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Magnum Rolle

[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 because I eventually want to take it to FA but the prose might need some tweaking.

Thanks, ~EDDY (talk/contribs/editor review)~ 23:16, 6 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is broad in coverage and pretty well-done. It isn't quite ready for FAC. I made many small proofing changes as I went, and I doubt that I caught everything. Another proofing sweep would be a good idea. Here are some other comments and questions as well:

  • The table in the High school and prep school section seems unnecessary. In addition, it includes direct links to web sites outside of Wikipedia, and this is a Manual of Style no-no. WP:ELPOINTS has details.
  • The image licenses look OK to me, and so do the refs except that the multiple red links to newspapers is distracting. I don't think you need to link the newspapers or publishers at all. Even when the links are not red, the blue ones create a sea of blue of limited usefulness.

Lead

  • "His coach at St. George's High School, Darrel Sears, bribed him with fried chicken to teach Rolle the fundamentals of basketball." - Is that detail important enough to include in the lead? It might give undue weight to something that makes Rolle look a bit silly.

Early life

High school and prep school career

Sophomore

  • "The Tigers finished the year 17–15 and 5–11 in SEC play, disappointing considering their preseason projection." - It would be good to say who considered it disappointing; otherwise it sounds like Wikipedia considered it disappointing.
  • "Former high school coach Darrel Sears said Rolle was unhappy with LSU since December 2006, and Brady had been making snide comments for a while. " - Maybe "said Rolle had been unhappy with LSU after December 2006"? Also, "snide comments" about whom? Could you make this more specific?

Junior

Senior

2010 NBA Draft

Indiana Pacers

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:31, 14 August 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this, here are some suggestions for improvement. Here are a few thoughts.

  • There are some images of him on Flickr, but none are freely licensed. Have you tried asking anyone there to release any of their photos under a free license?
  • In the lead, I would give at least the state for the Laurinburg Institute
  • Awkward sentence Rolle's season high in rebounds (10) and points (8) while shooting 4-of-8 from the field helped lead LSU past Nicholls State on November 21. I owuld put the date earlier, perhaps something like On November 21, Rolle helped lead LSU past Nicholls State, while making his season high in rebounds (10) and points (8), and shooting 4-of-8 from the field.
  • Need to explain what happened to Tyrus Thomas (assume he left the team, perhaps for graduation or to go to the NBA?) in Coming into the 2006–07 season, the Tigers returned four starters, including Glen "Big Baby" Davis, and LSU fans hoped that Rolle would replace the shot blocking of Tyrus Thomas [, who had ... graduated? left for the NBA? been abduscted by aliens?].
  • I am not sure what this means and it is rough Former high school coach Darrel Sears said Rolle was unhappy with LSU since December 2006, and Brady had been making snide comments about him for a while. How about Sears, his former high school coach, said Rolle had been unhappy with LSU since December 2006... I am not sure who Brady had been making snide comments about (him is a bit unclear - assume it is Rolle)
  • I would use his name and not "He" to start the first sentence of the 2010 NBA Summer League section
  • Assuming it is a newspaper, The Bahamas Tribune needs to be italicized.
  • Could the starting date of the regular 2010 NBA season be added?
  • I am not a writer of sports articles - this looks decent to me, though a bit stats heavy. There is relatively little on his playing style - could more be added on that? I also am not sure how to handle his NBA career, since it has not yet started (at least in terms of the regular season). Refs look OK to me.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:28, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs
  • "His coach at St. George's High School, Darrel Sears, bribed him with fried chicken to teach Rolle the fundamentals of basketball. " His refers to Rolle, so Rolle's coach bribed Rolle with fried chicken to teach Rolle? This isn't clear grammatically and doesn't make much sense as written. Why was the coach bribing Rolle? To teach him basketball? He wasn't going to learn otherwise? You don't have space in the lead to clarify this so it might be better to simplify it instead.
  • The prose isn't at a professional level yet; one of the biggest issues is repetitious phrasing and redundant diction, e.g., "He eventually decided on LSU", "Despite these challenges, in Rolle's only year"
  • Most of the required areas have non-breaking spaces, but there are still a few missing throughout the article. (WP:NBSP).
  • I played basketball as a kid, so I know the general rules and such, but to me this article relies far too heavily on bluelinks for explanation of technical terms. Every article should be able to stand on its own by what's in the article; if I have to link away from a page, you're not doing your job as a writer and I'm not coming back to read the rest of it—that's just a fact of web usability. Dumb down or explain terms where they are necessary, axe them when they are not.
    • That's why we have links to article, every article does not need to stand on its own. Am I supposed to explain what a rebound is, what an assist is, what a field goal is, etc.?
  • I suggest you don't dismiss Finetooth's comments so readily. The redlinked newspapers are not important, and you aren't encouraging creation of links by sticking them in footnotes. The "High school and prep school career" table is unnecessary, whether it's in other articles is immaterial, and sticking external links in the table that way does fall afoul of a consistent referencing system that is part of WP:FA?.
  • You can find an image. Asking copyright holders on Flickr or on fan sites is a tried-and-true method if you phrase it properly.

Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 14:09, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • Alright, I'll ask around for images.

The Old Wagon

[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 because I hope it can become a good article

Thanks, NoD'ohnuts (talk) 13:32, 25 September 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts[reply]

Just wanted to start off by saying that you've referenced this really well, and there's a lot of really good material here to work with. I'm sure with a bit of work (and possibly some expansion) this could be a good article.

  • On a general note, I would move production down below themes, and move themes into the plot section. Then simply have a cultural references section. But that's just general maintenance. You should also probably go through this with AWB just to catch any spelling errors.
  • Split the first sentence into two sentences. It's too long at the moment.
  • The second sentence doesn't make grammatical sense. Split the second sentence into two sentences with some more explanation for those not familiar with the universe.
  • Take out the part about the episode's themes in the second paragraph. Possibly make a third paragraph for them if you think that they need to be in the lead. Concentrate on who wrote/directed the episode. You might also want to put in some details about the producer and production company.
  • The last sentence of the second paragraph needs to be cleared up. "the highest rated sictom (sic) of the week and for the series" - does that mean it was the highest rated episode of the series? This needs to be made clearer.
  • The sentences in the plot section need to be shortened and more specific. The best example of this is the second sentence It could also do with a semi-colon in the middle if you don't wish to split it.
  • The production section should be changed to be in the past tense. There's no need to mention what programs come after it or before it. These details aren't relevant to the article's subject.
  • You might consider re-writing the cultural references section to say something along the lines of: The Very Hungry Caterpillar is mentioned by character X, in this context etc. etc.
Small note Here is another review that you might want to incorporate. —Justin (koavf)❤T☮C☺M☯ 08:50, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Amar la Trama

[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 because I want feedback about it to take it to Good Article status at least. I'll following this request closely to make the necesary changes.

Thanks, Jaespinoza (talk) 06:04, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • www.estereofonica.com is down.
  • www.guiasenior.com/contenidos/after/archives/2010/08/jorge-drexler-amar-la-trama.html is not Guia Senior's work. It is a press release by Jorge Drexler and his agents and should be noted and treated as such.
  • About.com is a situational source; the site's reliability is dependent on the author's expertise (which is best judged by third-party sources instead of about.com's proclaimations). What makes Tijana Ilich a respected expert on Latin music or who recognises her as such?

On the whole, I think the content is there to try for GA; however, there is a need for prose improvement. Several sentences do not sound correct to me, e.g. "An album, as told by the singer, playful, without "the melancholy and anguish" of 12 Segundos, his previous studio album." (incomplete sentence), "Amar la Trama is a result of an artistic evolution originated with the recording of Cara B, "with nine musicians playing and recording live on the album, I became interested on making music as in the past." the singer stated." (noun plus -ing, punctuations, and tenses), "... bringin great vitality and ..." (spelling), etc. Please enlist an able copy-editor to spruce up the language before going for GAN. Jappalang (talk) 08:34, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bentworth, Hampshire

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I have recently nominated the article for GA Class a couple of times but have failed. Since then, I have built everything up on the article and learned from the past mistakes. It has grown and gotten better since last time (including 40 references). This will be the last time I will nominate this article for anything - I just want to get a second opinion on it first.

Thanks, Jaguar (talk) 17:31, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dana boomer

First off, I took a look at the article history and I want to congratulate you on the great job you've done expanding the article over the past 15 or so months. From a one paragraph stub to this is impressive! Now, my comments:

  • More prose and less listy-ness and truncated thoughts is needed. For example, the Prehistory foundings section is a list that could easily be converted into prose, while "Bentewurda or Bintewurda (as it was known in c.1100)." (the first sentence of the Saxon times section) is not a complete sentence. There are several examples like this last sentence.
  • The Parish section contains a lot of really short subsections, making it very choppy and less flowing.
  • There are a lot of "paragraphs" of just one sentence. Sometimes short paragraphs can be used to make a point, by pulling a piece of text out that you want to be particularly noticed, but for the most part paragraphs should be at least three sentences.
  • The Population figures section, as pure statistics, desperately needs references. Also, some prose explaining the tables would be helpful.
  • The book(?) references are shortened to the point of being incomprehensible. For example, what the heck does "Cal. Pat. 1216–25. Unknown. pp. 329." mean?
  • Web references should have the link piped through the title (so that when you click on the title it takes you to the website), and should also include publisher, accessdate and author when available.

I hope these comments help. The article isn't ready for GA status at this time, but with a bit more work on the above could probably make it. Please let me know if you have any questions about the above comments - I am watchlisting this page. Dana boomer (talk) 17:18, 21 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Heim theory

[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 because I need some independent input on how it could be improved. Right now, I have assessed it as a C-class article, but I am curious if there is any small tweek or update that would push forward to be considered for B, GA, A, or (eventually) F. I would appreciate a detailed review analysis once comeplete so I can know what needs work most. Thanks, Novus Orator 02:55, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Sounds like an interetsing theory, but I think this needs a lot of work before it would even have a chance at passing WP:GAN. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • The external links checker in the Toolbox on this page finds at least five dead external links and several more that are likely dead or at least problematic.
  • The article has a disputed neutrality banner - this is enough to disqualify it from receiving a peer review, and would be a quick fail at GAN or FAC.
  • References are a curious mix of inline cites and direct external links. The ELs all need to be converted to inline citations.
  • Many of the refs cited do not have complete information needed. For example, internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase.
  • A few places need refs - the tables in Heim's Predictions for Experimental Masses do not seem to have any source listed, and sentences like A further prediction of Heim-Dröscher theory shows how a different arrangement of the experiment by Tajmar et al. could produce a vertical force against the direction of the Earth's gravity. need a ref too. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Article does not follow WP:ITALIC and is not internally consistent - Extended Heim Theory and Selector calcululus are italicized in the lead, but not elsewhere.
  • The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself, but dark matter is only in the lead.
  • The article has a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that interrupt the flow. These should be combined with others or perhaps expanded
  • History section should tell who Heim was, when he developed the theory, etc.
  • WP:See also says the See also section is generally not for links that are already in the article.
  • Make sure that sources used meet relaible sources guidelines - blogs and such generally do not.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours,

Tales of Monkey Island

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Alrighty, this article recently passed its GAN, and I'm planning on pushing for FAC. I'm not the best writer out there, so a peer review to help satisfy the "engaging, professional" prose standard of an FA, and any other issues that might have been missed somewhere, is in order. I'd also like someone to give it a look over to ensure that its written fully in American English, as I'm sure some of my natural British English has slipped in. Thanks! -- Sabre (talk) 15:39, 11 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by David Fuchs

Overall, it looks really good. One thing to watch in the prose is redundant words that don't add much to the text (cf. Tony1/Redundancy exercises), but I think it's fairly close to FA quality.

  • "Tales of Monkey Island complements LucasArts' enhanced remake of the 1990 title The Secret of Monkey Island; LucasArts oversaw production of the game, assisting in areas such as art direction." I'm still not sure entirely what this means: in what was does it complement the remake? Did they share developers/animators/graphic styles? Were they produced at the same time?
    • I've tried rewording the sentence to make it clearer. It now reads "The game was developed concurrently with LucasArts' enhanced remake of the 1990 title The Secret of Monkey Island; LucasArts oversaw production of Tales of Monkey Island, ensuring areas such as art direction matched the remake." I'm just wary of going into too much detail as the intro is getting a bit long. -- Sabre (talk) 22:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The game world is explored through use of the keyboard and mouse on the PC, and the Nunchuk on the Wii." Perhaps what the nunchuk is should be explained, lest people think flailing weaponry somehow controls your character?
  • "The game marks a first collaboration between the two companies" - this is one of several places in the development section (others being, for example, "the development team asserts that Gilbert's "thumbprints are all over" the game" or "[Michael Land] returns to score Tales of Monkey Island' soundtrack" or "Telltale has produced various items"), where the tense shifts from a historical "past" to a present. It's not necessarily "wrong", in that the elements described could be framed that way, but I think it's less confusing and a better practice to keep this information all in past tense (perhaps this was your intent, and these elements are just relics from when the final episodes were being released. Either way I think now's the time to run through the article and recast them.)
  • "rossman stated that they opted to release the WiiWare version of Tales of Monkey Island alongside the PC version as part of their model; they have opted to bounce releases between WiiWare and Xbox Live Arcade, as well as wanting to "give the Wii a little love as well";" - "opt"/"opt" redundancy
    • Slightly reworded that, hopefully its now sufficient. "Grossman stated that they opted to release the WiiWare version of Tales of Monkey Island alongside the PC version as part of their model; Telltale bounces releases between WiiWare and Xbox Live Arcade, wanting to "give the Wii a little love as well"." -- Sabre (talk) 22:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There's a few dead links in the article; I'd suggest going through the pains to WebCite or append Archive.org archiveurl's to all the refs to forestall a similar problem in the future. (Yeah, it's gonna' be a bitch, but I figure for FAs/near-FA quality it's better to be safe than sorry.)
    • I can't do anything about those current dead links, the site got hacked after they were referenced here and they haven't put it all back together. I was following WP:Link rot#Keeping dead links on what to do in these circumstances, which just says to tag them if there's no way of replacing them with alternate or archived sources. Hopefully that won't be an issue at FAC: WP:Link rot notes that links shouldn't be removed just because they don't work and dead links still indicate that the info was verifiable in the past. The FA criteria don't mention links anyway. Either way, setting up precautionary WebCite stuff sounds like a good idea. -- Sabre (talk) 22:47, 18 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Why not merge File:DeSinge's Lab Final.jpg and File:DeSinge's Lab Concept.jpg together, since they are images for the exact same fair use rationale and purpose (and can only really work together anyhow?)
  • For the reception, I think it would be better if the specific reviewers were credited for their comments, rather than just the publications (ex. "The chapter's puzzles were praised, with GameSpy's Ryan Scott commenting that puzzles "generally challenge [the player] just enough without becoming too frustrating",[102]" instead of "The chapter's puzzles were praised, with GameSpy commenting that puzzles "generally challenge [the player] just enough without becoming too frustrating",[102]" and then referring to Scott later.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 18:37, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi. Just dropping by the peer review to compliment your very fine work on this article; it should have no problem reaching FA. Copyediting such well-researched material has been a pleasure. On that note, I should be finished with my first pass of the article before too long, after which I'll do a second pass to clean up my own changes. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 04:06, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Travis Tritt

[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 because I want to get it to GA. His autobiography, despite being from 1994, has been really helpful in building up the article, and I'd like to know what else it might need before I take it to GAN.

Thanks, Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:08, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Belovedfreak

Hi, I will look over the article as if I'm reviewing it at GAN, although not all of my suggestions will be directly applicable to the GA criteria. I will try to make it clear which ones are.

Lead

  • First of all, the lead needs some expansion per WP:LEAD, to adequately summarise the article. It's often easier to do this when you've finished working on all the other bits. Th article goes into quite a bit of detail about his albums, so some more detail would be appreciated in the lead. Also, his early years, personal life and musical stye aren't really covered in the lead. Adhering to WP:LEAD is a GA requirement.
  • Fixed.
  • I would recommend a copyedit from someone uninvolved with the article. The prose is not bad, and I think it would be ok for GA, certainly if you want to develop it further the prose can be tightened up. One example that jumps out at me (throughout, not just the lead) is the repetition of certain words or phrases like "he also". "He also" really caught my eye as it kept coming up and often, the use of the word also was not needed at all. I think it disrupts the flow a little, sounding a bit like a list: "he did this, then he did this, he also did this..." I'm sorry if I'm not getting across exactly what I mean, but I do think it would benefit from a copyedit. This can be one of the most difficult parts of article-building if writing is not your best skill (it's certainly not mine!)
  • I can't think of anything else to make it flow better.
  • I think punctuation should be outside of quotes, eg. for song titles. So, and "Best of Intentions". not and "Best of Intentions." and for "The Whiskey Ain't Workin'", not for "The Whiskey Ain't Workin',". The only bit I can find in the manual of style is WP:LQ, which I assume applies to using quotes for titles too. I may be wrong.
  • Bleah. I always get that wrong.

Biography

  • I'd consider a different header title. Although some editors don't like to use "Biography" at all, saying that the whole article is a biography, I actually disagree with that and think it can be ok as a header. However, I'd argue here that several of the other sections would also be classified as "Biography", so it might be better to retitle it as "Early life" or something else.
  • Retitled "Early Life."
  • "He lived with his mom after she and his dad divorced" - mom and dad is a bit informal, I'd prefer mother and father
  • Fixed — what was I thinking?
  • "they re-married when he was eighteen" - this might be a silly question, but: did they remarry each other? Or did they both marry other people when he was 18? Either is possible, as people sometimes use "remarry" to say that someone has married again (a different person). It's a bit confusing so I would specify either "they both re-married" or "they re-married each other" (or a less awkward way of you can think of one!)
  • "Re-married each other."
  • "He worked at an air conditioning company while playing in clubs, but gave up the air conditioning job at the suggestion of one of his bandmates.[12] His father thought that Tritt would not find success as a musician, while his mother thought that he should perform Christian music instead of country." - this is perfectly fine for GA the way it's written, but I wonder if it could be improved. His parents' opinions coming after the air conditioning job seems a bit random, so I'm wondering if it would benefit from a sentence or part-sentence inserted in between, to introduce the fact that neither of his parents were too pleased with what he was doing. Just a thought.
  • "Through Davenport's assistance, Tritt signed with Warner Bros. in 1989." - is there any more detail on how Davenport helped him to sign with WB?
  • Added a little bit of detail.

1989 – 1991

  • The first sentence could possibly be split into two (where the semicolon is) to make it a bit more manageable
  • Fixed.
  • I notice that you use a mixture of Number One and, for example, #2. I realise that number one is kind of a special place in the chart, but I've not seen this mix before (compare Madonna (entertainer) for example)
  • In addition to the comment above, per MOS:NUMBERSIGN, the # symbol shouldn't be used, rather number 2 or No. 2
  • Spelled them out.
  • Who is Alanna Nash? (ie. state that she's a critic, or say what publication/organisation she's from)
  • Clarified that she's from Entertainment Weekly.

1991 – 1992

  • Is there any info on what the Horizon Award is for?
  • Clarified.
  • "The album would go on to become his best-selling..." - this sounds a little awkward. Does it need to be in this tense? Or could it be "The album went on to become his best-selling..."
  • Fixed.
  • "All four of its singles reached Top Five..." - Should this have italics (I'm not familiar with the country charts)? Also, should it be "All four of its singles reached the Top Five..."?
  • Fixed.
  • "He and Stuart charted a second duet..." - I think it's safe to assume here that he means Tritt, but personally I don't think it would hurt to say "Tritt and Stuart" here.
  • Fixed.
  • This section doesn't seem to be about A Travis Tritt Christmas (referenced in the section header); that album seems to be covered in the next section.
  • Oops. Fixed.

1992 – 1993

  • "Tritt and Stuart began a "No Hats Tour" in 1992.[24] In August of that same year, he released the album T-R-O-U-B-L-E. " - again, although it's an article about Tritt, grammatically he could refer to either Tritt or Stuart, both the subject of the previous sentence. Rather than repeat Tritt's name though, I would consider rearranging the prevcious sentence so it reads Tritt began a "No Hats Tour" with Stuart in 1992.[24] In August of that same year, he released the album T-R-O-U-B-L-E."
  • "It was led off by "Lord Have Mercy on the Working Man,"" - I could be wrong here but "led off by" sounds very strange to me which makes me wonder if it's a colloquialism. Again here you have a comma inside quotes which I think should be outside.
  • "That song peaked at #4 as well, and its follow-up..." - I'm not sure what as well is referring to here, or if it's necessary.
  • Yeah, what was that doing there?
  • It's not clear who Stephen Thomas Erlewine is or why he's mentioned here (it's fine to have it, just needs context)
  • Clarified that he writes for Allmusic.
  • "followed too closely in the formula of" - in doesn't need to be here: followed too closely the formula of
  • Having explained who Nash is earlier, it wouldn't hurt to give her first name here and the next time. As I was reading it, I was thinking "Who's Nash?" The names that will stick in the reader's head are the subject of the article and the other people who are part of his career, names of critics aren't likely to stick.
  • I think it would be could to clarify what the Grand Ole Opry is as not all of your readers will have heard of it. I know a little about country music (not much!) and I've heard of it, but I wasn't sure what it was. Of course, people can click through to find out more, but it helps just to clarify what it actually is here.
  • Clarified.

1994 – 1995

  • "The album reached platinum certification in December of that year, and would later go on to become..." - I'm not sure if "reach[ing] ... certification" is great grammatically. Can you reach certification? Isn't it something usually given or granted? Or certified? I know it' spretty much the same thing but doesn't sound quite right to me. Also, any reason to have "would later go on to become" rather than "later went on to become"?
  • Fixed.
  • Again, at this point I've completely forgotten who Mansfield is. I'm not saying you have to repeat that he's from Allmusic, but maybe give his first name
  • Fixed.
  • Linking "greatest hits album" is possibly not necessary, especially as it comes directly after the link to his greatest hits album, which has the link to "greatest hits album" if readers need it
  • Fixed.

1996 – 1997

  • "peaked at #29 country" - I'm unfamiliar - is that the conventional way of wording it? It sounds odd.
  • Fixed.

2002 – 2005

  • Should it be Crossroads or CMT Crossroads as it is in that article?
  • According to the article name it's just Crossroads, but I clarified that it's on CMT.
  • What exactly do you mean by a special program?
  • Oops, leftovers from the crappy old revision. Refined.
  • "all of which peaked below Top 20" - this wording sounds a bit strange. Perhaps in the Top 20?
  • Fixed.

Musical styles

  • This section is a really good addition to the article. It would be even better if there was a bit more outside opinion from critics or whoever about Tritt's style, to go with his own thoughts.
  • Added some.

Personal life

  • "the former Karen Ryon" - I assume you mean that was her name until she married? If so, there's no need to say "former". "He married Karen Ryon" is fine. At the point of marrying him, that was her name. (Assuming that's what you mean by former). Likewise his third wife.
  • Fixed.
  • "By the time he was 21, he married a woman..." - Was he 21 when he married her? Or did it happen at an unspecified time up to then? If so, perhaps By the time he was 21, he had married a woman
  • Clarified.
  • "He divorced her shortly after signing with Warner Bros..." - would be nice to have either a date or age here to give context, just so I don't have to scroll up the page again to see
  • Fixed.
  • I'm unfamiliar with what "rehabilitative support " means. Do we have a relevant article to link to? Is it a kind of alimony?
  • Sounds like alimony; I just used his words there.

References

  • The date formats are inconsistent. Pick either Day Month Year or Month Day, Year. Given that this is a US-related article, I'd go with the latter, although that'll be more work!
  • Rather than listing the book under "Further Reading", I'd call the section "Sources" or something, as "FUrther Reading" sections tend to be used for books etc not actually used in the article. I would also consider listing the other books in that section to keep the books separate from the footnotes.
  • Put the footnotes under "Notes" and the book under "References."
  • I don't think About.com is usually considered reliable unless the author of the article is considered reliable themselves.
  • According to its article, its content is written by experts on the subjects. I've seen it used in GA and FA without question.
  • From what I've seen, it really depends on whether you can show that the actual article you're using is written by an expert as some stuff on about.com is not considered reliable. Looking through these search results [17] [18] may give some more definitive answers.--BelovedFreak 09:53, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments help, please let me know if you have any questions. I enjoyed reading it and think it's not far from GA at all. Good luck with further developing it.--BelovedFreak 14:36, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tropical cyclogenesis

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I would like to get it up to fa status.

Thanks, Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 01:11, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Checklinks (toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows a dead link and several sites that require subscription; please fix the dead link and note which sites require subscription in the References.
    Which ones in particular were you concerned about (besides the dead link)? I verified all the "suspicious" output in checklinks, and all the journal references worked for me. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I must have mixed it up with another article. Journal links are working fine here. Jappalang (talk) 06:29, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Tropical cyclogenesis is the technical term describing the development and strengthening of a tropical cyclone in the atmosphere."
    "Tropical cyclogenesis is the technical term that describes the development and strengthening of a tropical cyclone in the atmosphere."
    Switched. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... due to significant convection in a favorable atmospheric environment."
    "... due to significant upward movement of warm air in a favorable atmospheric environment."
    I am hesitant to change this one, since the establishment of the full convection cell is important, not just the upwards advection; I'll wait for further input on this request. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "An average of 86 tropical cyclones of tropical storm intensity form annually worldwide, with 47 reaching hurricane/typhoon strength, and 20 becoming intense tropical cyclones (at least Category 3 intensity on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Scale)."
    This average number is applicable for what time period? Furthermore, read User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing on why "... with <noun> -ing ..." is discouraged.
    The reference from where this information is obtained only says "in the last few decades". I'd rather not introduce such a vague statement to the lede of the article, but I welcome further opinions. I tried to remove the noun+ing. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are six main requirements that are necessary but not sufficient for tropical cyclogenesis: [...] These conditions are necessary for tropical cyclone formation, but they do not guarantee that a tropical cyclone will form."
    The phrase "that are necessary but not sufficient" is redundant; the second sentence plainly states the same but in a clearer manner.
    Fixed. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "These warm waters are needed to maintain the warm core that fuels tropical systems."
    "Tropical systems" = tropical climates/environments or tropical cyclones?
    Tropical cyclones. However, Adding "tropical cyclones" there would make the paragraph very repetitive. Alternative formulations would be welcome. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This value is well above the global average surface temperature of the oceans, which is 16.1 °C (60.9 °F)."
    "This value is well above 16.1 °C (60.9 °F), the global average surface temperature of the oceans."
    Fixed. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "However, this requirement can be considered only a general baseline because it assumes that the ambient atmospheric environment surrounding an area of disturbed weather presents average conditions."
    Unsourced; there are more unsourced information in the Times of formation and Unusual areas of formation sections.
    I recently placed these tags for statements that I know are true, but which should be better referenced. Titoxd(?!? - cool stuff) 12:11, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are several "[citation needed]" tags; this and the above unsourced elements stopped my reviewing of content.

The article mostly manages to present information that is understandable to the layman at times. However, I believe it still needs some polishing on its prose and resolution of the unsourced/uncited elements and image copyrights.

George Fernandes

[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 because I feel this is a great article about a great personality. Thanks, Xavier449 (talk) 15:53, 13 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm an American, and I don't know what a bandh is. Of course, now I will go to Google and find out, but if that is not a wikilinked term, it should probably be explained in the article for readers of English outside India. My Google search shows that that word should be wikified. It would be more encyclopedic English to say "arrested" or "detained" (whatever is legally exact) rather than "nabbed."
In general, a very interesting article. There are various proof-reading issues to address. Some of the article sections are so short that they probably should be combined. The use of section headings for major incidents is very good. Keep up the good work. I've learned something by reading the article. Any biographical article is more balanced with a bit more criticism of the subject of the article, I think. -- WeijiBaikeBianji (talk) 02:28, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Sorry to have taken so long with my comments. WHile he certainly sounds like an interesting person, the article needs a fair amount of work to better follow the Manual of Style and the Biography of Living Persons policies. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • First off the article has three disambiguation links as found by the disambig links tool in the toolbox on this page. They will need to be fixed.
  • It also has at least one dead external link according to the external links tool in the same toolbox.
  • The lead should either be cited like everything else or only have refs for extraordinary claims and direct quotations. The current lead is in-between.
  • Watch out for POV and WP:PEACOCK words, like "infamous", "renowned", and "key ally" - if these are direct quotes from a reliable source, they are OK, but otherwise they are not very encyclopedic.
  • Remove uneeded repetition - for example, the Baroda Dynamite case is discussed twice in the article. To my thinking, the second appearance (in COntroversies) is not really needed, as long as it is covered in detail in his career.
  • I also worry that the article is not clear on details of the Baroda Dynamite case, in particular it does not seem to distinguish between accusations and what actually happened. The Emergency era and union ministry section is written in a more neutral tone. There is says he was charged with smuggling dynamite, but not that he actually did it. Since he was tired but never found guilty, unless he actually said / admitted that he actually planned to dynamite bridges (or whatever), the material in the Controvesries section is potentially libelous: They aimed at blasting vital installations on bridges. They procured dynamites from the quarries nearby Baroda. but then it says they were cleared of all charges.
  • I also wonder that the source used for the Controversies section on the dynamite case is "Experiments with truth and non-violence: the Dalai Lama in exile from Tibet" which seems unlikely to be the best source on this topic (the Emergencies section uses what seem like better sources on this).
  • At least the dynamite case has a source - the Support to Secessionist Groups section has a fair amount of material without refs. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • The prose is uneven - parts are nicely written and others are quite rough. I would get a copyedit if this is going to WP:GAN (need to fix the other issues too).

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:25, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

William Walton

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have listed this article for peer review in the hope of getting it up to at least GA standard. I have lately revised and expanded the article, and would be glad of any comments on, e.g, length, proportion, balance between the technical and the intelligible – or anything else, really.

All contributions gratefully received – Tim riley (talk) 08:43, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: A few initial thoughts, more to come

Lead
  • I'd look for a stronger opening paragraph, emphasising Walton's stature, thus replacing the second sentence with something along the lines of "During a 60-year career he wrote music in several genres and styles, his best-known works being..." (take your choice, but include Belshazzar's Feast)
  • I don't see the purpose of the hidden note. It reads like a personal comment, is unencyclopedic ("Tommy") and not accurate (Franks was Dean of Christchurch, not "master" of Oxford, a post that doesn't exist). Suggest get rid of it.
    • Aargh! This was a hangover from a brief wrestle with my guardian angel and proof-reader user:Ssilvers. I should have blitzed it, and now have. (Ssilver's point was that for a man supposedly "mostly self-educated" in composition Walton spent a lot of time in a musical educational establishment, and I wanted to make the point that Christ Church was by no means a music academy.) Tim riley (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "...and his more tranquil later compositions were rated more highly, alongside his earlier energetic compositions." Close repeat of "compositions" - but I'm not sure about the meaning. "More highly" than what? Is it that his tranquil late compositions, together with his earlier energetic stuff, were rated more highly, while his middle period work remained unesteemed? Clarification requested
  • "not large"; well, that depends. Not large compared with the more prolific masters, but much more than, say, Tippett (or Mahler. or Puccini, etc). You do, however, make the point that he had a long career, so the point is valid enough.
  • "in recent years" is a bit vague. "Since his death" would be a bit more specific.
First successes
  • The critical reactions to Facade of The Observer and the Manchester Guardian are mentioned. Is it possible to name the reviewers? I don't know who was at the Observer then; I imagine the Guardian review would be from Langford or Eric Blom. Not essential, but it would be nice to know, since you mention Dent in connection with The Illustrated London News and Newman of the Sunday Times.
    • The Observer on Façade was initalled by "P.A.S.", which I can't put a name to. The Manchester Guardian piece was unsigned, and, I strongly suspect, run up by a reporter rather than an arts critic – it certainly reads that way. It has Osbert down as "Mr D. Sitwell". Good old Grauniad! The rave review of the Viola Concerto in The Guardian is initialled by E.B., which, again, rang no bells, but seeing your mention of Eric Blom, I suspect it would be justifiable to assume it was he: what say you? Tim riley (talk) 15:41, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I can't place P.A.S. either. You can safely assume Blom for the Viola Concerto - at that time he did London reviews while Langford (and later Neville Cardus) did the north snd overseas stuff. Blom may have done the Facade piece, "D. Sitwell"" being a typographer's error, but probably best left anonymous. My personal preference is for, e.g. "The Observer's critic wrote..." rather than "The Observer wrote..." (newspapers don't write themslves) but again, that's up to you. Brianboulton (talk) 08:05, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the last sentence of the second paragraph, the words "of Facade" are surely superfluous?
  • 4th paragraph: again, "The Manchester Guardian wrote..."

This is looking extremely good. I'll add more later. Brianboulton (talk) 14:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • A few more comments from BB:-
1930s
  • Should Britten's diary entry have an ellipsis before "lunch" (or a capital L if that's in the diary)?
World War II
Postwar
  • I don't think you need describe Susana as "young" - you give her dates and her age.
    • Done
  • "barely held the work together" sounds like a critic's comment rather than that of a neutral encyclopedia. Attribution?
    • In fact Sargent got away with it as far as the critics were concerned, but not as far as Walton and the performers were concerned. Reid and Kennedy both record that Sargent clearly did not know the score and gave wrong cues etc at rehearsal and on the first night. I have changed the text to a direct quote. Tim riley (talk) 09:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Last years
Music
Recordings
  • I have doubts about the value of this section. Its plethora of blue links and citations make it unattractive to look at and bothersome to read, and I don't think a mere listing of 40-odd recordings adds anything worthwhile to the article. Within a biography of Walton, it is of course necessary that you discuss his music, which you do most adequately. As to recordings, I would suggest give details of the earliest recording of a Walton work, make the general statement that his major works have all been recorded, usually many times, and give a couple of quotes from critics on recent recordings of major works (The Gramophone Good CD & DVD Guide is particularly interesting on the 1995 Hickox recording of Troilus and Cressida)

Overall, this is an excellent composer biography, certainly in the featured class, and I hope that, after the glitches have been ironed out, you will overcome your aversion to the FAC process and send the article there.Brianboulton (talk) 19:33, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for these suggestions. I shall heed your encouraging words about FAC. Tim riley (talk) 09:03, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments added by PanydThe muffin is not subtle 14:50, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A big disclaimer on this review. This is an excellent article which could probably make GA status already. I'm just nit-picking here, so don't think these are giant issues. They're just things which could be improved to make this perfect.

There is just a twinge of OR to the beginning of this article. To give an example, you state that William Walton was more successful as a singer, and then go on to list where he sang. The source backs up the claim of where he sang, but not that he was more successful as a singer. It's not blatant and it's nothing that couldn't be considered true looking at it in context, but if we're going to be perfectionists about this then there need to be sources backing up these claims. Even if some of the later paragraphs I've mentioned are backed up by the source mentioned a few sentences later, consider using the "<ref name=""></ref>" tags, just to add the citation in numerous places. It makes it look tidier and backs up claims which might otherwise be considered spurious.

There need to be more in-line citations in the lead. Especially when you're making claims like 'he had ceased to be regarded as a modernist'. Similar caveats apply to the statements regarding critics.

The paragraph beginning; 'Walton, who was laregly self-taught', also needs more in-line citations.

The sentence ending in "father had spent the money for the fare in a local public house" is both hilarious and desperately needs a citation.

There's no need to say that he's sometimes called the youngest undergraduate since Henry VIII. Simply mention that he was amongst the youngest. It's tidier.

  • True, but my reason for mentioning it is twofold: first because it is (me judice) interesting and secondly, and more importantly to scotch a false statement that still pops up occasionally. I think I'd prefer to leave it. Tim riley (talk) 16:12, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Maybe give some context to the names mentioned. I know they're linked but when you read the sentence: "Alban Berg heard the performance and was impressed enough to take Walton to meet Arnold Schoenberg" - it might be a little confusing to some. Even putting them in context of where they were historically then (e.g. Arnold Schoenberg, who had just completed xyz) might help clear things up for readers coming in with no outside knowledge.

The sentence: "In 1923, in collaboration with Edith Sitwell, Walton had his first great success, though at first it was a succès de scandale" - either needs a citation or to have the 'opinion' removed (again, in context, it seems perfectly fine, this is just nitpicking)

"In the 1930s, Walton's relationship with the Sitwells became less close. He had love affairs and new friendships that drew him out of their orbit." - Citation or death (source 57 may be good here!)

(sp) He underwent successful surgery, not successfully surgery

Magicpiano

[edit]

Since I reviewed this article a few years ago, Tim asked me to look at it. All I have to say is "well done!" It has a good balance of biographic detail, musicology, and commentary, which was sadly lacking back then. As someone commented above, this would probably sail through a GA review. I didn't look at the image provenance and licensing; that should be done if you consider sending it to FAC. (I defer any detailed commentary on prose to those who are better at it than I am; I didn't spot anything glaring.) Magic♪piano 20:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A3 (Croatia)

[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 because I'd like to submit it to GAN later on. I expect that the article still needs a thorough copyedit but I plan to submit it to WP:GoCE after the peer review.

Thanks, Tomobe03 (talk) 21:57, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Niagara

General

  • there shoundn't any spaces around an em dash: "...in Croatia—A1, A2, A4 and A5."  Done Found several instances and removed those.
  • non-breaking spaces (&nbsp;) are needed between a number and its units (e.g. 21&nbsp;exits, 7 billion&nbsp;Croatian kuna)  Done Added missing non-breaking spaces.
  • Watch for overlinking; words should only be linked once in an article (twice if used its linked in the lead paragraph)

 Done Checked and removed overlinking from the lead, from the remainder of the prose and from the exit list. Also removed overlinking from references.

  • The lead uses the U.S. spelling of "kilometers" whereas the rest of the article uses "kilometre". It should be, consistently, one or the other.  Done corrected
  • Inline citations should be in numerical order, at the end of a sentence. "...during the period.[6][28]", not "...during the period.[28][6]"  Done corrected

Intro

  • "As it connects Zagreb, the nation's capital, to Slavonia region and a number of cities along the Sava River while serving as a transit route between the European Union states and the Balkans, the motorway represents a major east–west transportation corridor in Croatia and a significant part of the Pan-European Corridor X.
    • Broke apart sentence + a grammar fix: "The motorway connects Zagreb, the nation's capital, to the Slavonia region and a number of cities along the Sava River. It represents a major east–west transportation corridor in Croatia and a significant part of the Pan-European Corridor X, serving as a transit route between the European Union states and the Balkans."

 Done per suggestion

Route description

  • "The motorway spans 306.5 kilometers (190.5 mi) between Bregana border crossing to Slovenia located near Samobor and Bajakovo border crossing to Serbia east of Županja via Zagreb and Slavonski Brod representing the shortest and the most comfortable transit traffic route between Slovenia, the northern Italy, Austria, Switzerland and the southern Germany in the west on one hand and Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece and Turkey in the east on the other."
    • Split sentence + grammar/puncuation fixes: "The motorway spans 306.5 kilometers (190.5 mi) between the Bregana border crossing, located near Samobor, to Slovenia and the Bajakovo border crossing to Serbia east of Županja. It represents the shortest and the most comfortable transit traffic route between Slovenia, northern Italy, Austria, Switzerland, and southern Germany to the west; and Serbia, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Bulgaria, Macedonia, Greece, and Turkey to the east."
  • "The motorway is operated by Hrvatske autoceste."
    • What is "Hrvatske autoceste"? A short phrase/sentence about it whould make the article more comprehensive. Example: "The A3 motorway is operated by Hrvatske autoceste, the state-owned company tasked with the management, construction, and maintainence of Croatian motorways."

 Done both per suggestions

Toll

  • "The westernmost section of the motorway spanning Bobovica interchange and Bregana border crossing is tolled at Bregana toll plaza using an open toll collection system, and the motorway sections east of Ivanja Reka interchange are tolled using a closed toll collection system integrated with the A5 motorway as the two connect in Sredanci interchange forming a unified toll collection system."
    • Fixed punctuation: "The westernmost section of the motorway, spanning Bobovica interchange and Bregana border crossing, is tolled at Bregana toll plaza using an open toll collection system; the motorway sections east of Ivanja Reka interchange are tolled using a closed toll collection system, integrated with the A5 motorway as the two connect in Sredanci interchange forming a unified toll collection system."
  • "The toll is payable in Croatian kuna, euro, major credit and debit cards and using a number of prepaid toll collection systems including various types of smart cards issued by the motorway operator and ENC - an electronic toll collection (ETC) which is shared at all motorways in Croatia (except the A2 motorway) and provides drivers use of dedicated lanes at toll plazas and a discounted toll rates."
    • Fixed punctuation/grammar: "The toll is payable in either Croatian kuna or euros and by major credit cards, debit cards and a number of prepaid toll collection systems, including various types of smart cards issued by the motorway operator and ENC—an electronic toll collection (ETC) system which is shared at most motorways in Croatia and provides drivers with discounted toll rates for dedicated lanes at toll plazas."
  • "The toll collected by Hrvatske autoceste — the motorway operator — along the A3 motorway in January – August 2009 was reported to comprise the largest proportion of total Hrvatske autoceste toll revenue for the period amounting to 889.8 million Croatian kuna (approximately 121.9 million euro)."
    • Fixed punctuation/grammar: "The toll collected by Hrvatske autoceste—the motorway operator—along the A3 motorway from January to August 2009 was reported to comprise the largest proportion of the total toll revenue collpected by the company, for the period, amounting to 889.8 million Croatian kuna (approximately 121.9 million euro)."
  • "There are plans for the outer Zagreb bypass integrated into the tolled motorway network — as the ultimate solution for congestion at the Ivanja Reka toll plaza."
    • Fixed punction/grammar: "There are plans for the outer Zagreb bypass to be integrated into the tolled motorway network as the ultimate solution for congestion at the Ivanja Reka toll plaza."

 Done the above four points per suggestions

  • How much is an average toll?
That depends on the vehicle and sections travelled. The vehicles are categorized IA (motorcycles), I (cars, vans below 1.9m tall and 3.5t max permitted weight), II (cars with trailers, vans taller than 1.9m but below 3.5 max permitted weight), III (busses, busses with one-axle trailers, vans not falling into categories II or III, vans with trailers, trucks), IV (trucks with trailers, semi-trailer trucks, busses with multi-axle trailers). Naturally, the toll is the cheapest for the IA and the most expensive for the IV cat vehicles. Toll charged to IA vehicles traveling between Ivanja Reka and Rugvica exits is 2 kuna, and it is 61 kuna for entire tolled motorway east of Zagreb. For category I vehicle that is 3 / 105 kuna, cat II 4/160 kuna, cat III 7/240 kuna and cat IV 10/350 kuna. Since different charges apply for different combinations of the category/entry/exit that complicates calculation of an average value immensely. Furthermore there is another toll plaza west of Zagreb with the same vehicle categorization in place, although it charges toll for a single section. Perhaps it would be of some use to indicate current toll charge for travel along the entire route in a car or a semi or both?--Tomobe03 (talk) 21:25, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added inline citation linking to official price list.
Okay, I looked at the website and I think I understand how the tolling works. What I would do is to give the toll at the Bregrana toll plaza for a Category I vehicle and then for a Category IV vehicle, making sure to mention what vehicles each category pertains to. For the tolls east of Zagreb, I'd do the same thing as with Bregrana, but give a range for the lowest and the highest tolls for a Category I and a Category IV (for consistency). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

 Done per suggestion

History

  • "A substantial portion of the works was carried out by youth from Yugoslavia and abroad through youth work actions and by Yugoslav army soldiers, as nearly 300,000 of them took part in the construction."
    • Split sentence: "A substantial portion of the works was carried out by youth from Yugoslavia and abroad through youth work actions. Nearly 300,000 Yugoslav army soldiers also took part in the construction."

 Done Revised mostly per suggestion, however the figure refers to both soldiers and the youth work action participants, so I modified it slightly to reflect this.

  • "Inspection of the motorway section carried out at the time revealed damage to a viaduct carrying the motorway over Zagreb–Sisak–Vinkovci railroad and a local road near Novska, a number of flyovers and to the pavement caused by artillery bombardment, damage to flyover approach embankments where trenches were dug as well as some damage caused by overall lack of maintenance during the period."
    • Split sentence, reworded to flow better: "Inspection of the motorway section carried out at the time revealed damage to a viaduct carrying the motorway over Zagreb–Sisak–Vinkovci railroad and a local road near Novska. Besided the overall lack of maintenance during the period, the pavement and a number of flyovers were damaged by artillery bombardments, and the flyover approach embankments were damaged where trenches were dug."

 Done per suggestion

Further construction

  • "The A3 motorway is completed in its entire length since 2006 therefore further construction related to the A3 now comprises only additional interchanges and rest areas."
    • Reword: "Since the A3 motorway was completed in 2006, further construction on the A3 now only comprises of the addition of interchanges and rest areas."

 Done Revised per suggestion, except I used consists instead of comprises now.

Rest areas

  • "There are however rest areas which are available to the eastbound traffic only—Lužani and Brodski Stupnik rest areas; or to the westbound traffic only—Slaven and Staro Petrovo Selo rest areas. Furthermore, some rest areas offer different types of amenities to each direction of the traffic."
    • Fixed punction; reworded: "There are however rest areas which are available only to the eastbound traffic (e.g. Lužani and Brodski Stupnik rest areas) or to westbound traffic only, like Slaven and Staro Petrovo Selo rest areas.

 Done per suggestion

  • "6 in the afternoon"
    • I've always considered 6:00PM to be considered evening, rather than afternoon (cultural difference maybe?).  Done Locally both versions would work. Changed to evening.

Interesting photos and a well written article, makes me what to visit Croatia. Getting it promoted to GA shouldn't be too hard (if you should feel like it, with a little more work, an FA would be possible). If this review was helpful, consider reviewing an article in the backlog, as that is how I found yours. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 20:01, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review. Your comments were constructive and helpful indeed. I am interested in promoting the article to FA eventually, so all your suggestions in that respect are more than welcome.
As far as the average toll is concerned, it seems to be quite impossible to provide a reliable value thereof, and I doubt that it is worth saying for instance what would it cost to drive a regular car along the entire A3, since it would not be of any use to those driving other types of vehicles or those traveling shorter distances than that - although that is quite possible to do. Furthermore, one of the inline citations in the toll section provides a link to Hrvatske ceste official price list for the motorway.--Tomobe03 (talk) 22:26, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I believe I came up with a way to a provide an idea of what the tolls on the A3 are (see above). In trying for an FA, I'd look for other, similar FA's to use a model; I note there are no FA's for WP:WikiProject Highways, other than highways in the U.S. (even though the style of the article different, you could use their FAC's to see what kinds of things you need fix here before nominating the A3). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:02, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks!--Tomobe03 (talk) 06:50, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A6 (Croatia)

[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 because I plan to submit it for WP:GAN and I'd like to have someone else to have a look at it.

Thanks, Tomobe03 (talk) 06:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Niagara

  • "Kilometer" vs. "kilometre"  Done changed to one of those only

Into

  • "As it connects Rijeka, the country's largest seaport, to the A1 motorway at Bosiljevo 2 interchange and the capital, Zagreb via the A1."
    • De-fragmented: "It connects the capital of Zagreb, via the A1, to the seaport of Rijeka."  Done a similar solution applied
  • "The motorway route is completed since 2008."
    • Tense: "The motorway route was completed in 2008."  Done per suggestion
  • "National significance of the motorway is reflected through its positive economic impact on the cities and towns it connects as well as its importance to tourism in Croatia, however its genuine importance as a transit route shall be achieved upon completion of proposed expansion of Rijeka Port and Rijeka transport node."
    • Grammar fix: "The positive economic impact on the cities and towns it connects, as well as its importance to tourism in Croatia, is reflected in the the motorway's national significance."
    • There is no mention of this "proposed expansion" of the "transit node" elsewhere in the article. Anything in the lead paragaraph should be repeated/expanded upon in the main body of the article.

 Done per suggestion; the proposed expansion placed in the main body of the article, and I'll expand it a bit (one or two sentences extra) later on today

  • "Those sections of the motorway steeper than 4% have three traffic lanes to facilitate smoother traffic of slow vehicles."
    • Reword: "The sections of the motorway that have a gradient greater than 4% are divided into three lanes to prevent traffic problems caused by slower vehicles."  Done per suggestion
  • "As the motorway is tolled using a ticket system and vehicle classification in Croatia, each exit includes a toll plaza, except Bosiljevo 2 where the traffic defaults to the A1 motorway and is tolled upon leaving that motorway and exits south of Grobnik mainline toll plaza, as that part of the A6 route is not tolled."
    • Reworded to flow better: "As the motorway is tolled using a ticket system, each exit includes a toll plaza, except at Bosiljevo 2 where the traffic continues from A6 onto the A1 or vice versa, where the toll is collected upon leaving the motorway or at the Grobnik toll plaza on the A6."  Done a similar structure applied, split sentence for clarity

Route description

  • "...to its hinterland."
    • Wow, I learned a new word :-) It probably would be helpful to link it to wikt:hinterland.  Done wikilinked
  • "The cavern has been bridged by one of the tunnel tubes and sealed away from the motorway in order to protect it and the water flowing through the cavern."
  • Fixed tense; I'm assuming the motorway was what was sealed, not cavern itself: "The cavern was bridged by one of the tunnel tubes, which was sealed to protect the cavern and water flowing through it."

 Done Perhaps sealed is not the most fortunate description. I intended to point out that unlike Lærdal Tunnel where the cavern roof is rock visible from the road, in this case the tunnel tube (reinforced concrete) is uninterrupted along the motorway running through the tunnel and nothing apart from concrete is visible.

Toll

  • An example toll would helpful here too (probably just the toll between Bosiljevo and Rjeka).  Done per suggestion and similarly to the A3 (Croatia)
  • "The toll is payable in Croatian kuna, euro, major credit and debit cards and using a number of prepaid toll collection systems including various types of smart cards issued by the motorway operator and ENC - an electronic toll collection (ETC) which is shared at all motorways in Croatia (except the A2 motorway) and provides drivers use of dedicated lanes at toll plazas and a discounted toll rates."
    • Fixed punctuation/grammar: "The toll is payable in either Croatian kuna or euros and by major credit cards, debit cards and a number of prepaid toll collection systems, including various types of smart cards issued by the motorway operator and ENC—an electronic toll collection (ETC) system which is shared at most motorways in Croatia and provides drivers with discounted toll rates for dedicated lanes at toll plazas."

 Done per suggestion

History

  • "...when Carolina road..." "...new route — Louisiana road..."
    • Out of curiosity, is their any reason why it appears they were named after U.S. states?
There is. All of them were named after European nobility with same or similar names: US states were named after Louis XIV of France and Charles I of England, while the roads were named after Charles VI, Holy Roman Emperor (reigned during construction of Carolina road) and Empress Marie-Louise, Duchess of Parma, who was also Archduchess of Austria and the second wife of Napoleon I of France (Austria ruled the area before 1809, then France until 1813, then Austria once again - covering the period when Louisiana road was built)
  • "The first section of the A6 motorway, between Orehovica and Kikovica, 10.5 km (6.5 mi) long, has been opened on September 9, 1972, as the first motorway section in Croatia and Yugoslavia, as a part of project of construction of Rijeka–Zagreb motorway."
    • Fixed tense, trimed redundant material: "The first section of the A6 motorway, between Orehovica and Kikovica, was 10.5 km (6.5 mi) long and opened on September 9, 1972."

 Done per suggestion; a reference to the first motorway built in the country remained as a historically significant fact

Exit list

  • Which exit(s) would take to reack Rijeka? The exit list doesn't appear to mention the city.

 Done Orehovica interchange is shared between the A6/A7 motorways and a part of Rijeka bypass - in effect a section of the A7 serving Rijeka through six interchanges Matulji, Diračje, Rujevica, Škurinje, Orehovica, and Draga.

Neat tunnels! It reminds of the ones on the Penna Turnpike. It shouldn't be terribly hard to get this through GA. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:10, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your review! It was really helpful.--Tomobe03 (talk) 12:01, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2012 phenomenon

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
If you'd asked me a year ago I wouldn't have considered this article for FA consideration, but I'm starting to ponder whether it is now ready. Please let me know if it is.

Thanks, Serendipodous 08:57, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is interesting, seems comprehensive, and is generally very well-done. I think, with a few fixes, it would have a chance at FA. My suggestions are mostly fairly trifling and shouldn't be difficult to address. When the world doesn't end in 2012, the article will need updating. I'm sure you've thought of this and perhaps even look forward to it with relish.

  • The dab tool at the top of this page finds four dabs.

Lead

  • Consider spelling out NASA as well as abbreviating on first use?
  • I doubt that you need to link "scientist".

Mesoamerican Long Count calendar

  • Maybe "body" instead of "corpus" because the former is more familiar to readers.
  • "Unlike the 52-year calendar round still used today among the Maya," - Tighten by deleting "today"?
  • in units of 20, so 20 days made" - Maybe a semicolon instead of ", so"? The "so" makes the text read a bit like a lecture rather than a statement of fact. Ditto for "So, for example, the Mayan date...". I think "The Mayan date... " would do nicely.
  • "have the count shifting to a higher order" - Does the higher order have a name? I assume its another "tun" with a preface.

The Long Count and apocalypse

  • To avoid repeating "Long Count", which is in the head, maybe just "Apocalypse"?
  • "In the Maya Long Count, the previous world ended after 13 b'ak'tuns." - Does "previous world" mean the third world?
  • "This means that it too will" - I think that "it" means the "fourth world". If so, maybe saying "fourth world" rather than "it" would be more clear.
  • "added that "there appears to be a strong likelihood that the oral calendar, like the year calendar, was motivated by a long-range astronomical prediction, one that made a correct solsticial forecast 2,367 years into the future in 355 B.C." (sic)[17]" - three problems: (1) I'm not sure what "oral calendar refers to"; am I just not seeing the explanation? (2) Should "correct solsticial forecast" be explained? What forecast? (3) It's not clear what the (sic) refers to.

Objections

  • "Coe's apocalyptic connotations" - Is "connotations" the right word? Would "interpretation" be better?
  • "In their seminal work of 1990" - Maybe delete "seminal" since that might be a judgment about the work rather than a neutral claim.
  • "Stela 1 at Coba," - Should Stela be linked to Stele for readers who don't know the term?
  • "this date is 3 quintillion times" - I added a few no-break codes to items similar to this one, which needs an nbsp to hold the digits and units together on line-break. WP:NBSP has details. The others like this one should be fixed too. "Monument 6", "Stela 1", "b'ak'tun 13", and 20th century are other examples.
  • "projects into the future to the 80th Calendar Round" - The term "calendar round" was lower-cased and linked in the Mesoamerica Long Count calendar section. Should it be lower-cased here too? Otherwise it appears to be a new term not yet explained.
  • "of the famous Palenque ruler" - Delete "famous"?
  • "adding to it the Distance Number" - Maybe I am missing something, but has "Distance Number" been explained?

New Age beliefs

  • "SETI" - Spell out as well as abbreviate on first use?

Timewave zero and the I Ching

  • I Ching should be in italics in the subhead and in the text.
  • The "page needed" tag is correct. Direct quotations need an in-line citation directly after the end punctuation of the quoted material.
  • "peppered this specific date throughout the second, 1993 edition of The Invisible Landscape" - A bit awkward. Suggestion: "peppered this specific date throughout the second edition of The Invisible Landscape, published in 1993.

Doomsday theories

  • "However, Jenkins has berated the fact that a science fiction writer" - I don't think you can berate a fact. "Lament" perhaps?
  • "Common themes for the end of the world in 2012 include the following:" - This line seems a little out of place. I see what the intent is, but maybe there's a better way. Maybe the first paragraph could have its own subhead, for example.

Other alignments

  • "Sgr A*" - If you abbreviate here, you should give the abbreviation as well as the full spelling on first use, above.

Citations

  • The date formatting should be consistent. Citation 14 uses two different formats, and there might be others. Citation 96 is another odd one.
  • Citation 46 needs a punctuation fix.

References

  • The ampersands should be changed to "and" unless part of a formal name such as a corporation name.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page.

Real Madrid C.F.

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I think it has chances to become a featured article, in the future. However, I know that a big problem would be the references, but maybe the article itself has some issues...so...

Thanks, Hadrianos1990 talk 16:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As the editor who got FC Barcelona to FA I can recommend you buy or borrow Phil Ball's book on Spanish football, read it thoroughly and add stuff to the article. Once you've added some good sources, remember to use three/four more books, ask for a copyedit and then finally a PR. That should send it off for FA, but it will take time. Sandman888 (talk) 18:39, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Jappalang

Lede

  • Is it needed to spiel every trophy they won in the league?!
  • "... was given by the King ..."
    Which king?
  • "... several teams in Spain have got this royal distinction:"'
    "... several other Spanish football teams also received this royal distinction:"
  • "Real Madrid has spent its entire history in La Liga, ..."
    Real Madrid is not a living entity that can decide to "spend" its time doing something.
  • "In the 1940s, the Santiago Bernabéu Stadium and the Ciudad Deportiva had to be rebuilt following the Spanish Civil War."
    What has this to do with Real Madrid?
  • "... in Spain and Europe (known as La Quinta del Buitre), ..."
    Europe is known as La Quinta del Buitre?
  • "The team's traditional home colours are all white, ..."
    A layman might come to think this means the team's stadium is painted all in white. Avoid football jargon.
  • "... and the second most valuable worthing over €950m in 2008."
    "Worth" is not a verb; hence, there is no such word as "worthing" unless you mean the town in South England.

Early years, Civil War and Franco (1902–1945)

  • "... on 6 March in 1902."
    There is a redundant word.
  • "Real Madrid led the first edition until the last match,"
    I am fairly certain "edition" is not synonymous with "league".
  • "The Whites won the League again the following year, ..."
    Who are the Whites? Barcelona?

Santiago Bernabéu Yeste and European success (1945–1978)

  • "... the club, the Santiago Bernabéu Stadium and the Ciudad Deportiva were rebuilt following the Spanish Civil War."
    What are the Santiago Bernabéu Stadium and the Ciudad Deportiva? When were they built in the first place?
  • "In 1955, acting upon the idea proposed by the French sports journalist and editor of L'Équipe Gabriel Hanot, and building upon the Copa Latina (a tournament involving clubs from France, Spain, Portugal and Italy), Bernabéu met in the Ambassador Hotel in Paris with Bedrignan and Gusztáv Sebes and created an exhibition tournament of invited teams from around Europe that would eventually become what today is known as the UEFA Champions League."
    This is a long sentence with some redundant ideas (does it matter where they met). Break it apart and summarise.
  • "Winning the competition five consecutive times saw Real permanently awarded the original cup ..."
    Avoid anthropomorphising an event; how does it (without sentience) "see"?
  • Is "nationally born" a common term?
  • "a first in the competition."
    Which feat was the "first in the competition"?
  • As a newspaper, Diario Marca should be in italics.
  • "The club played its first UEFA Cup Winners' Cup final in 1971, being defeated by English side Chelsea 2–1."
    "The club played its first UEFA Cup Winners' Cup final in 1971 and lost to English side Chelsea 2–1."
  • "In his honour FIFA decreed three days of mourning during the tournament."
    "The International Federation of Association Football (FIFA) decreed three days of mourning to honour him during the tournament."
  • "The following year, the club organized the first edition of the Santiago Bernabéu Trophy in the memory of its former president."
    Unsourced.

Los Galácticos, Calderón and second Pérez era (2000–present)

  • "His campaign vowed to erase the club's debt and ..."
    Again. avoid anthropomorphising. "He vowed in his campaign to erase the club's debt and ..."
  • "... the club controversially got its training ground rezoned ..."
    What is "rezoned"? Why was it controversial? Without explanation, the adjective becomes a biased term.
  • "... purchasing Cristiano Ronaldo from Manchester United for a record breaking £80 million."
    Unsourced.

Statistics and records

  • I think it is better to start off with club statistics rather than player statistics.
  • Why should Figo's 127 caps be linked with Real? He certainly did not earn all of them with the club.
  • All records should be made clear whether they are club-level, nation-level, or international-level.
  • "Officially, Real Madrid's highest home attendance is 83,329 for a Copa del Rey match in 2006."
    Do not force readers to go to another article just to figure out what that term is. Suggestion: "Officially, the highest home attendance figure for a Real Madrid match is 83,329, which was for a football cup competition, Copa del Rey, in 2006."
  • "Real have also set ..."
    It was all singular until here, why?
  • "The "Whites" also hold ..."
    Why is Whites now in quotes?
  • "Raúl González is the all-time UEFA Champions League top scorer, with 66 goals. The team has the record number of consecutive participation in the European Cup with 15, from 1955–56 to 1969–70."
    Unsourced.

Support

  • "... by season ticket holders, of which there are average of 68,670."
    There is a missing word, but still, the sentence could be rephrased.
  • "To become a season ticket holder one must first be a socio, or club member. Not all members are able to get a season ticket."
    Why (on the second sentence)?
  • How is "To become a season ticket holder one must first be a socio, or club member. Not all members are able to get a season ticket. In addition to members, the club has more than 1,800 peñas (official, club-affiliated supporters' groups) in Spain and around the world. Real Madrid has the highest average all-time attendance in Spanish football and regularly attracts over 65,000 fans to Santiago Bernabéu; it was the second best-supported La Liga team in the 2004–05 season, with an average gate of 71,900." sourced to "On the first place was Barcelona with an average gate of 76,000."?

El Clásico

  • Who or what is "Ghemawat, Pankaj. p. 2"? Does this source truly back up "There is often a fierce rivalry between the two strongest teams in a national league, and this is particularly the case in La Liga, where the game between Real Madrid and FC Barcelona is known as El Clásico. From the start of national competitions the clubs were seen as representatives of two rival regions in Spain: Catalonia and Castile, as well as of the two cities. The rivalry reflects what many regard as the political and cultural tensions felt between Catalans and the Castilians, seen by one author as a re-enactment of the Spanish Civil War."

Note: Based on the sourcing discrepancies found above, I find it hard to trust that all the information given are backed up by the citations and have stopped reviewing content from this point on.

Tables

  • Why are the countries represented in flags not identified on first use? This violates WP:MOSFLAG, causing accessibility issues.
  • Why should technical staff have flags next to their names? On what grounds does this not violate WP:MOSFLAG's guidelines on inappropriate flag use?

General

  • There are several tags for expansion.
  • Several sections are not sourced at all.

References

  • For a club this big, there should be books dedicated to the subject or are of academic focus on the football scene. These are preferred over websites and newspaper pieces and should be used instead; so why are books listed here if they are not even used at all? Surely, there should also be more books about Real Madrid or Spanish football than these?

Images

  • File:Logo Real Madrid.svg: "Because it is a logo there is almost certainly no free equivalent." is incorrect. Is this a copyrighted image? Why is it copyrighted and for how long? Those are the questions that should be answered. 350,000 pixels is high resolution; 100,000 pixels is the recommended low resolution level. Why should the logo be of this high resolution?
  • File:Real2007.jpg: Can an admin check the licensing is correct when the image was at Wikipedia and update the Transfer log?

The above points to a serious makeover before the article should be submitted to FAC. Jappalang (talk) 00:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

2010 PapaJohns.com Bowl

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

From a distance, the 2010 PapaJohns.com Bowl was merely a matchup of two mediocre 7–5 college football teams, another forgettable bowl game in a sea of 34. Look closer, however, and you'll see both teams have their own unique and interesting story. The South Carolina Gamecocks started their season hot, winning five of six games, including over the No. 4 team in the country, only to collapse down the stretch, losing four of five. They found a measure of redemption in their final regular season game, beating their archrival who had already won a berth in their conference's championship game. Their opponent, the Connecticut Huskies, had already experienced half a difficult season with multiple close losses when, on the night of October 17, everything changed. Coming out of a dance at the UConn student union, star cornerback Jasper Howard was brutally stabbed and murdered, dying in his teammates' arms. The Huskies mourned and suffered through three straight last-second losses, until finally finding victory in a highly emotional, double-overtime victory at Notre Dame that sealed the fate of Charlie Weis. Connecticut won its remaining games, including the last on a last-second field goal in the snow, to secure a bowl bid that had looked doubtful just a few weeks before.

This article is currently a Good article nominee. I am submitting it for peer review in order to seek suggestions for improvement in order for it to reach featured article quality. As I believe it is close to my previous featured article, the 2009 International Bowl, if reviewers here think the article is ready I may bypass the long queue at WP:GAN and go to WP:FAC directly. Any comments or concerns directed at improving the article would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, –Grondemar 03:22, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: I think you have the basics for a good article here. It's certainly broad in coverage and well-sourced. However, after enjoying the exciting lead, I got quite bogged down in the first three sections, which I think are largely unnecessary. I think it would improve the article to combine the most essential bits of these three sections under one head, perhaps "Regular season", ending with a couple of minimalist sentences about bowl selection. Here are a few other comments.

Heads

  • In the "Pregame buildup" section, using the more telegraphic "Connecticut" instead of "Connecticut offense" would eliminate the repetition of "offense" already made clear by the "Offensive matchups" subhead. Ditto for the other three similar subheads that repeat "offense" or "defense".

Lead

  • "marked by the loss of five games by a total of fifteen points between them" - I believe that should be "among them" since there were more than two.
  • "Pregame coverage focused on the tragic circumstances of the Huskies' season as well as head coaches Randy Edsall of Connecticut and Steve Spurrier of South Carolina." - Maybe "and on" instead of "as well as" to avoid suggesting that the two coaches were also "tragic circumstances".

Team selection

  • "the PapaJohns.com Bowl had contracts with the Big East and the SEC that allowed them" - Since "Bowl" is singular, should this be "it" rather than "them"? Ditto for "its" rather than "their" later in the sentence? Ditto for "team" and "its" later in the article or similar constructions such as "Connecticut" and "it" rather than "they".
  • "The Big East had a contractual bowl bid since the first PapaJohns.com Bowl in 2006 and had a team play in the game every year." - Should "contractual bowl bid" be clarified somehow? Could this be rewritten as "The Big East had signed an agreement with the PapaJohns.com Bowl in 2006 to have one of its teams play in the bowl every year"?
  • "The Big East's contract with the PapaJohns.com Bowl stated that the bowl would share its selection with the International Bowl and the St. Petersburg Bowl, following the selections of the bowls with higher priority." - I don't think foreign readers will have any idea what this means. Could it be made more clear how one bowl can "share its selections" with another bowl? And what does "following the selections of the bowls with higher priority" mean?
  • Note 2 will likewise mean almost nothing to an outsider to the sport. I wonder if it would improve the article to simply omit these complications, which seem to have little bearing on the central matter at hand, the 2010 PapaJohns.com Bowl? Are these details necessary?
  • On further reflection, I think it might help improve the article to omit most of the "Team selection" complications. Perhaps just a couple of paragraphs mentioning the essence would be sufficient. I think most readers will not care about the team-selection complications even if they can understand them.

Connecticut

  • "The departure of NCAA rushing leader running back Donald Brown" - I'd suggest re-casting this to avoid the long string of adjectives in front of Donald Brown. Maybe: "The departure of NCAA rushing leader Donald Brown, a running back,"
  • "UConn opened their" - Shouldn't this be "its" rather than "their"?
  • I'm not sure that recapping the entire Connecticut season is germane to the topic. Any team in a bowl game will have played many games in the regular season, but the scoring details of each of these games seems at best remotely related to the bowl game. The murder of Howard is relevant. Connecticut's overall record is relevant, and summary of its strengths and weaknesses in the regular season would be relevant. But all the rest seems unnecessary.

South Carolina

  • Ditto for this team. Are the individual game details necessary to an understanding of the bowl game?
  • The sections from this point on seem relevant. It shouldn't be hard to reduce the early sections and get right to the heart of the matter.

Aftermath

  • The Manual of Style deprecates fancy quotes and recommends using blockquotes instead for quotations of four lines or more. WP:MOS#Block quotations has details.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:05, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you for the above suggestions. My apologies for not replying earlier; User:Maclean25 began the GAN review before this peer review was posted. I was trying to get the GAN closed out before addressing these issues.
  • I believe I have caught all of the grammatical and formatting issues and fixed them. Thanks for catching them.
  • Regarding the headings and article structure, I am reluctant to deviate significantly from the formats of the vast majority of already-featured bowl game articles, such as 2009 Orange Bowl, 2009 International Bowl, and 2000 Sugar Bowl. I cut back the information in the season summaries and moved more information in the team selection section to footnotes, but I'd rather not cut them back as far as you suggest as bowl selection is a major topic in college football in and of itself; bowl projections are made by reliable sources as early as the end of the preceding season. Readers familiar with college football would want to know how the two teams in the game were selected. I've tried in the season summaries to give a feel on how the season flowed for each team, without going into excessive detail.

List of Russian inventors

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Well, review this article pls, is it ready for FL?

Thanks, ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:33, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Review

[edit]
  • The is no need for the flag pictures in the lead.
 Done GreyHood Talk 22:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
yes, its the same name-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 21:12, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The lead should definitely be expanded to meet WP:LEAD. I'm aware it's pretty hard to make a large lead for these type of pages but there are others that make good leads for lists. I think you should include history and what the most notable inventions went on to do. Example:
In 1997, Russian inventor Sergey Brin and American industrialist Larry Page created the Google Search engine. In 2009, Google was the most used search engine, topping Yahoo! by about 60% of users every month.[19]
  • Users at FL are VERY picky on prose (paragraphs and stuff). The lead definitely needs to be in prose format.
  • Many pictures need alt text. I don't believe the any of the faces of inventors need alt text a few pictures may need it.
  • The Inventions column has a lot of words that need to be capitalized. The beginnings of each square should be capitalized (ie: camming devices, tricolor principle of the color television etc.)
  • Person doesn't seem to be the best column name. Perhaps Information.
  • I VERY STRONGLY suggest that you copy the edit box at the bottom of this page and paste it over this page.
  • According to this and this, you are the fourth most contributer to the page. I once got a FAC withdrawn because of this. You should at least be third.
  • There are 12 dabs (links that lead to disambiguation pages), see here for help
 Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 21:07, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Honestly I see no need for the picture gallery in the beginning at all.
me too-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 21:10, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done GreyHood Talk 22:09, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are tons of external links that need to be fixed. see here for help.
  • The lead really should be cleaned up. Sentences 2,3, and 4 are not needed. See my fourth comment for more info.
I know that sentences 3 and 4 are not quite along the line of WP:LEAD, but they contain valuable links to the similar information on Russian inventors presented in different way. Why not write a good large lead and preserve these two small links in it? Regarding sentence 2, it's rather important since it defines some of the criteria for inclusion into this list. Without it there is a pretty good chance that some on-wiki nationalists will start remove Russian immigrants/emigrants, non-ethnic Russians etc. Such activities on the List of Russian people were not infrequent. GreyHood Talk 22:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The list seems to be incomplete. The talk page gives a list of people that need to be included. I recommend you search the names on google books or google scholar for actual RS.
With all the names on the talk page the expansion of this list would require a huge amount of work. Establishing the priority and notability of many inventions, finding illustrations, writing articles on some inventors and inventions etc. I'd propose to concentrate on improving the list as it stands in order to make it good enough for FLC. Expansion would be nice too, of course, but I think it is impossible in principle to make this list complete. GreyHood Talk 22:29, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

All In all I feel that the list and lead need expansion to pass FLC. I strongly suggest that you respond to my comments soon, as I will check back Friday. I also suggest you check out some similar lists that have passed FLC. Good luck improving the article. Please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). CrowzRSA 01:44, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My Chemical Romance discography

[edit]
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review
This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've been making adjustments to this page for a while now. I've cleaned up all the references, found additional content to include (primarily music industry certification awards), and made minor adjustments to the format. I'm considering nominating the article to be a featured list but would like some general feedback fist. My only major concern is the quality of the lead. – Zntrip 00:05, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: No queries with the tables, which look fine. A few comments on the lead:_

  • Why is the listing in the first paragraph of the lead in a different sequence from the infobox list, which is different again from the order in which the tables appear in the article?
  • Why not follow the MOS guideline which indicates that numbers with a value of 10 or more should be written numerically (14, 11, 10)?
  • There is a close repeat mid-lead of the word "major". The second is not really necessary, but could be replaced with, e.g. "considerable"
  • "2 million" rather than "2.0 million"
  • The word "forthcoming" is redundant when you say the album is expected to be released in late 2010. (I would shorten this to "due for release").
  • One other point: the toolbox on the right is indicating that the link in ref 35 is dead, although I have no problem accessing it. Check it out.

That's all I have. Looks pretty well ready for FLC. Brianboulton (talk) 18:48, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for looking at the article, your suggestions helped out a lot. – Zntrip 20:15, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Ida (2009)

[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 because it is one of our project's A class articles and need suggestions on how to get it up to FA class. I have taken care of most of the issues from its last FA nomination, but am still in the process of correcting the rest.

Thanks, Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 01:42, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: I don't see anything that would cause this article much trouble at FAC. I made a fair number of minor proofing changes, but none were substantial, and I don't think I missed much. Here are a few other things I think need attention.

The tools at the top of this review page find two dead urls in citations.  Done

Meteorological history

  • "After moving inland, the high mountains of Nicaragua caused convection associated with the hurricane to diminish, resulting in rapid weakening." - The mountains didn't move inland. Suggestion: "After the hurricane moved inland, the high mountains... ".

 Done

Central America

  • "Shortly after being designated as Tropical Storm Ida on November 4, the government of Nicaragua... ". - The government of Nicaragua wasn't designated a tropical storm. Suggestion: "Shortly after the disturbance was designated as Tropical Storm Ida on November 4, the government of Nicaragua... ".

 Done

United States

  • " were urged to not take chances and ride out the storm at home" - Tighten to "were urged to stay home"?

 Done

Nicaragua

  • "UNFPA" - This and the other abbreviations should be spelled out as well as abbreviated on first use.

 Done

  • "($2.12 million USD) - No need to link USD more than once in the main text.

 Done

Northern Caribbean

  • "In Cuba, the outer bands of Ida produced widespread heavy rainfall... " - I note some mild overlinking in the article. I don't think you need to link anything more than once in the lead and once in the main text. Cuba and Yucatan Peninsula don't need links in this section, for example.

 Done

References

  • "Lixion A. Avila and John Cangialosi" - The only places I recall seeing author names written first name first in citations is in hurricane articles. The normal order is last name first, which makes for easier alphabetizing and sorting. Normal would be "Avila, Lixion A., and Cangialosi, John". Why should hurricane articles be different?

 Done

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Davenport, Iowa

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because…after 2 failed WP:FACs, I'm ready to get it to FA status, and need to know what the article needs to get it to FA.

Thanks, CTJF83 chat 16:48, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

Lede

  • "Davenport is the county seat of and largest city in Scott County and the Quad Cities. [...] Davenport is one of the Quad Cities, along with neighboring Bettendorf and the Illinois cities of Moline, East Moline, and Rock Island. The Quad Cities has [...] Davenport was founded on May 14, 1836, and was named after Colonel George Davenport, a friend of founder Antoine LeClaire."
    Bad organization; why mention Quad Cities only to define it later? Drop the first mention of Quad Cities. Why is Davenport's naming and founding dumped at the end? I think a reordering of information in the lede is warranted.
  • "... Palmer College of Chiropractic, which is the birthplace of chiropractic and wellness techniques."
    That is a very, very big claim to make. Are you saying that "chiropractic and wellness techniques" never existed until the formation of this college?
  • "In 2007, Davenport, along with neighboring Rock Island, won the City Livability Award."
    Since this award does not have its own article or such (notable?), extra clarification about its nature might be warranted.

History

  • "In 1803, Davenport was part of the Louisiana Purchase from France. Lieutenant Zebulon Pike was the first official United States representative to explore the Upper Mississippi River. On August 27, 1805, Pike's records indicate that he camped on present day site of Davenport."
    Purchase by who? How does Lieutenant Pike's exploit tie in to this purchase? Why not "In 1803, the United States acquired parcels of North American land from France under the Louisiana Purchase agreement. Lieutenant Zebulon Pike was the first official United States representative to explore the Upper Mississippi River, which runs through the newly acquired land. On August 27, 1805, Pike camped at what would become the city of Davenport."
  • "Keokuk stipulated that Antoine build their home on the exact spot where the treaty was signed or forfeit the land."
    Whose home? Keokuk's or Antoine's or the two of them?
  • The paragraph of Davenport's exploits to become county seat can be summarised and reorganised. It would be best to talk about Scott County first, then introduce the hows and whys of Davenport's victory. Avoid anthromorphism like "Davenport and rival neighbor Rockingham both campaigned". Why was Davenport not the county seat at the second election even though it won?
  • "... on May 6, 1856, just weeks after it was completed, a steamboat captain deliberately crashed the Effie Afton into the bridge."
    The steamboat (or its captain) was completed a few weeks before May 6, 1856? How does this tie in to Davenport's history (it seems to be a trivial event that did not impact its economy or development)?
  • Should the Iowa Soldiers' Orphans' Home not be in the Landmarks section instead? It feels out of place in the city's history.
    • Well it flows from the previous sentence saying Davenport was Iowa's first civil war camp, it goes on to talk about the orphanage housing civil war orphans. CTJF83 chat 04:45, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
      • I disagree. The entire city of Davenport is not an orphanage, and I believe the city was not solely known for hosting an orphanage. The History section should mainly tell how the city as a whole was founded and developed. Jappalang (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Architectural journals poked fun at city leaders due to the small amount budgeted for the project. The 1920s brought an economic and building boom."
    The first sentence is not reflected in http://qconline.com/progress99/1pgdport.shtml. Furthermore, there seems to me a disconnect between the two sentences.
  • ... as many citizens went to work for the Works Progress Administration and then Davenport experienced a boom ..."
    "Then" is redundant.
  • Since the last paragraph (and later sections) brought up mention of the Quad Cities, when was it formed and how did Davenport get named as one of them?

Geography

  • Davenport is located at 41°32′35″N 90°35′27″W / 41.54306°N 90.59083°W / 41.54306; -90.59083 (41.542982, −90.590745).
    The entire city is located at that geographical co-ordinate?
    What should I put? FA Ann Arbor and Minneapolis only have one coordinate listed. CTJF83 chat 04:58, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    So why do the other FAs have it? Their reason may not be sound at all or only applicable to their subjects. How big an area does that co-ordinate represent? Is it accurate to say it encompasses the entire city or does it represent the city and some other areas? Precision comes into play here. Jappalang (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The content of this section (first three paragraphs) should be reorganised/rewritten. There is overlapping and scattering of information on the Mississippi River and waters.

Climate

  • "Davenport is in the humid continental climate (Dfa) on the Köppen climate classification."
    Would it not be better to say "Under the Köppen climate classification, Davenport is considered to have a humid continental climate."?
  • "... as a result of mid-latitude storm tracks."
    What are storm tracks?
  • "While situated squarely in the path of Tornado Alley and the potential certainly exists for one, no devastating tornado ..."
    No devastating tornado is situated squarely in the path of Tornado Alley? Potential for what?
  • "The reason for a lack of tornadoes may be due to the fact that the Mississippi River and Rock River merge together close to the city."
    I believe "due to" is wrongly used here... Regardless, how does the merging of the two rivers inhibit the formation of tornadoes?

Neighborhoods

  • "Davenport has a variety of neighborhoods dating back to the 1840s."
    I believe most cities have "a variety of neighborhoods"; it is not perculiar to Davenport. Why not simply "Several neighborhoods in Davenport date back to the 1840s."
  • "Lindsay Park, in The Village of East Davenport, was used as parade grounds for Civil War soldiers from Camp McClellan."
    Unsourced.
  • "Development of the Vander Veer Park was the first major beautification effort outside two small spaces in downtown."
    What were the "two small spaces"?
  • "Today the eastern side of Davenport still contains many of the higher class houses in the city."
    Would this statement be applicable tommorrow, two months later, a year later, two years later?
    Not sure how to respond....in a year or two, all the houses could be gone, or they could build far more higher class housing on the west side. CTJF83 chat 06:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Therefore, avoid all "today", "now", and "currently" unless the information is unlikely to change for many, many years (usually applicable to geological features and overall city, not individual buildings, locations). Think of a way to rephrase the sentence in a precise manner. Jappalang (talk) 16:50, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Crime

  • "Murders are down 42.9% from 2000 to four murders in 2006."
    It is not mathetically precise to compare percentages to absolute figures.
  • This section also seems to be based on recent figures. What is the history of crime in the city?

(Note: by this time, I am a bit tired, so apologies if the following are rather skimpy.)

Economy

Culture

Sports and recreation

Media

  • What importance to Davenport's media was the hiring of Ronald Reagan?

Government

  • Several sentences are unsourced.
  • "Davenport uses a mayor-council form of local government, which consists of a mayor (currently in 2010 Bill Gluba) and a ten-person council."
    Anthromorphism: I believe it is more correct to say "has" than "uses".
  • "City Council" or "city council"? I believe it is the latter.
  • "... to expand the city boarder,"

Huh?

  • "... a more business like government ..."
    I believe it is "business-like" and what does that mean when applied to this government (organization, attitude, performance)?

Education

  • Last sentences are unsourced.

Transportation

  • "Evey year ..."?

Notable natives

  • "she is the creator of decorative concrete figurines that bear her name."
    Unsourced.
  • This section is prime target for trivia. At the moment, I feel it (as a simple list) adds nothing to the context of Davenport the city.

General

  • I spotted a few "... with <noun> being ..." constructs. Please read User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing on why such a structure is discouraged and how it can be improved.
  • When was this article assessed as A-class? It is not reflected in ArticleHistory.

Images

  • File:Davenport Flag.gif, File:Davenport Seal.png: How do uses of these images comply with NFCC, especially since Davenport the city is illustrated with the identifiable skyline? There are no critical commentary whatsoever in the text about these symbols either.

I think that the article could improve by some slight restructuring to certain parts of the content. I felt it was becoming somewhat droll in the middle. Prose could still be improved (copy-edit). Jappalang (talk) 06:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WOW!! Thanks for your through review, I greatly appreciate it...sounds like I have a LOT of work to do! Thanks again, CTJF83 chat 16:58, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ok, got most of it done, just need some clarification above. CTJF83 chat 06:18, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The last two images both have their corresponding licenses from Wikipedia, now on Commons. Killiondude (talk) 06:26, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hurricane Ione

[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 because I'm going through the list of vital articles to try to get them up to fa status and want to know what I can do to this article to improve it.

Thanks, Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 23:26, 26 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is broad in coverage but may not be comprehensive. It appears that material could be added about the hurricane's impact on areas other than New York City and along the Delaware River. Also missing is any discussion of preparations in North Carolina. Virginia is listed in the infobox as damaged, but the main text doesn't mention Virginia. Four urls are dead in the citations, and the article includes some overlinking. Here are a few other suggestions.

The tools at the top of this review page find four dead urls in citations.

  • Overlinking. No need to link North Carolina three times in the lead or to link "state" to North Carolina in the "Meteorological history" section or again twice in the "Impact" section.

Done

Meteorological history

  • "Ione reached its peak of 120 miles per hour (100 kn) winds" - Should the conversion be to km/h rather than knots? Ditto for similar conversions in the article? I believe km/h is standard in featured hurricane articles. WP:FA#Geology, geophysics and meteorology is a good place to check things like this.

Done Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 22:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Ione reached its peak of 120 miles per hour (100 kn) winds... " - A bit awkward. Maybe "Ione's peak winds reached 120 miles per hour (100 kn)... "

Done Changed it up a bit. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 22:31, 1 October 2010 (UTC) Preparations[reply]

  • "Recent flooding along the Delaware River kept residents along its recently flooded banks on alert" - Repetition: "recent flooding", "recently flooded".

 Done Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 00:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • It would be helpful to foreign readers to say where the Delaware River is and where the Regal paper mill is. Also, should Regal Paper Mill be in caps? Is "Regal" a town? If so, in what state? Why is the paper mill important enough to include? Weren't lots of other properties threatened?
The paper mill is important because it was dealt severe damage from previous hurricanes that year, which caused the the Delaware River flood of 1955. As a result they wanted to protect it because they had just completed repairs. I've added this to the article and cited it. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 00:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "with cops" - "Cops" is slang; "police" would be more encyclopedic.

 Done Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 00:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Flights were canceled" - What flights? Where?

The source only says in New York. I will add that. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 00:02, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Preparations in North Carolina are not mentioned even though the damage was greatest there. This seems odd. Didn't North Carolina prepare in any way? What about north of New York City? Did Massachusetts prepare?

The preparations that were taken in North Carolina and New York are in the article. The Hurricane alert was only issued up to New Jersey, Massachusetts didn't have any preparations according to the sources. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 02:08, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Link "Staten Island"?

 Done

Impact

  • "HMTS Monarch" - Should that be HMT (Her Majesty's Trawler) rather than HMTS?

✗ Not done No, HMTS Monarch is a cable laying vessel. There is are several ships that were called HMS Monarch, but those were navy ships. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 02:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Ione caused $600 million (2005 USD) in damage, much of it from crops" - "To crops" rather than "from crops"?

 Done

  • "The rest came from flooding in an area" - Unlink "flooding"?

 Done

  • 'Ione caused seven deaths" - Where and how?

 Done

  • "Along the Trent river near Trent and the New River near Gum Branch, the river stage" - Are these places all in North Carolina? Can any of them be linked?

 Done Yes those are places in North Carolina and I've linked all that have articles, which is only one. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 02:14, 2 October 2010 (UTC) Legacy[reply]

  • Because this section and the "Retirement" subsection are so short, I'd recommend merging them under the "Legacy" head. Also, I wonder if the failed model had a name or if anything more could be said about it. Did people take it seriously? Did the North Carolinians avoid preparing because they thought the hurricane would miss them? Did South Carolinians prepare for a hurricane? Or was the model not used to make public forecasts?
The storm had been taken seriously after what the people went through with Connie and Diane, hence the reason they were ready to move to higher ground and had dump trucks ready at the paper mill. I don't see any record of South Carolina preparing, based on the information about New York and North Carolina residents preparing I assume that the model was not taken seriously due to it being in the test phase. I'm also unsure whether the data was made public while the storm was active. They call the method behind the model the numerical method, but I don't think it had a name. Bobby122 Contact Me (C) 02:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

  • Something's amiss with citation 12.

 Done

  • Authors should be listed last name first in the citations.

 Done

  • The date formatting in the citations should be consistent.

 Done

  • Citations should include the date of publication if it is known or can be found.

 Done

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page.

Petra (band)

[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 because I've just finished a comprehensive rewrite of the page and wanted to see what else needs to be fixed before submitting it for GA status, etc. Thanks!

Thanks, Paa00a (talk) 20:02, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

I see several concerning issues with this article.

  • Several uncited (and hence unsourced) information. Per the policy WP:Verifiability, all material (particularly anything challenged or likely to be challenged) in Wikipedia articles must be attributable to a reliable published source to show that it is not original research.
Can you provide specifics? Much of the intro is uncited because the information is expanded upon and cited later in the article. I'm not sure if that's what you're referring to... Paa00a (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Musical style section is almost uncited. 1980–1985: The Greg X. Volz era has an uncited second paragraph. Likewise, Never Say Die (1981) subsection has an uncited second paragraph. The last sentences of the last two paragraphs are also uncited. These are just examples. Jappalang (talk) 06:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The musical style section, like the intro, contains an overview of items discussed in detail and cited in the body of the article. I've added citations for the specific points you mentioned; most of them were in previous or subsequent sentences, just not clearly attached to the paragraphs in question. I think that's the only section that had this problem. Paa00a (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
No, even if it is a summary of other items later in the article, it should be cited per WP:V and WP:CITE (the lede is an exception). This helps to keep information in the main body text well-cited, preventing insertion of unsourced elements. As I had already pointed out, the above are examples, there are several more uncited information in other sections. Jappalang (talk) 01:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • As currently presented, all the images of the band and their albums do not comply with WP:NFCC. They fail the contextual significance (nothing is presented in the article on the significance of the images) and could possibly have free replacements (reunions, fan photos, etc).
Hmm. I'll see what I can come up with. The images predate my time here. Paa00a (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Still working on this one. Hoping to get some concert photos from other Petra fans to replace the photos currently on the page. Paa00a (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The same goes for the audio samples. File:01 God Gave Rock And Roll To You.ogg might comply with NFCC (provided the rationale is made clearer) because of the commentary that surround it, but there is nothing in the article that asks for us to listen to the music to gain further understanding.
I'm not sure I understand this, as the captions for the songs themselves provide commentary underlining their significance. Paa00a (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fair use rationales should be written on the image/media page as well (they are mostly written there actually). The rationales should mostly be saying why these media are needed to help readers further understand something that is written in the article and why pure words would not have the same effect as seeing or listening to these media aids. Jappalang (talk) 06:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've added and expanded the fair use rationales for three songs and deleted a fourth song that wasn't all that noteworthy from a musical or historical perspective. Paa00a (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The reference section should have consistent formatting in compliance with the MOS. I see publications are not italicised and such.
Good point. I'll go back and check the MOS. Thanks! Paa00a (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Italicized magazine titles and fixed the block quotes per MOS. Paa00a (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Copyright violations should not be used as sources (the youtube video in particular). If the event is notable, a reliable source would have covered it.
I'll fix the citation. Thanks. Paa00a (talk) 15:33, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Added a pair of newspaper articles as citations in place of the YouTube video. Paa00a (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Ref 120: "<copyvio link removed from here> YouTube video] of performance" is still there. Jappalang (talk) 01:53, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The above are serious issues and should be resolved before attempting higher level assessments. Jappalang (talk) 23:13, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Let me know if you think I've resolved these issues adequately. Thanks! Paa00a (talk) 15:53, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Santana discography

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
hello,

I've added this article to peer review, because I want to know, if this article may be a FL. But I'm not sure in few things:


  1. Is the infobox k? Should I change the colors? Make a suggestion!
  2. The "citation needed" in the "Sales" division really disturbs me (and other maybe too). Is it possible to remove it and to be a FL?
  3. I have too less information about some albums. for example I can't find the label, or release date. I googled all of them, but I couldn't find anything. Is it k to replace to missing informations to three question marks?
  4. Should I add singles, even if they didn't chart?
  5. I don't like the guest appearance part. Can you suggest something?
  6. I delayed the videography part to Santana videography. Was it a good idea or not?
  7. Are B-Sides notable?
  8. In the "Sales" and "Certification" sections I have no idea if I should array the country recordings certifications to an alphabetical order, or is it necessery to order it to a chronological order? Or maybe importance, i.e. US than UK and the other in alphabetical order? Please make an advise.

thx -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request: I am prepared to review the article, but could you remove the coloured effect from the above list, so that I can read it more easily? It's a great strain at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 16:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that. I will be with you soon. Brianboulton (talk) 23:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Review from JohnFromPinckney

As Brian is apparently busy at the moment (and since you [Pumpkin] asked for a review at WikiProject Discographies]), maybe I can just put in a few notes here. Mine are numbered, too, but don't correspond to your concerns above.

  1. The first sentence should explicitly mention Carlos Santana (with link) as well as "his band Santana" as you already have it.
     Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  2. In the intro, it's correct to italicize the mentions of album names, but inappropriate to make them bold.
     Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  3. You're right to be concerned about the unreferenced sales figures, but there's an easy fix: delete the whole column. Almost all of the figures shown are unsourced, and those that do have references point to either Last.fm, which I don't consider a reliable source, or the German BVMI page where one can search for certs. These latter figures, like many of the unreferenced ones, appear to depend on conversion backwards from the certification providers, although they certify variously based on sales or shipments. In any case, the consensus I've seen again and again is to remove all unsourced "sales" figures, and provide only those which are specifically reported in a reliable source. These won't be complete or regularly updated, and so it's no shame that the page doesn't have any such figures. In which case, best to just delete the columns. (The tables in particular and the page in general will look much better all in one swoop.) See WP:DISCOGSTYLE for a few words about what should be shown in a discography, and how.
    can you tell me some good sources, on WP:RS i didnt find for music charts or certifications.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  4. What are "Unofficial albums" and why are they being listed here?
    i dont know, its from the template-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  5. The page currently shows up to 20 charts columns for singles, when we try to keep the number to 10 or fewer. See WP:DISCOGSTYLE again. Showing two charts in one column, as currently attempted with the Adult Contemporary charts, is not useful and needs fixing. EDIT: Yikes! I just realized you have two tables for the singles, one with 20 non-Billboard charts, the other with 19 Billboard charts. I hope I've already made clear this is the wrong way to go about it; we show up to 10 charts in total, chosen for a balance of relative importance and the artist's success on them. —EDIT added 20:45, 13 October 2010 (UTC)
    well, what charts should i remove?--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    i think all charts are usefull, if only 10 is a must be, how about US (billboard 200 or 100??), UK, AUS, NED, GER, SWI, BEL fla., BEL wal., hot latin pop air, hot adult contemporary? -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:44, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  6. Certs and sales again (because I got down to the Singles Certification table): Delete the sales column, because they are based wholly on the certs. The certs are for sales and shipments, depending on the provider (and date of the award), so it's misleading and unnecessary to show anything there. Change the heading of the certs column to match the example at – you guessed it – WP:DISCOGSTYLE, and the interested reader can click through to our article listing the various cert providers and the thresholds they use for award determination.
    i like the sales column, but i have to do that :(-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC) Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 09:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  7. You asked about the infobox. I have no problems with the colors (although I notice they are rather pumpkin-y), but what did bug me was the wrapping of the long titles for the guest appearances. I don't know what to do about this, other than to look at other articles to see how they handled it. I'll leave that to you, though.
    yes i dont like this, too. can i rename it to "Cameos"?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  8. Sheesh, what's this guy doing in so many other artists' work? Can't he get a regular job? Oh, er...
    deleting?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  9. Splitting off the videography seems quite appropriate. Good choice.
    yes, thx-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  10. Since I mentioned WP:DISCOGSTYLE so many times, I may as well point to the fact that it was recently changed to match requirements of WP:ACCESS, which is part of the Manual of Style, a factor considered in FL reviews. I can't say whether this page is close to ready for an FL nom, but you should be aware that the look of these discog pages (esp. the tables) will start to change from the look you've got now (copied, no doubt, from some other good page) to the look shown in the WP:DISCOGSTYLE examples.
  11. Yes, I believe consensus is to list all released singles and albums, even if they flop. What's often discussed, with much weaker consensus, is the listing of every damned thing the artist produces. I think the most recent discussion ended at: show all official albums in the Albums section; show all official singles in the Singles section; show notable other songs (read: non-singles which charted) in a section separate from Singles.
    k-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    i just found 2 non-album singles. should i separate them anyway?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 09:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    what should i do with the unofficial albums? maybe deleting them?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 10:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this list is helpful to you. Brianboulton has a great deal of experience with promoting articles, I have none. Do listen to whatever comments he has to make about the article. And good luck! Respectfully, — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 20:39, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: First, I apologise for the delay in getting to this, having promised a review. I have had very limited online time this week, with several things to keep abreast of. I am grateful to JohnFromPinckney for his detailed review. I don't want to repeat his points, so I'll just say a few things:-

  • In my view the tables are overcomplicated. I've looked at various discographies at FL; none of them that I have seen have a sales figures column, which in your case has brought a host of citation tags, and a very unwieldly appearance for some of your tables. Use existing FLs as a model.
what about Madonna albums discography? It has a sales column.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are numerous disambiguation links; use the toolbox in the top righthand corner to identify and correct.
  • I am unconvinced by the image licensing. There is no proper source information; was this photograph taken by the uploader, and if so, how do we know this? There is no current WP editor called Magikman6386.
i can replace the image, i.e. or , or are they not correct?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these few suggestions are helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Albany City Hall

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article just passed GA, with no comments. I'd like to bring it to FAC, but would feel it a better idea to get a full peer review first. Your help would be appreciated! Thanks upstateNYer 21:51, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

Lede

  • Is it generally "3.5-story" or "three-and-a-half-story"? Also applicable to main body text.
  • "... a 202-foot (62 m) tower ..."
    Better to be explicit or put in a "high" or "tall"? Also applicable to main body text.
  • "... from the capitol, city government moved in ..."
    Missing definite article: "the city government"?
  • "Critics consider the building to ..."
    What sort of critics?
 Done upstateNYer 03:03, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Former city halls

  • Opening paragraph unsourced
    • What do I do here? It's sourced in that the sources disagree. Do I have a source that states that? No, because no source goes that in depth about the building. However it would be misleading to the reader if I didn't make it clear in the beginning that some of the sources disagree. I feel this a fair representation of the sources. Do you suggest I do something different? upstateNYer 03:11, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Stadt Huys

  • "... there, which was the first formal proposal to unite the British American colonies."
    How is a physical location a "formal proposal"? Suggestion: "Benjamin Franklin of Pennsylvania presented in the city hall the Albany Plan of Union, which was the first formal proposal ..."
  • "... city hall was home ..."
    I think there should be a definite article (same for the rest of the article).
  • "... eventually demolished after a fire in 1836."
    Be specific about the fire; how did it affect the building?

Current city hall

  • "... after a substitution for granite rather than brownstone."
    "... after they chose to substitute brownstone with granite?"
  • "... meant to be the transition in the (to-be built) jail, ..."
    Is transition not supposed to be used with "between" to denote the connection between two locations? Hence, begging another question: what is the second location?

Images

I'll get this fixed. I understand your concern; I had a legitimate feeling that it was too simple for copyright. However it can be easily replaced with a blacked out version of File:Empire State Plaza illustration.svg, which is a vector version of a photograph: File:EmpirePlaza16.jpg. However, when it is blacked out it will be almost identical to the original file, just fair warning. upstateNYer 02:54, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
"Almost identical" can mean the difference between a copyright violation and otherwise. One is an artist representation (drawn from photographs or personal experience), another is a trace of a photograph. Tracing from a photograph that has been released into the public domain is fine. Jappalang (talk) 03:32, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Alright, the new image is up. Because that file is used all over the place, I uploaded the new version over the old one. Currently waiting on deletions at Commons to remove the old files, and still waiting for the new image to work its way through the system (that will take some time). But all should be cleared up now. upstateNYer 04:53, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, this is a pretty good article. Jappalang (talk) 21:33, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, had no idea you reviewed. Will respond soon. upstateNYer 04:38, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Harry Potter and the Philosopher's Stone (film)

[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 because, with the Potter franchise coming to an end, I want to be able to feature this on July 15, 2011, with arrival of the final Potter. Also, I want to feature the 8th-highest grossing film ever.

Thanks, Guy546(Talk) 18:40, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: I've done a detailed review of the first two-thirds of the article. A few more comments will follow on the final sections, but here is some stuff for you to be getting on with:-

Lead
  • "The film was shot primarily at Leavesden Film Studios, as well as historic buildings around the country, and was released in the United Kingdom and the United States in November 2001." The grammar is wrong. Also, you need to specify "the country".
  • The film won't always be "the eighth highest-grossing film of all time", so it might be better to qualify: "...and as of October 2010 was..."
 Done. Guy546(Talk) 20:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Plot
  • "invited to begin attending" → "invited to attend"
  • "Harry boards the train to Hogwarts via the concealed platform 9¾." You need to name the railway satation.
  • "On the train leading to Hogwarts..." The phrase "leading to Hogwarts"s is redundant
  • "Harry inadvertently makes Gryffindor's Quidditch team as a Seeker..." Perhaps briefly explain what Quidditch is (don't rely solely on links). Also, "inadvertently"? As I recall, it was due to his skill as a broomstick rider.
  • The paragraph beginning "after hearing from Hagrid" is very confusing. What does "get to it" mean? Where are these "tasks" carried out, and who supervises them? Then: "Quirrell tries to kill him but Harry's touch burns him to death. Quirrell then crumbles into dust and dies." He crumbles to dust and dies after being burnt to death?
 Done. Harry did inadvertantly join the Quidditch team, though, because McGonagall saw him flying in her office. Guy546(Talk) 20:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Cast
  • "Figgis left production" → "Figgis left the production"
  • "were selected from thousands of auditioning children..." The words "from thousands of auditioning children" are redundant.
  • There is too much plot information in some of the entries, especially that for Harry Potter.
  • Terms such as "Muggle-born" need explaining.
 Done. Guy546(Talk) 20:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Development
  • "In the Rubbish Bin section of her website..." We don't need such detail
  • Same sentence: "maintains that she has no role ... and said..." Tenses conflict
  • Does Rowling actually use "veto-ed" (with hyphen)? If so, she should know better. The word is "vetoed"
  • "Kloves was sent a selection of synopses of books proposed as film adaptations, which he "almost never read". Doesn't read right. I think you mean: "Kloves often received synopses of books proposed as film adaptations, which he "almost never read".
  • "over 4 July 2001 weekend" is awkward phrasing. Why not just "on 4 July"?
 Done, except the 4 July part. I looked at a calendar for 2001 and 4 July was on a Wednesday that year. Also, she did write "veto-ed", so I put a sic sign on it. Guy546(Talk) 20:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Filming
  • Avoid two "ands" in a sentence ("Warner Bros. accepted their proposal..." etc)
  • What does "principal photographt" mean?
  • "Canterbury rejected Warner Bros. offer.." Surely, "proposal" rather than "offer"?
  • "Filming on the street took two days, with the producers only having planned for one, the delay meant that they had to pay the street's residents more money than they had anticipated." Inappropriately punctuated, clumsily phrased. Suggest: "Filming in the street took two days instead of the planned single day, so payments to the street's residents were correspondingly increased."
  • Delete "As such" from the start of the following sentence.
  • Caption: "Store in London was used as the exterior of The Leaky Cauldron". Either delete "was" or add "This" to the beginning.
 Done. Guy546(Talk) 20:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Design etc
  • Again, remove "As such"; it's a meaningless interjection. Replace with "instead".
  • "with numerous companies handling different things" sounds vague and fussy. Suggest "involving numerous companies"
  • "John Williams was selected to compose the film's score.[53] Williams composed the score..." Unnecessarily repetitive. Simplify to "John Williams composed the film's score at..." etc
 Done. Guy546(Talk) 20:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More to follow in a day or so. Brianboulton (talk) 15:36, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Here is the remainder ("or so" turned out to be seven days):-

Differences from the book
  • "minor" would be more encyclopedic than "little"
  • The phrase "as with many book to film transitions" reads as POV, and should be either removed or attributed.
  • "...highlighting how Muggles react to magic". Who/what is/are "Muggles"? This is first mention of the term.
  • What does "McGonagall references how she had been watching the Dursleys all day" mean? It's the "references" that obscures the meaning.
  • Overall in this section,I think there is too much detail given about scenes and episodes that are not in the film. These details are meaningless to those ufamiliar with the book. Obviously a book of 400+ pages will have a lot more in it than a fil of 150 minutes, so there's no need to spell all the details out. Does the film differ significantly from the book in terms of plot, characters, ending, etc? If not, this section could be made a great deal shorter.
Marketing
  • Don't repeat the words "first teaser" in the opening sentence.
  • "...debuting in cinemas with See Spot Run. Does this mean debuting in cinemas where the film See Spot Runwas showing? Where did this debuting take place – in the USA? in the UK? worldwide?
  • In what form was the film's soundtrack released?
  • Was the video game released before or after the film's premiere?
  • In what form did Warner brothers release the "ultimate edition" of the film.
  • Prose point: the words "the film" occur 8 or 9 times in this short section. It may be possible to avoid this repetition with some rephrasing.
Reviews
  • The sentence beginning "Praise which was shared..." is not a grammatical whole. Nor was the praise "shared" - it was "echoed". Thus: "This praise was echoed by..." etc
  • "comparing it closely to the book": not sure of the meaning here, needs clarifying
  • Who are Jeanne Aufmuth, Kirk Honeycutt, Jonathan Foreman and Ed Gonzalez?
Box office
  • "...with the cinema adapted to have a Hogwarts design." Clumsy; delete "have a", or better still, rephrase "with the cinema arranged to resemble Hogwarts Academy".
  • Be consistent in your short title for the film. Sometimes it is Philosopher's Stone (bad idea given the US title) and sometimes Harry Potter.
  • "greatly received" s meaningless
  • "On Saturday, the second day..." Delete "Saturday", it's not significant.
  • "the film increased to $33.5 million..." The films takings, you mean. The word "once" later in the sentence should be removed.
  • "In the United Kingdom it broke the record..." Clarify: does "it" refer to Harry Potter oe Spiderman. the last film mentioned?
Awards
  • "The film won a Saturn Award for its costumes and was nominated for eight more." Eight more what?
  • Where were the nominations for Best Child Performance and Best composer made< and what is the relevance to this article of Williama's nomination in respect of a different film?

I hope these comments are helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 16:26, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments, and I hope I himproved the prose of the article. Guy546(Talk) 19:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ronnie Lee Gardner

[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 because incoming information has stabilized considerably as the subject is now deceased. I am interested in recommendations to promote this to good article status.

Thanks, KimChee (talk) 04:36, 24 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Dablinks (toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows 2 disambiguation links; please fix them.
  •  Done
  • Checklinks shows 6 dead links; please fix them.
  • It appears the only other online versions of these 3 articles are now behind pay portals. The links used to forward to newspaper scans in Google Archives that have since been taken down. There may be no other choice than to comment these links out and treat them as offline sources in good faith. KimChee (talk) 11:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I am noting the dead links here before replacing them with alternate sources in the event the former do appear again:
  • Bernick Jr., Bob (1985-04-03). "Vickrey clears prison guards, says security will be studied". Deseret News. p. A1. Retrieved 2010-09-25.[dead link‍]
  • Spangler, Jerry (1985-04-03). "Sheriff blames layout of building". Deseret News. p. A1. Retrieved 2010-09-25.[dead link‍] (includes diagram of Gardner's April 2, 1985 escape attempt from the Metropolitan Hall of Justice)
  • Fidel, Steve (1987-10-29). "Gardner smashes door, barricades visiting room". Deseret News. p. A1. Retrieved 2010-09-25.[dead link‍] (includes diagram of Gardner's October 28, 1987 barricade of a Utah State Prison visiting room)
  •  Done

Life

  • "... born on January 16, 1961 in Salt Lake City, Utah."
    US format dates are also required to have commas at the end of the year.
  • Are you certain of this? I checked Barack Obama (an FA article for reference) and dates in mid-sentence do not have years followed by commas. I am unfamiliar with this usage outside of a conditional clause at the beginning of a sentence. KimChee (talk) 23:55, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • See Comma (In dates): "This style is common in American English. Additionally, most style manuals, including The Chicago Manual of Style and the AP Stylebook, recommend that the year be treated as a parenthetical, requiring a second comma after it: 'Feb. 14, 1987, was the target date.'" Jappalang (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. I remember this style guide in college. It may as well be a religious text book.
  • "He was one of nine children born to Ruth Lucas. His father, Dan Gardner, was a heavy drinker who left [...] his mother's subsequent husband, Bill Lucas, while burgling homes."
    Were his parents married? Is his mother's maiden name Lucas as well? If not, please check because the sequence by names here is confusing.
  • I think it is a bit puzzling still... Might I suggest that "... born in Salt Lake City, Utah. His father, Dan Gardner, was a heavy drinker who left the family while Ronnie was a toddler and told him that he was not his son. His mother, Ruth, divorced the elder Gardner and later married Bill Lucas. Gardner was raised by his sister, 8 years his senior. ..." Jappalang (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... and molested by his older brother."
    The article reports this as fact. The source states "Gardner has said an older brother molested him." This is a serious allegation that should be backed up by high-quality sources per Wikipedia's policy on biographies; I do not think Gardner's claims should be stated as fact. Jappalang (talk) 02:24, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done.
  • "Jack Statt became a foster parent to Gardner and one of his brothers in 1975,"
    Who exactly is Statt? Why and how did he become their foster parent? There should be a better way to introduce him.
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "Psychology professor Dr. Craig Haney stated that his mother asked the hospital staff to sterilize her because she was overwhelmed by her parental responsibilities."
    Is this necessary? Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I think the professor was trying to paint a picture explaining why Gardner's mother was unable to parent him properly. I can see how the sentence placement is a bit awkward — if you think this section still communicates everything it needs to without this detail, I can live without it. KimChee (talk) 11:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I edited the section a bit, removing the above the sentence. I also removed the link to alcoholism (from heavy drinking) since alcoholism is an addiction that should be outright stated in the source. Jappalang (talk) 02:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Murders

  • "... he shot bartender Melvyn Otterstrom in the nostril,"
    I have a hard time imagining this. Where did the bullet end up?
  • "According to fellow attorney Robert Macri, Gardner initially ..."
    Gardner is an attorney?
  • "Darcy Perry McCoy found unarmed and arrested about a mile away."
    I think a word is missing here.
  •  Done

Sentencing and incarceration

  • "... because he was upset that he was required to wear a leg brace that would lock if he attempted to escape again."
    Repetitive "... that ... that ..."
  •  Done
  • "The jurors deliberated less than three hours on the same day to find Gardner guilty of capital murder."
    I think "The jurors deliberated less than three hours and found Gardner guilty of capital murder." would be better; the above sentence seem to imply that they planned to find the man guilty.
  •  Done
  • "... but grandfathered it for convicts ..."
    "Grandfather" as a verb is informal, not suitable for an encylopaedia.
  •  Done
  • "... Utah state representative Dan Tuttle (D-Magna) ..."
    Why the subscript?
  •  Done
  •  Done
  • "On March 3, 2001, the Metropolitan Hall of Justice, the building faulted with the escape attempt that led to Burdell's murder and Gardner's own death sentence, was itself demolished."
    Does this matter to the subject at hand (Gardner) in a critical sense? One does not fault a building (a non-living entity which cannot take responsibility for any event), nor can it do wrong.
  • The escape led the sheriff and the state to evaluate the building and conclude it had serious security problems because of its inherent layout. Here is the problem: this article was once hosted on Google Archives and mysteriously vanished. Hopefully, it will come back. KimChee (talk) 03:46, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  •  Done. I found different sources and expanded this into a paragraph more clearly relating Gardner's influence on the development of the security measures of the new replacement courthouse, which makes the mention of the demolition of the old one fit more logically. KimChee (talk) 10:34, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Defense motions

  • "Lawyers and medical experts in Gardner's defense argued whether meningitis contracted at the age 4 had damaged Gardner's brain. He had also huffed gas and glue with his siblings, and played with mercury stolen from gas meters by his stepfather to sell."
    This is all too sudden here. Why should these not be in the Life section? Or are they simply concoctions substantiated only by his defense?
  • "Deputy Salt Lake County attorney Bob Stott said that McCoy would not be prosecuted because Gardner, the only witness, was going to be executed anyway."
    This sentence (particularly the ending) reads quite informal to me.
  •  Done
  • "... he signed off on the execution on Twitter:"
    "... he signed off the execution on Twitter:"?
  •  Done

Death penalty debate

  •  Done
  • "Rev. David Henry ..."
    What is "Rev."? See above about abbreviation.
  •  Done

Execution

  • "The Utah Department of Corrections prepared documentation for Gardner about dying by firing squad and lethal injection along with records of the training and expertise of the execution team. His attorney Andrew Parnes agreed to personally relay the information without showing the actual documents to Gardner or anyone else."
    Suggestion: "The Utah Department of Corrections provided Gardner with documentation for his own perusal about executions by firing squad and lethal injection. They also gave him records of the execution team's training and expertise. These documents were relayed to Gardner by his attorney."
  • "... 12:15 a.m. MDT ..."
    What is MDT? See above about abbreviation.
  •  Done
  • "... at Utah State Prison in Draper, Utah."
    It would be weird if the state prison is not in Utah, so why not "... at the state prison in Draper, Utah."?
  •  Done
  • "... five anonymous volunteers who were certified police officers who stood about 25 feet from the target."
    Repetitive "... who ... who ...".
  •  Done
  • "His dark blue jumpsuit made it difficult to see the blood pooling at his waist. A medical examiner removed Gardner's hood to reveal his ashen face."
    Does this seem to be a bit too detailed, more suitable for newspapers than an encyclopaedia? Jappalang (talk) 02:16, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After the lack of pulse at the neck and pupillary light reflex were verified, Gardner was pronounced dead at 12:17 a.m. by the medical examiner."
    Active voice: "After verifying Gardner's lack of pulse at the neck and pupillary light reflex, the medical examiner pronounced his death at 12:17 a.m."
  •  Done

Sources

  • This appears to be the one rare source in which many of the family members are identified by name; it otherwise does not make any exceptional claims. KimChee (talk) 23:55, 30 September 2010 (UTC) /18:41, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • While this is stricken, I question whether we should identify his family. They (non-notable subjects) might not like their relationship with Gardner made even more explicit. Jappalang (talk) 02:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • File:Mathesoncourthouse.jpg: lacks the customary assertion of authorship (e.g. "own work", "uploaded by photographer/me", or "I took this photo"); I have asked the uploader to help on this (hopefully he would be on to help).[21]
  •  Done. I found an alternate image of the courthouse that is clearly CC/free, though the other photo is still better. I can switch back if the uploader responds later. and wrote a new caption that fits this photo. KimChee (talk) 04:15, 1 October 2010 (UTC) / 10:34, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

After reading the lead, I thought there would be more wrangling by the subject, the authorities, and the church over the issue of blood atonement, criminal tendencies and such. However, those seem quite inconsequential... Is there really no more that can be reported of? That aside, I found the language here to be pretty good. Jappalang (talk) 06:59, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Thank you, this process has been very helpful. I was previously concerned of coatracking, but will look into the suggestions, though outside coverage of this subject has slowed down considerably. KimChee (talk) 23:55, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Coatracking is when the focus shifts to another subject. I am more concerned for events that relate to Gardner's case (and not attempts to bring the subjects into general focus); i.e. was Gardner's claim of blood atonement justified (whether it fulfills the tenets of Mormonism), what disputes of "criminal tendencies", centered on Gardner, were brought up during the trials, etc. Details of theories and their validity should not be in this article (this article should not validate or dispute them). Jappalang (talk) 02:30, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cool (Gwen Stefani song)

[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 because it was a WP:Featured article that ended here. I made an enormous copy-edit, but some prose would not be clear for a GAN. Thanks, TbhotchTalk C. 19:59, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by PanydThe muffin is not subtle 15:27, 3 October 2010 (UTC) This is a good start. I don't think this is ready for GA status yet though, so a bit more work is going to have to be done before it can get to FA. I have every confidence you'll be able to achieve it though![reply]

Get rid of the credits and personnel section. You should try and work that list into prose or the infobox. It's completely unnecessary in the body of the article as a list.

You should probably include the release date in the opening sentence, it just gives it a little more context.

  •  Done

This sentence needs to be changed to make grammatical sense: "The single received generally positive reviews from music critics, being criticized for not be like her other singles, as well as being a Cyndi Lauper's remain"

Similarly, this sentence should probably be rewritten and possibly split into two sentences: "On it features many flashbacks of when Stefani and her former boyfriend —played by Daniel González— were dating, and nowadays, despite his new girlfriend, both are "cool" about their relationship"

You appear to be simply repeating information from the lead with citations in the beginning of the writing and composition section. If there's nothing new to add from the lead then why not hold back until you get to the section proper.

We don't need quite as many quotes from critics. Two or three prominent ones would give us a sense of the reception without it seeming as though the article is being padded out. You could even lengthen that section by writing about the song's cultural impact rather than simply quoting from critics.

There's no need to put cool in quotes in the music video paragraph. I think by this point in the article even readers with no outside knowledge will understand what you mean when you say it. If you simply mean to reference the song title then use an apostraphe rather than quotes.

Ex parte Crow Dog

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I am submitting this article for peer review to see what needs to be done to take this to FA status. Any suggestions or recommendations are welcome. GregJackP Boomer! 16:28, 3 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting account of an important case. I have quite a few suggestions for further improvement.

  • The dab finder at the top of this review page finds one dab, Lakota.
 Done GregJackP Boomer! 15:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "court did not have jurisdiction to try a Native American (Indian) who killed another Indian" - Link Native American to Native Americans in the United States?
  • court did not have jurisdiction to try a Native American (Indian) who killed another Indian" - Modify slightly to: "court did not have jurisdiction to try Crow Dog, a Native American (Indian) who killed another Indian"? Otherwise not all readers will instantly understand that Crow Dog is a person.
  • Link Crow Dog on first use here in the lead?
  • "on the reservation" - Link reservation to Indian reservation?
  • "The tribe handled it according to Sioux tradition" - Link Sioux?
  • Link Supreme Court to Supreme Court of the United States?
  • Move the Congress link up one sentence to the first instance.
 Done with the exception of SCOTUS link - already linked in first sentence. GregJackP Boomer! 15:04, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Murder of Spotted Tail

  • "and was known to the BIA" - Spell out and abbreviate on first use: Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA)?
  • "confrontation where Crow Dog pointed a rifle at Spotted Tail" - "During which" rather than "where"?
  • I find this section confusing. For one thing, it's not clear until the sentence that begins, "In another version", that the first version was a version. In fact, I'm not sure how many versions there were. Apparently all versions are the same up to the sentence that says, "At a tribal meeting on August 5, 1881, a number of tribal members criticized Spotted Tail for taking the wife of a crippled man." If so, perhaps that sentence could begin a separate paragraph and could start with "In one version of the events leading to the murder... ".
  • "At a tribal meeting on August 5, 1881, a number of tribal members criticized Spotted Tail for taking the wife of a crippled man." - More detail is needed here. In what sense did he take her? Does this mean "had an affair with", or does it mean "grabbed and ran off with" or something else?
  • "It was a latter conflict with the Indian Agent that forced the disbanding of the tribal police and Crow Dog's loss of his position" - Do you mean "later" rather than "latter"?
  • "by payment of US$600" - No need for US in front of $ in a US-centric article. Ditto for note 5.
 Done GregJackP Boomer! 15:14, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Trial

  • "Surprising many of the white citizens of the area, Crow Dog turned himself back in when he was supposed to report back." - Tighten to "Surprising many of the white citizens of the area, Crow Dog returned to court as required."
  • "The territorial Supreme Court affirmed in May 1882 the conviction and the execution was rescheduled for May 11, 1883." - A bit awkward. Suggestion: "In May 1882, the territorial Supreme Court affirmed the conviction, and the execution was rescheduled for May 11, 1883."
  • "accepted the case.[1][9][10][6][14]" - The custom is to arrange a series of citations like this in ascending order: 1, 6, 9, 10, 14.
 Done GregJackP Boomer! 15:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Opinion of the Court

  • "The first statute prohibited murder on federal land, the second statute applies the first statute to reservations, and the last has specific exceptions to prosecution." - All past tense; i.e., "applied" and "had"?
  • "laws on federal crimes apply to Indian reservations" - Should that be "applying" rather than "apply"?
  • "He stated that since the law has not been amended" - "Had" rather than "has"?
  • "since implied repeals are not favored" - "Were" rather than "are"?
  • "such a repeal requires" - "Required"? All past tense.
  • "Matthews also noted in a clear statement to the sovereignty of the tribe and discomfort in applying white standards to the tribes that:" - Tighten by deleting "Matthews also said of the Indians that"
 Done except for:
  • Implied repeals was not changed - this is still current legal thought, they are not favored. "Were" would imply, in my view, that this was a former legal doctrine.
  • Changed wording on tribal sovereignty - this is one of the distinct points in the case, and should remain in the article. GregJackP Boomer! 15:38, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Major Crimes Act of 1885

 Done GregJackP Boomer! 15:41, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tribal sovereignty

  • Add the dates for United States v. Lara, Cherokee Nation v. Georgia, and United States v. Kagama to the text to establish a sense of chronology.
  • "Congress has subsequently used this power to breach the Medicine Lodge Treaty with the Kiowa without consent of the tribe." - Could "subsequently" be made specific? Would it be possible to elaborate? Breached how?
 Done GregJackP Boomer! 16:06, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

See also

  • No need to list anything here that has already been linked in the main text.
 Done GregJackP Boomer! 16:12, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Notes

  • Would it be possible to give phonetic pronunciations for the non-English names?
  • "Spotted Tail had killed Big Mouth" - Link Big Mouth here and delete from See also?
 Done - on link and see also. I haven't found anything to use as the phonetic for the non-English names. GregJackP Boomer! 19:26, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • File:CrowDogHorse1898.jpg. The copyright belongs to the Nebraska State Historical Society. If you follow the link on the image license page, you will find "PERMISSION. Permission for use is granted at the NSHS’s discretion for a single and one-time use. Reproductions from the NSHS’s collections cannot be sub-leased or sold by the user, nor may the user permit others to reproduce the materials or any facsimiles of them by any means for any purpose. They also may not be transferred, donated or sold to another person or organization. The NSHS does not issue permission in perpetuity or without limitations." This means that the Commons license is incorrect. This appears to be a good-faith mistake on the part of the uploader, but it means that the image should be deleted from the Commons and can't be used in this article.
 Done - replaced with LoC version with no repo restrictions due to publication in 1900. GregJackP Boomer! 18:59, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Spotted Tail.jpg. This one is probably OK since it comes from the Library of Congress, according to the license page. However, you will need to track down the url of the appropriate Library of Congress page and add a link so that readers can verify the license. See the license page for File:Thomas Stanley Matthews - Brady-Handy.jpg, for example. It looks OK.
 Done GregJackP Boomer! 19:19, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 01:26, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Another reviewer's query

  • Is it normal practice not to provide page numbers for quotes from court judgements? (I am looking particularly at the "Opinion of the court" section)
  • The article, particularly its last section (Tribal sovereignty) does a very good job of using secondary sources, not the case law, to support the text. Well done. hamiltonstone (talk) 04:34, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History of FC Barcelona

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
After a thorough copyedit and a good PR a month ago, I believe this is not overly far from FA. Any suggestions for further improvement before FAC would be welcomed!

Thanks, Sandman888 (talk) 18:14, 20 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for all of your work on FC Barcelone articles. I think this has enough probloems / issues that it would face some opposition at FAC, so here are some suggestions for improvement with FAC in mind.

Lead
  • I am not sure the first sentence meets WP:LEAD, which says The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject. The first sentence is fine for an article on FC Barcelona, but does not really mention the history aspect (which is the subject here).
  • Per WP:MOSQUOTE single quotes should not be used except within a longer quotations, so use "double quotes" in FC Barcelona, also known simply as 'Barcelona' and familiarly as 'Barça,' is a football club based in Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain. for "Barcelona" and "Barça"
  • The lead should be a summary of the article and as a summary should not contain anything in the body of the article. The lead says The team was founded in 1899 by a group of Swiss, English and Spanish footballers ... but the article does not repeat this that I could see and does not identify the nationalities of the founders, though one can guess based on their names.
  • I am also not sure that the lead is an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but I am not sure the current lead really summarizes the whole article. For example, Núñez is not mentioned in the lead.
  • The link to Sextuple tells the reader nothing about this team or even football
  • Could more be said about the lead image? What year was it designed? What are the siginficance of the bat and the crown? I think it is the first crest that was replaced in 1909, but there is nothing in the text that I can see about the first crest.
  • I think it is usually better to use specific dates than vague general terms, so I would fix To this date, Barcelona has never been relegated from La Liga, a record ... to something like As of 2010, Barcelona has never been relegated from La Liga...
Birth (1899–1922)
  • Birth seems an odd word choice for starting a team, and 23 years is an awfully long time to take being born. Would another section title work better? Perhaps something like "Founding and early years (1899–1922)" or maybe "Founding and amateur club (1899-1922)"?
  • I think the article also needs to use an en–dash instead of a hyphen in the dates, but I am not always sure on this.
  • I do not know much about the club, but I still had some questions about the founding even after reading this section. What was Gamper's background, why was he in Barcelona, and why did he want to found a football club there? We are told he is from Basel and there is a mention that he was a Swiss champion in the ad, but the article says little about him.
  • I also was not clear about the financial status of the club in this section - the next section makes it clear that the club first became professional in 1923, but what were the financial needs before this? Why did the club nearly go bankrupt? Or what did the members do and how much did they pay to be members? All the article says here is Gamper simultaneously launched a campaign to recruit more club members, and, by 1922, the club had over 20,000 members, who helped finance a new stadium. butthis does little to explain what the members were before this.
  • Watch WP:OVERLINKing - Joan Gamper is linked twice in this section, and things like rights and freedoms, which most readers understand without a link, are linked later.
  • I think this still needs a copyedit - During the Gamper lead era, Barcelona won eleven Campeonato de Cataluña,.. should be "Gamper-led era" or even just the "Gamper era"
Rivera, Republic and Civil War (1923–1957)
  • WP:HEAD says not to capitalize words in headers after the first word, unless they are normally capitalized. Are all of these words normally capitalized?
  • WP:MOSIMAGE says in part ...images should not be reversed simply to resolve a conflict between these guidelines; doing so misinforms the reader for the sake of our layout preferences. An image should be reversed or substantially altered only if this clearly assists the reader (for example, cropping a work of art to focus on a detail discussed in the text). Any such alteration must be noted in the caption. Why doesn't the article just use File:Alberti002.jpg and left justify it? Then the bombing pic could be on the right and the next part is already on the left again.
  • Needs a ref Despite the difficult political situation, CF Barcelona enjoyed considerable success during the 1940s and 1950s. In 1945, with Josep Samitier as coach and players like César, Ramallets and Velasco, they won La Liga for the first time since 1929. They added two more titles in 1948 and 1949. In 1949, they also won the first Copa Latina. In June 1950, Barcelona signed Ladislao Kubala, who was to be an influential figure at the club.
  • Why is it "Las Cortes" and italicized in the first section, but Les Corts and not italicized in this section?
Club de Fútbol Barcelona (1957–1978)
  • Again, why is Camp Nou itlicized here and not elsewhere? The completion of the Camp Nou, finished in 1957, meant the club had little money to spend on new players.[29]
  • I also think more could be said on Camp Nou - why did they decide to build it? How much did it cost, how long did it take, what szie was it when finished, etc.?
  • Ballon d'Or is spelled with a lower case o and should be linked.
  • No previous mention of the club's original official name was made, so With the end of Franco's dictatorship in 1974, the club changed its official name back to Futbol Club Barcelona and reverted the crest to its original design, including the original letters once again.[30][31] comes as a bit of surprise.
  • From 1978 on, there are no images besides three starting lineup diagrams. There are many images that would be better than these. I like File:Campnou colors.jpg for one.

The 2000-2010 section seems overly long for one decade compared to the other sections which are multiple decades - see WP:WEIGHT and WP:RECENT

  • The toolbox on this page finds one dead external link.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:55, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of conventional hydroelectric power stations

[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 because i want to improve it by removing any grammatical mistakes, spelling errors, and general copy editing. In near future i will give this article for featured list.

Thanks.

BineMai 08:11, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comments by ResMar:

  • This is a very good list in terms of completeness. In fact, it's above and beyond =). However, the referencing on the article is underpowered. First of all, as the lead is unique material, all of it needs to be cited. Second of all, the references need to be checked: User:Dr pda/editrefs.js is a great way to masterlist all of the article's references quickly for expansion. Right now, the refs are bare title + urls; you need to add accessdates, publication dates, authors, etc. In addition use Checklinks to make sure that all of the external links work; right now, I see refs 6, 119, 32, 86, 8, 114, and 2 are all broken. Oh, and if you don't use it yet, Wikipedia:RefToolbar 2.0 is the bomb.
  • How sensible is the order? Coming to the article I was expecting it to be listed by kW, not name. This would be a pain to fix, so I guess using the sortkey is ok. May or may not become an issue on the FLC.

Matt Lawton

[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 because I hope to bring it up to good article status and want to get constructive feedback on improvements before taking it to be reviewed.

Thanks, Brian Halvorsen (talk) 04:26, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Note that sites such as highbeam.com and newsbank.com are subscription sites and should be noted in References with "subscription required".
  • Thanks, but they are both reliable sources according to WP:WPBB. If you have a serious problem, I suggest you take it there.
  • You suggested that they weren't reliable sources. I just directed you to the area to discuss that if you feel that way. I work with baseball articles all the time and know that both are used frequently because they are reliable. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 00:47, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think this article is one-sided in presenting a biographical look on the subject. A biography should give an overall picture of the man or woman with an emphasis on what he or she is known for. I feel this article has gone overboard in focusing on the player's career (with lots of statistics). Little is given about who the person is, what is his ideals or goals, who he associates with and how he is known among friends or people of other circles. The net result to me is a "baseball player who got busted for steroids" without a sense of his personality, and the mounds of statistics is distracting in a negative sense. I would prefer to know his career in terms of the impact he had on his team and fellow players, and to know less of minute details that are presented in a chronological fashion. It might be well to analyze the player, grouping notable aspects of his career in paragraphs (reorganizing what has been written) rather than scattering them across the page. Jappalang (talk) 09:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree that would be very nice, but it would also be original research. It might also slide into WP:POV territory. I have no clue how much of an impact he had on players. There has never been such documentation. I think for a baseball biography article we should stick to what he is notable for, playing baseball. That is what, in my opinion, this article does well. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 19:32, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
You know, the article doesn't do a terrible job of that as it is. It talks about his philanthropy, how he was called a racial slur on the field, comments from his manager in Minnesota, Todd Walker being his good friend, his feelings about his new teams, how Milton Bradley always got mistaken for him, how he got his jewelery stolen in Philadelphia, how he was reunited with his good friend Walker, what Joe Torre thought of him, his personal sorrow for using drugs, and the professional way he handled his release in Seattle. I think "baseball player who got busted for steroids" is a very skimpy way of looking at it. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 19:49, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
And can you clarify what I have been "scattering...across the page". --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 20:00, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
As you are the primary editor of the article, you would be intimately involved with the details. We, however, are readers with little knowledge of the man (unless we are his fans). The statements above backs up my points in my opinion. Where are all those information about the man? Scattered here and there. There is no grouping of common points like what I said. Look to Edward Drinker Cope, Ayumi Hamasaki, and Jada Pinkett Smith for examples of what I believe are better organized articles. They have aspects of the person grouped together for easy reading (paragraph and section-wise). Furthermore, the repetition of statistics in this article about Lawton disconnects the information one from the other. It is not OR or POV to extract and compile information and comments that others have made about the subject; it is OR or POV to introduce our own. Jappalang (talk) 22:51, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I don't agree. I don't see the issue. To bring all comments together would be one path, but it can also be done the way it is. Right now it is in order of seasons with sections of the teams he played with over those seasons. This makes it easy to follow. If I were to break it up into "Career statistics", and "Playing style" it would be difficult for the reader to follow which year matches with the statistics. Right now, I think the organization of the article is both easy to read and up to the standards of WP:WPBB. --Brian Halvorsen (talk) 22:56, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • To comment on the sourcing above, Baseball-Reference has been proven as reliable many times at GAN and FAC, so no issue there. As for The Baseball Cube, I'm not as sure of; in most cases anything that cube can cite B-R can as well, so that's not a problem. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 00:55, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    • If The Baseball Cube is an uncertain source, and if Baseball-Reference is reliable and can be used for any TBC cite, then all references to TBC should be replaced by B-R.

Protein C

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This article is on its way to WP:FAC. What do you think it needs? (I've also nominated it for WP:GAN, which I think it should pass comfortably.) -- Rmrfstar (talk) 01:22, 17 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Cryptic C62

[edit]
Resolved comments
  • "plays an important role in managing blood clotting, inflammation, cell death and the permeability of blood vessel walls" First, what does "managing" mean in this context? Second, does the protein "manage... the permeability of blood vessel walls" or does it "play an important role in ... the permeability of blood vessel walls"?
Reworded.
  • "proteolytically inactivating proteins Factor Va and Factor VIIIa." The purpose of the subscripted "a"s is not clear to me.
As far as the reader should be concerned (at this point in the article), those are just the names of the proteins which protein C inactivates. I've included them in the wikilink to make this clearer.
  • "given the risk of bleeding associated with treatment." I feel like there should be an adjective in front of "bleeding". Perhaps "external", "internal", or "excessive".
I understand. I've put in "serious". Does that satisfy?
  • "that eluted from DEAE-Sepharose ion-exchange chromotograph." Not entirely sure what this means, but I think there should be "a" or "the" before "DEAE-Sepharose". Or perhaps "chromotograph" should be pluralized.
Fixed.
  • "cDNA cloning of protein C was performed in 1984 by Beckmann et al. which produced a map of the genes responsible for producing protein C in the liver" Was this the first cloning of protein C? If so, I suggest adding "first" before "performed".
Fixed.
  • "Also in 1984, inherited protein S deficiencies were proposed as cause for a case of familial thrombophilia, since protein S is a cofactor of protein C and the latter's malfunctioning is associated with thrombosis." Not sure why this is included. It seems to be more relevant to protein S than to protein C, and it isn't made clear from the surrounding prose whether or not this proposal was ever accepted as fact.
Took it out.
  • "in baboons infused with lethal concentrations of" I don't know a whole lot about this area of knowledge, so I could be wrong here, but I don't think "infused" is the most accurate word here. It makes me think of tea.
The word is perfect. A linked the term to the appropriate page.
  • "Two years later, the Gla-domainless APC was imaged at a resolution of 2.8 angstroms." The what? Without a link or an explanation, I don't think many of our readers will know what "Gla-domainless" means.
Added a note.
  • "In 1998, a study was performed mating mice which were heterozygous for a protein C deficiency after the gene was specifically targeted for inactivation. Their offspring exhibited clear signs of the serious symptoms associated with homozygous deficiencies." So what? Without some sort of explanation, this appears to be nothing more than an insignificant factoid.
I commented this bit out.
  • "an amino-terminal leader preceding a propeptide." What kind of leader? I don't understand.
Linked "amino terminal" and made "leader" go to leader peptide.
  • "epidermal growth factor (EGF)-like domains" This is an awkward-looking and somewhat confusing construction. Why not just "EGF-like domains"?
I'd say that the acronym "EGF" is too obscure, yet too relevant.
  • "The light chain contains the Gla- and EGF-like domains. The heavy chain contains the protease domain." What about the aromatic segment and the activation peptide? Are these not on either chain?
Fixed.
  • "If either of these two proteins is absent in murine specimens, the mouse dies from excessive blood-clotting." First, what does "murine" mean? Second, this seems to be a sweeping generalization. Even if there is a strong association between the absence of these proteins and death in the specimen, the wording of this sentence implies that removing one causes automatic death, which is a bit silly.
"Murine" means mouse-related. I changed the wording slightly and added a source for each deficiency.
Perhaps your edit wasn't saved correctly; the wording of the sentence in question has not changed. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 01:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My mistake. I added the qualification this time.
  • "The activation of protein C is strongly promoted by thrombomodulin" Just going off my gut here, but would it be correct to insert "the presence of" before "thrombomodulin"?
The presence itself is not enough: the thrombomodulin must bind to thrombin to create the complex. Anyway, it'd be slightly more idiomatic, but unnecessarily wordy.
Then why is it used later on in the paragraph: "The presence of thrombomodulin accelerates activation by several orders of magnitude" ? The importance of the binding is not made clear in the text. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 01:33, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
In that case cutting the prepositional phrase would make the language rather stilted. These are just stylistic choices which change emphasis and flow in a subtle fashion.
Regardless of the stylistic choices, you've hinted here that the thrombomodulin must bind to thrombin to create the complex which promotes the activation of protein C. This is not made clear in the text. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 18:47, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
A couple of sentences down: Because of the accelerating effect of thrombomodulin on the activation of protein C, the protein may be said to be activated not by thrombin but the thrombin-thrombomodulin (or even thrombin-thrombomodulin-EPCR) complex.
  • "One particular exosite augments protein C's ability to efficiently inactive Factor Va" This sentence is missing a verb. I'm guessing that "inactive" should be switched with "inactivate".
You are correct.
  • "The biologic instructions for synthesising protein C" I had never heard the word "biologic" before now. A quick google search shows that biologic is used far less frequently than biological. Any objections to switching the word?
"Biological" is redundant; and scientists, I believe, tend to use "biologic"... it's an adjective already.
  • "The gene's symbol is "PROC" from "protein C"." This seems a bit out of the blue, as it doesn't indicate what system of symbols is being used.
Fixed.
  • "anticoagulation and cytoprotection (its direct effect on cells)" If the parenthetical comments is intended to clarify the meaning or relevance of "cytoprotection", perhaps an explicit statement of what cytoprotection is would be more helpful than the non-descriptive "direct effect". Otherwise, I'm not really sure what the purpose of the parenthetical is.
The purpose of the parenthetical is to allow someone reading the article straight through to avoid following the the wikilink to cytoprotective, which should be unnecessary given the importance of the sub-topic. The parenthetical, I think, provides enough information on what "cytoprotection" (in fact nearly useless jargon) is, accompanying the word's first significant use, to allow said reader not to stop but continue reading.
  • "To a degree, APC's anticoagulant properties are independent of its cytoprotective ones" Not sure what this means. My first guess is that APC cannot perform both functions at the same time, which seems obvious given that the presence of EPCR determines which function takes effect, but if that's the case then why does the sentence start with "To a degree"?
That's not what that meant: I've reworded it. Also, "independent" does not mean "exclusive" but literally "not dependent".
  • "The protein C may be up-regulated by platelet factor 4." As far as I can tell, this is the only instance of protein C being referred to as "the protein C", which suggests that there may be a missing word. If there is a missing word, I suggest un-missing it. If there isn't a missing word, I suggest deleting "the" for consistency.
Fixed.
  • "concentrations around 70 nmol/L; the activated protein C is found at only 40 pM/L (2.3 ng/mL). Protein C levels in a healthy term infant average 40 IU/dL." Why are there so many different unit systems being used here? It's absolutely impossible to form any comparisons.
I'm working on this. Unfortunately, "IU" are about the stupidest units of all time, I can't find a way of converting them to moles: protein C has its own conversion factor, and I can't find out what that is. I do know that 100 IU/dL is approximately 70 nm/L, but not accurately enough yet. I fixed it.
  • "In addition, proteins released from cells can impede protein C activation, for example eosinophil, which may explain thrombosis in hypereosinophilic heart disease." Perhaps I may be asking for details that aren't entirely necessary, but how exactly do these proteins impede protein C activation? The previous regulators were all accompanied by explanations of why/how they regulate the activation.
    I wrote a note.
    Good, but the phrase "excess eosinophil specific granule proteins" is... a mouthful, to say the least. It's not clear what "specific" is referring to, and I suspect there is a missing hyphen. Perhaps "excess eosinophil-specific granule proteins" ? --Cryptic C62 · Talk 03:15, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yup.
  • "Last, Protein C is inhibited by protein C inhibitor." Starting this sentence with "last" is a tad confusing, as it implies that this is an item in a list, which it is not. I see no problem with removing it entirely.
There is a list: a list of substances which up- or down-regulate protein C.
Yes, but the other substances mentioned are not preceded by listy terms, such as "first," or "also,". I don't see any reason why they should be treated as list items, but if so, they should all be consistent. Having a paragraph of non-listy terms and then one random listy term is awkward and confusing.
I've replaced "last" with "in addition". Does that work for you?
  • "The half-life of Factor VIIIa is only around two minutes unless Factor IXa is around to stabilises it." Besides the obvious typo of "stabilises" instead of "stabilise", the use of "is around to" is both informal and vague. Perhaps "is present to stabilise" would be better?
Fixed.
  • "either of which is sufficient to disable Factor VIIIa and convert it to Factor VIIIi" Is there any difference between "disable" and "inactivate" in this context? Assuming the two terms are interchangeable, the inclusion of "and convert it to Factor VIIIi seems somewhat redundant. "either of which is sufficient to inactivate the activated Factor VIII and convert it to the inactivated form of Factor VIII."
I just wanted to make clear what inactivation actually is.
  • "APC inactivates activated Factor V" It would be more concise to say "APC inactivates Factor Va", and indeed this is how the paragraph on Factor VIII is introduced. Is there any reason not to use this notation?
It's clearer, I think, if sometimes the full notation is employed.
While that may be true in some cases, I think the two consecutive instances of "activate" will be confusing. My !vote is still "APC inactivates Factor Va". --Cryptic C62 · Talk 17:05, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
OK.
  • "Treatment of cells with APC demonstrates its gene expression modulation effectively controls major pathways for inflammatory and apoptotic behaviour." I'm not sure that I'm interpreting this sentence correctly, but if I am, I think it would be much clearer if there were a "that" after "demonstrates".
Yup.
  • "though other cellular functions are also affected." Such as?
Nothing interesting. I've removed the offending phrase.
  • "APC's mechanism for altering gene expression profiles are not well-understood" Subject-verb disagreement. Should be either "APC's mechanisms for altering gene expression profiles are not well-understood" or "APC's mechanism for altering gene expression profiles is not well-understood".
Yup.
Editing break
[edit]

Here are some comments on the article's prose:

  • "Thrombin itself may also have an effect on the levels of EPCR." This is somewhat vague. I'm assuming it means that the presence of more thrombin decreases the levels of EPCR, but I suppose it could be a positive correlation too. Which is it?
I can't track down (though I've made an incomplete effort) what it does exactly. I think it's not relevant enough to matter anyway.
  • "A genetic protein C deficiency, in its mild form associated with simple heterozygosity" Heterozygosity of what? Suggest adding "of the PROC gene".
  • "there may be a presentation of purpura fulminans, severe disseminated intravascular coagulation and simultaneous venous thromboembolism in the womb" It's not clear if these are three separate conditions or just a long explanation of purpura fulminans. If the former, I suggest employing the serial comma and changing the "and" to "or". If the latter, I suggest employing an em dash after "fulminans".
  • "No racial nor ethnic biases have been detected" How about gender bias?

More to come. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 21:59, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Much appreciated, as always. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 00:30, 23 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Glad to see you're back! I thought you had been eaten by bears. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 17:05, 13 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]
It's not bears one has to worry about. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 01:37, 17 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Blue Comet

[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 because I'm in need of some additional general feedback. "The Blue Comet" is the much-admired penultimate episode of The Sopranos. Sadly, there isn't a plethora of information available about the production of the series because David Chase preferred to keep it all under tight wraps but I think this article makes good use of what's out there.–FunkyVoltron talk 14:50, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Dablinks (toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows one disambiguation link; please fix it.
Done. Now refers to Wiktionary page explaining the word.
SandyGeorgia (FAC's delegate) frowns on using Wikitionary (it would be similar to citing information to Wikipedia, according to her). Jappalang (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Several statements in the article are unsourced/uncited.
Can you be more specific? Some statements use the episode as its source.
I understand it for Plot, but doing this for other sections make things confusing and could attract trivia and original research ("Hey, you can watch the episode to know what I say about Paulie is true!"). If you are going to use the episode as a source, use {{Cite episode}} to back up plain evident objective information. Jappalang (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Several sentences run in the vein of "noun plus -ing"; User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing tells why such structures are discouraged and suggests how they should be improved.
I have overhauled the text to the best of my ability. See this comparison.
  • Critical response is basically a collection of quotes from critics (which is further compounded by the lumping into a single paragraph). It will be better to sort them out and present a summarised and thematic analysis of what critics has said, using a few quotes for emphasis or illustration.
The second sentence of the first paragraph ("Much praise...") is supposed to function as a summarization of the critics' opinions. The individual critical reviews are also supposed to be their overall estimation of the episode. I personally think the section achieves this.
  • Is File:Sopranos620.jpg truly the identifying shot of this episode that cannot be fully expressed by words alone? The article mentions no critical commentary of this particular scene (Bobby and the train) and it is not too hard to imagine the character as he holds the model train. How does the use of the image comply with all 10 criteria of WP:NFCC, especially #1 (free replacement possible by words) and #8 (little or no contextual significance)?

I think fixing the above and giving the article a copy-edit would make it well-placed for GA quality. Jappalang (talk) 09:31, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. Do you think the article has a long way to go before it qualifies for FA status?–FunkyVoltron talk 15:20, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Reliability of sources and image use (copyrights) are generally critical issues at FAC. If opposes on such issues are valid, the article would very likely not be promoted. Jappalang (talk) 02:01, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

A4 (Croatia)

[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 because I'd like to nominate it for WP:GAN soon, so all suggestions are welcome and appreciated.

Thanks, Tomobe03 (talk) 12:34, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Niagara

  • "The positive economic impact on the cities and towns it connects, as well as its importance to tourism in Croatia, is reflected in the motorway's national significance."
    • Reversed: "The motorway's national significance is reflected in the positive economic impact on the cities and towns it connects, as well as its importance to tourism in Croatia."

 Done per suggestion--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:21, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "The motorway consists of two traffic lanes and an emergency lane in each driving direction separated by a central reservation. There are no emergency lanes in the tunnels. All intersections of the A4 motorway are grade separated. As the route traverses hilly terrain, it requires a substantial number of viaducts and tunnels, as well as two major bridges to span the Drava and Mura rivers"
    • Changed order of sentences so that the fact that there tunnels on the A4 is stated before the fact that they don't have emergency lanes: "As the route traverses hilly terrain, it requires a substantial number of viaducts and tunnels, as well as two major bridges to span the Drava and Mura rivers. The motorway consists of two traffic lanes and an emergency lane in each driving direction separated by a central reservation. There are no emergency lanes in the tunnels. All intersections of the A4 motorway are grade separated."

 Done per suggestion--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:21, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "51% of TEA was owned by Astaldi, with the remainder owned by the Republic of Croatia."
    • It is preferred to not start a sentence with a numeral. Rewording it would be best, instead of writing the number out: "Astaldi owned 51% of TEA, with the remainder owned by the Republic of Croatia."

 Done per suggestion--Tomobe03 (talk) 17:24, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • I'd consider replacing one of the tunnel photos, as they are very similar (for a second, I thought they were the same photo), or at least seperating them a bit more.

 Done moved one of them further down the article a bit... I'll try to get another image for the article later on.--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:24, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Nice job, so far the best one yet! ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 16:52, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the comments!--Tomobe03 (talk) 18:24, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

1907 Tour de France

[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 because I am trying to get the article to GA-status. The first nomination failed, because of prose problems. The reviewer left some comments, and suggested a PR before a new nomination. I have tried to fix the mistakes that he found, but I don't know if I did this right, after all, I thought my initial prose was fine. I did not change "The Alcyon team, with Trousselier as best placed cyclist, was not satisfied with the fine given to Georget, and left the Tour in protest", even though the reviewer mentioned it needed "better grammar and style", because I honestly don't see what's wrong with that line. English is not my first language, so I miss the capability to write brilliant prose needed for a FA, but I hope this review can give me a hint what I need to improve to write well-written prose for a GA.

Thanks, EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 09:21, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • "The Alcyon team, with Trousselier as best placed cyclist, was not satisfied with the fine given to Georget, and left the Tour in protest."
    I believe this could have been improved to "Unsatisfied with the fine given to Georget, Trousselier and his Alcyon team left the Tour in protest."
Done.
  • Similarly the opening sentences of the article would, in my opinion, be better as: "The 5th annual Tour de France bicycle race took place in 1907. From 8 July to 4 August, participants cycled 4488 km (2,788 mi) across France. The winner, Lucien Petit-Breton, completed the race at an average speed of 28.47 km/h (17.69 mi/h)."
Partially done: WP:LEAD says that, if possible, the page title should be the subject of the first sentence. To me it seems possible here.
True, but consider the redundancy: "X 2007 is the 5th annual X." Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... the first Tour de France to visit the Western Alps ..."
    Avoid anthropomorphizing inanimate objects. The Tour has no will or physical existence to "visit" a place.
Done (and I always thought I avoided such anthropomorphisation...)
  • "... was in the beginning dominated by ..."
    "... was dominated at the start by ..."
Done.
  • "Petit-Breton won two stages, and the victory overall."
    "Petit-Breton won two of the remaining stages and the Tour."
Done, but I have the feeling this makes it less clear for the non-cycling fan...
  • "... could not defend his title since he had committed suicide ..."
    "... did not defend his title because he had committed suicide ..."
Done.
  • "The length again increased by one stage, ..."
    So when was the previous time the length was increased by one stage? By using "again", the reader is expected to know it had happened before (which will make him or her wonder what happened last time and confused why this was not mentioned). Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... and for the first time Switzerland was included. The mountain stages had been so successful, according to the organiser Henri Desgrange, that the western Alps were included."
    The link between the two sentences can confuse readers. If Switzerland (mountains) was included the first time, how can anyone judge "the mountain stages had been so successful" at that time? The context of "mountain stages" here should be clarified. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The race was again contested by the points system, as in the previous year."
    How does a "points system" (not even a living thing) participate in the race or oppose it?
Changed.
  • "... a car with bicycle repairmen rode behind the riders ..."
    A car does not "ride".
Changed to "drove" (although I think the driver drives, not the car...)
Passengers "ride" in a car. A driver "drives" a vehicle, and vehicles "drive" on their own as well. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... the first domestiques in the history of the Tour de France."
    Do not divert readers to another article to get a basic understanding of a unique term; append a description (basic explanation) of the term either in parentheses or as a descriptive clause.
I read in the "domestique" article that this term was first used in 1911, so I changed the 1907 article to avoid this term.
  • "Jean-Marie Teychenne", then "... from that moment Teycheime was also ..."?
Changed.
My initial point is to note the different spelling of the names. Which is correct? Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The coureurs de vitesse could get help from the car with bicycle repairmen when they had to fix a bicycle, and when a bicycle was beyond repair, they could change it to a new one."
    Unsourced.
Added tag to remind myself to source it later.
  • "... the general classification was as follows:"
    The general practice here is not to present main body items as lists/tables, but in prose. Lists and tables generally stand on their own without being addressed to.
Generally they do, for example the two other tables in this article, but these two tables are different. The information given here is at this point relevant to understand the race's development. If they are given without introduction, the accompanying prose misses something. If the MOS says something about it, I'll be happy to change it, but I think it is really normal in this kind of situation to introduce the table in prose, as it is used in books, journal articles and other encyclopediae.
My point is that it can be done in prose "X led the group with Y points, followed by A with B points. In third place was M with N points." and such. The flexibility with sentences (prose) allows the interjection of critical comments as well. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... started in the "poinçonnée" category of riders ..."
    What is the "poinçonnée" category?
The category as explained in "Participants" (which is obvious to me). I now changed the wordings to make it more obvious, also to somebody who did not write this article.
  • "Petit-Breton finished the next stages all in the top three, so no other cyclist was able to challenge him for the overall victory. At the end of the race, he had increased his lead to a margin of 19 points to Garrigou and 27 points to Georget."
    Unsourced.
Sourced by the reference that was used three times before and three times after, but I now added it here.
The main trend of references/citations here is that each paragraph of information should be sourced. If two consecutive paragraphs are based on the same source, they should still each be cited to the source. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The cyclists officially were not grouped in teams, but some cyclists had the same sponsor, even though they were not allowed to work together."
    Unsourced.
Added tag to remind myself to source it later.
  • Why is the point system described only after the events in the race were presented?
It looked like the optimal place to put it. I understand why you disagree, so I moved it upwards, but now the best place is in the "Changes from the 1906 Tour de France" section, while the system is exactly the same as in 1906.
It would seem to me then that "Changes from the 1906 Tour de France" is not a good section header. Use "Background" or such. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • It is a violation of WP:MOSFLAG not to name the country when its flag is first used.
I agree, but where in this article is this done? Everytime a flag is used, the country is also given. WP:MOSFLAG explicitly says it is ok to use shorter variants (it says {{flag|JPN}} can be used in stead of {{flag|Japan}}), so I think this article is not in violation of the MOSFLAG.
My bad. I expected the name of the country to be next to the flag, not at the end of the athlete's name. I am not enamored with this layout and do not like the three-letter ISOs (which can still be as confusing as flags without names), but I am not as harsh on them. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Is there a need to constantly put the French flag next to the racers in the first two tables?
No, removed.
  • www.memoire-du-cyclisme.net: The site has a contact us page, and is backed by a French legal entity. Info on other races than the Tour de France is only available for paying members, so the website relies on the accuracy of the content. Is considered reliable in the cycling community.
  • www.nieuwsdossier.nl: I can not prove nor disprove its reliability.
  • www.wielercentrum.com: I can not prove nor disprove its reliability. I know that in this case and the above case this means the source can not be used, so I will go and replace these sources by other sources, unless I find a proof they are reliable.
  • www.veloarchive.com: Personal website. Brilliantly researched, but unfortunately not reliable. I will replace it by some other source.
  • File:Lucien Mazan.jpg and File:Georget emile.jpg: Where did these photographs come from (WP:IUP and WP:CITE#IMAGE)? How do these photographs qualify for PD-old (which asks that the copyright holder has died more than 70 years ago)? If the copyright holder was 20 years old in 1900, and lived till 1960, he certainly has not died more than 70 years ago.
File:Lucien Mazan.jpg: according to the source given in Commons ([22]), provided by Nationaal Archief (the Dutch national archive, which is a reliable source I guess), the photographer is unknown (Dutch: Fotograaf onbekend). In this case, the copyright expires 70 years after publication, which has passed already.
When was this photograph made public? See commons:Comnmons:Anonymous-EU: "a copyright term of 70 years after the work was made available to the public and the author never disclosed their identity." If the photograph remained in a private collection until now, it is still copyrighted according to this rule. Jappalang (talk) 01:47, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
File:Georget emile.jpg: I removed the PD tag on commons, and started a discussion there. Probably the image will have to go.

Overall, I think the GA reviewer was correct. I recommend you to seek help from one more fluent in the English language to give the article a copy-edit. Jappalang (talk) 03:26, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review. I corrected some things in the article, but have still some minor questions on some things. I don't have the time now to ask them, but I hope you will help me later. --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 09:32, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
The GA reviewer was correct (I even thanked him/her for correctly failing this article). Thanks again for the remarks. I changed most of them directly in the article (and tried to learn from it). Some things I'd like your comments on: the first sentence, the use of the two tables in the prose, the location of the explanation of the points system, and the MOSFLAG interpretation. If I'm not taking up too much of your time, that is... --EdgeNavidad (Talk · Contribs) 13:56, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Deshastha Brahmin

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because…

...the article failed a GA review. Reviewer asked that it be thoroughly reviewed again before nomination. We've made all of the fixes per the GA review. Once the peer review is done, we will nominate for GA again.

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 05:13, 19 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: I don't know if I can be of much help or not.

  • I find myself struggling to understand the basic concepts because I'm almost totally unfamiliar with the caste system as well as many other aspects of life in India. The table in the "Classification" section, for example, is almost without meaning for me. To understand it, I would need to look up "Rig Veda", "Yajur Veda", "Recension", "Shukla (White)", "Krishna (Black)", "Śākalya", and so on. I wonder if the article could be revised with a broader audience in mind. Here are some other comments and suggestions.
 Done - provided explanation of the Vedas, recension and branches. Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The tools above find one dead url in the citations and seven links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.
 Done - fixed all dead/disambiguation links. Zuggernaut (talk) 00:41, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • "The word Deshastha" - Italicize "Deshastha" for consistency within the sentence?
 Done Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Terms like 8th century need a no-break code to hold the parts together on line-break. I fixed one, 13th century, but you should fix them all. WP:NBSP has details.
 Done Zuggernaut (talk) 19:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The hitherto ritually, socio-economically and Brahminically "inferior" Konkanastha, achieved parity with the Deshasthas in the nepotistic era that followed the passing of the seat of the Peshwa in Konkanastha hands in 1713." - This is quite a mouthful and will probably puzzle many foreign readers. The comma after "Konkanastha" should be removed. Is "Brahminically" a real word? Should "in Konkanastha" hands be "into Konkanashta hands"?
 Done - Brahminical is an adjective per this dictionary - [23] Zuggernaut (talk) 19:38, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "During this era, the Konkanastha unleashed social warfare on the Deshasthas, with at least one recorded incident of the Peshwas ruining and disgracing a reputed Deshastha Brahmin from Wai." - Two problems: (1) It's hard to imagine that one incident amounts to warfare; (2) "at least" is vague.
 Done Used specific phrasing to eliminate ambiguity. Removed "at least". Zuggernaut (talk) 19:56, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Deshastha Brahmins constitute 60 percent of the total Brahmin population in Maharahstra, which itself stands at four percent of the population of Maharashtra." - Suggestion: "Brahmins constitute 4 percent of the population of Maharahstra, and 60 percent of them are Deshastha Brahmins."
 Done Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Classification

  • To make this more understandable to a foreign reader, would it be possible to include a paragraph that explains the caste system in India? Who does it include? What are the main categories? Is it possible to change category? Does one category have an advantage over another; that is to say, if someone could choose any category, which would be most desirable?
 Done Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Castes claiming to be Deshasthas

  • "Golak or Govardhan are considered degraded" - Considered by whom?
 Done Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The caste headman is generally someone with a smattering of Sanskrit and is called a Vedia. They are the earliest settlers in and around Nasik." - Past tense; i.e. "was generally someone" and "was called" and "they were"? Also, can someone be "smattered with Sanskrit"?
 Done - changed to past tense. Smattering is used correctly. Here's a dictionary entry from a random dictionary. [24] Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Randa Golaks are similar to the Kunda Golak in their origin, with the difference in that their first female parents were Brahmin widows." - Confused syntax. People only have one set of parents. I think you must mean that all of the Randa Golak people are considered illegitimate by (somebody, not sure whom) because they are thought to have descended from the offspring of a Brahmin widow.
 Done - rephrased. Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • All of this section seems highly POV-ish. The head, "Castes claiming to be Deshasthas" suggests that someone denies this claim. But who is that arbiter, and why is that arbiter's claim any more valid than the opposite claim?

Demographics

  • "The Brahmin caste constitutes four percent of the total population in Maharashtra." - Who else lives in Maharashtra? Who are the other 96 percent?
 Done Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

History

  • As the original Brahmins of Maharashtra, the Deshasthas have been held in the greatest esteem and have considered themselves superior to other Brahmins." - Who holds them in the greatest esteem?
 Done - source doesn't say who, it just says they've been held in greatest esteem. [25] Zuggernaut (talk) 19:20, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The Deshasthas are a progressive community and some of the them have taken to white collar jobs." - Who says they are progressive? I'm not suggesting that they aren't, just trying to point out that this seems to present a Deshastha point of view. Are there any other views that have been published by reliable sources?
 Done - Anthropological Survey of India says so - [26]

Images

  • File:Dr. Hedgevar.jpg is a 50 kilobyte image licensed as "own work" but appears to be a scan rather than a photograph. "Own work" usually means something like "I took this photograph with my camera". However, a scan of someone else's work does not qualify as "own work". The "source" part of the image description summary should name the original source and either link to it or give information sufficient for a reader to verify the license claims.
 Done -- this one looks like a hand made portrait/picture rather than a photograph. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Tantiatope.jpg. The image description page needs to specify where this image came from. What is the original source? When was it published? If the photographer's name is known, that should be included too.
This particular image is sourced from Colombia University's website (info I have added to the image) and that was originally from NNDB. The link [27]. The creator of the work is not specified but since it was originally created almost 150 years ago it would be the public domain. --Johnxxx9 (talk) 10:48, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done - marked done assuming Johnxxx9's answer suffices. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Madhava Rao.jpg. The image description page needs to specify the original source. The image appears to be a scan, but a scan of what?
 Not done - uploader does not wish to participate in providing the information [28]...will remove if GA reviewer asks to do so. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • File:Deshastha Girls.jpg has been licensed as CC-by-SA 2.0, but it does not appear to be a photograph taken by the uploader who added the license. If the image is not the uploader's own work (a photograph he or she created), then the uploader can't arbitrarily license the image as CC-by-SA 2.0. The uploader seems to be aware of the difficulty and adds language usually associated with a fair-use claim. This won't do.
 Done pictures have been removed. Will try to persuade uploader to work on this so we can have pictures back. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I did not check the license pages of all of the images. I'm hoping the above examples will suffice.
 Done removed a few others which fell in the File:Deshastha Girls.jpg category. Zuggernaut (talk) 06:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

References

  • The abbreviation for a single page is p. Thus "pp. 59." in citation 1 should be changed to "p. 59". Ditto for all the similar constructions.
 Done
  • It's helpful to provide an OCLC number for books such as Hindu Castes and Sects with no ISBNs. You can usually find the OCLCs via WorldCat.
 Done (provided ISBNs and/or URLs for almost all references)
  • Citation 7 is incomplete. Citation 8 lacks an author. The Indian Express in citation 83 should appear in italics. The all-caps part of citation 86 should appear in title case (Wikipedia house style) as Press Trust of India. I noticed these things on a quick read-through, but I suspect there are more small things that need to be fixed to conform to the Manual of Style. A careful proofing of the citations would be a good idea.
 Done

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page.

Massachusetts Institute of Technology

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because…there will be a FAC prepared for this article in the near future, and the peer review process can be used for collaboration. Thanks, GrapedApe (talk) 20:53, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GrapedApe's review

I have prepared these thoughts as I have read through the article.

  • File:George Eastman plaque.jpg - when was that plaque created? Might be derivative works problems with it.
    • Update: it looks like there is a (c)1932 in the bottom right corner, so PD-no notice doesn't work here. Who was the sculptor, so we can check to see whether PD-not renewed might apply?
  • File:SonsOfMIT.ogg might be problematic. I have raised a question at Wikipedia:Media_copyright_questions#File:SonsOfMIT.ogg.
  • Right now, the lead is problematic. Per WP:LEAD, the lead is supposed to be a summary of the entire article. Are there any major points in the article that aren't covered in the lead? Are there any items in the lead that aren't in the nmain body. Finally, there really shouldn't be a need for references in the lead, since any fact there would be sourced in the main article. I would suggest that the lead is something that ought to be done last, to avoid missing any changes in the article.
  • The quote box around "Act to Incorporate the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Acts of 1861" is covering up lots of text in the "Because open conflict..." paragraph in my browser (firefox).
  • I'm concerned that File:MIT McDermott Court.jpg might be an impermissible derivative work of that statue. Consider getting an FUR for it. I can help with that. Same for File:MIT Barker Libary.JPG.
  • The brass rat image File:Brass Rat 2007 Finger.jpg has the opposite problem: it has an FUR, but the copyright of the photograph itself is questionable.
  • Consider grouping the navboxes at the bottom in a "Links to related articles" dropdown. (see W&J for an example that I did)
  • Move the University portal tag to the "See also" section
  • In the infobox, there is the "Nobel Laureates" section. I'm not sure whether that's alumni, faculty, or both.
  • In the infobox, under "(except for Rowing)"-- reading that I'm curious what division rowing is in.
  • In Foundation and early years, link Massachusetts State Legislature
  • The quote "to promote the liberal and practical education of the industrial classes." should be referenced, even though I presume that its a quote from the Morrill Act.
  • "handsome new neoclassical campus" might be a bit POV. A source for an architect calling it handsome?
  • When was the name changed from Boston Tech to MIT? Not clear to me.
  • Clarify that Office of Scientific Research and Development is a federal agency, not an intra-university department.
  • Was the Radiation Laboratory part of the OSRD funding? Same for the Instrumentation Laboratory and other projects in that paragraph.
  • I'd like to see a ref on the "While the school mainly served the needs..." sentence.
  • In "Recent history" the word President is capitalized, but it isn't in earlier paragraphs
  • The phrase "the past quarter century" should be amended to make it clear that it is referring to 1975-2000. In a few years, that phrase might not be so intuitive.
  • Under "Organization and administration," do you think its worth noting that the chairman, John S. Reed, is an alumnus? (Also an alumnus of W&J, FWIW).
  • Are the "three elected officers" chosen from among the members, or are they elected separately?
  • I'm uncomfortable with the quote "a university polarized...". First, what does polarized mean here? Are those departments antagonistic towards each other? Are they very independnet of each other? Second, I'm not sure its a good idea to start a paragraph with a quote,even if its a quote from an administrator. Here's an idea: start the paragraph with the list of schools, then expand on the "polarization" between the departments.
  • There are a few initals that aren't used elsewhere in the article: MISTI, MITIMCo, GIRs, Z-Center
  • Just as an overall style point, a lot of paragraphs begin with "MIT...". It would be nice to vary that a bit.
  • In the Campus section, there is a reference to "Maclaurin buildings" but that term isn't explained until later in the section.
  • Any more up to date crime stats?
  • Under "Architecture," I'm not sure what "progressive" means. Is that like futuristic? Or just interesting buildings?
  • Under Architecture, there is a reference to MIT as the "Institute," but I don't think such a nickname was used earlier in the article. Perhaps change that to "MIT"
  • Under Housing, I wouldn't start a sentence with a number, s in "50% of." Spell it out?
  • How did Scott Krueger die? Was it a result of the frat's actions?
  • Under Housing, what kind of countercultural activities? The aforementioned protests over defense work?
  • Shouldn't "Class of 2006" be lowercase?
  • Under Students, "97% of the ..." "61% of students ..." consider writing out these number
  • Any more info on the tuition riots? How is that tongue in cheek?
  • I see now how Scott Kreuger died. Consider adding a short note or clause at the first reference to him. Also, might his death be notable enough for a separate article?
  • I'm not really sure what the "These and later cases were significant...loco parentis" sentence means. Did MIT deny that responsibility before these reforms? Did the families of the deceased use these reforms to show that MIT was at fault in the deaths?

Tim Conlon (artist)

[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 since it's a new unreviewed article and I'm in need of some additional general feedback.

Thanks, Cdematties (talk) 12:24, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: Peer review is meant mainly for articles that are headed for GA or higher. This article is new and not yet well-developed. Even so, here are a few suggestions:

  • The images are almost certainly violating copyright law. They come from the Smithsonian, as noted on the image license pages, but the Smithsonian terms of use suggest that they are not free to duplicate and distribute. The non-commercial restriction alone makes them not usable on Wikipedia, and it does not appear that the copyright holder has licensed them as CC-by-SA 3.0. They can't arbitrarily be licensed as CC-by-SA 3.0 by Wikipedia. WP:IUP explains Wikipedia's image use policies.
  • The article as it stands reads more like a puff piece or vita for Conlon than a neutral biography. It would help to include what art critics have to say about Conlon's work instead of relying so much on what he has to say about himself. Instead of listing potential sources in "External links", use them as sources in the article and use them to find other sources.
  • The direct quotations, amounting to roughly 150 words, are too much for such a short piece. It's generally better to paraphrase and to use direct quotations selectively.
  • Direct links to external sites from within the text are a Manual of Style no-no; thus "blog" should not be linked to Conlon's blog. Instead, use an in-line citation.
  • The citations are incomplete. Citations to web sites should include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and date of most recent access if those are known or can be found. It may be helpful to use the "cite" family of templates to create the citations. They can be found at WP:CIT. If you use them, don't mix them with other citation families. You can look at featured articles at WP:FA to see how other editors have dealt with art biographies; in edit mode, you can see how citations have been handled by various editors in these high-quality articles.
  • Blogs, personal web pages, and many dot-coms are not reliable sources per WP:RS. How can we be sure that DCist.com, for example, is a reliable source? Much better would be to use the Washington Post, American Observer, and other publications with editorial staffs and a reputation for accuracy.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 05:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Santana discography

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I added this for peer review again, because the peer review took to long (15 days) and nobody answered. The text above is from the first archive-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

My dear Pumpkin, I take considerable offense. I hope you understand the reasons:
  • Firstly, I'm not aware there's an expiration date on a peer review, so 15 days doesn't seem too bad to me.
  • Secondly, your claim that "nobody answered" is inaccurate and, well, rude. You had a response from Brianboulton on the 10th, but then he had some personal problems and was delayed. You then advertised your request a little, and after seeing your note of the 13that WT:WikiProject Discographies, I responded in just over four hours. I took pains with it, and replied in some detail. I may not be perfect, but I don't like being considered "nobody". Further, Brianboulton made time to look at the article, too, and replied three hours later. A guy with so much experience in FL and FA promotions is hardly "nobody".
  • After we made comments, you replied, interleaving your responses, which included some questions, in our remarks (and leaving the attributions muddled and ruining the list numbering).
  • You then closed (sort of) the discussion two days later, before we (or at least I) could reply to your open questions.
  • Now, having closed that review and discussion, you come here again, create an entirely new page, and paste our comments from that one here without our permission. I only realized you had done it because you added a post to my Talk page telling me not to "let Santana alone". If you didn't like the last review, why did you paste it in its entirety here? If somebody posts review comments here, will you paste them in other new review request pages you start up?
In conclusion, I feel that I have spent more than enough time on this already, as it's unclear what you want from me or anyone else. I am going to delete my earlier words from this page, which may leave you talking to the clouds, but I don't feel that that's unfair. — JohnFromPinckney (talk) 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


hello,

I've added this article to peer review, because I want to know, if this article may be a FL. But I'm not sure in few things:


  1. Is the infobox k? Should I change the colors? Make a suggestion!
  2. The "citation needed" in the "Sales" division really disturbs me (and other maybe too). Is it possible to remove it and to be a FL?
  3. I have too less information about some albums. for example I can't find the label, or release date. I googled all of them, but I couldn't find anything. Is it k to replace to missing informations to three question marks?
  4. Should I add singles, even if they didn't chart?
  5. I don't like the guest appearance part. Can you suggest something?
  6. I delayed the videography part to Santana videography. Was it a good idea or not?
  7. Are B-Sides notable?
  8. In the "Sales" and "Certification" sections I have no idea if I should array the country recordings certifications to an alphabetical order, or is it necessery to order it to a chronological order? Or maybe importance, i.e. US than UK and the other in alphabetical order? Please make an advise.

thx -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 19:20, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Request: I am prepared to review the article, but could you remove the coloured effect from the above list, so that I can read it more easily? It's a great strain at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 16:44, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for doing that. I will be with you soon. Brianboulton (talk) 23:03, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1.  Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1.  Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. can you tell me some good sources, on WP:RS i didnt find for music charts or certifications.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:39, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. i dont know, its from the template-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. well, what charts should i remove?--♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    i think all charts are usefull, if only 10 is a must be, how about US (billboard 200 or 100??), UK, AUS, NED, GER, SWI, BEL fla., BEL wal., hot latin pop air, hot adult contemporary? -- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:44, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. i like the sales column, but i have to do that :(-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:36, 14 October 2010 (UTC) Done-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 09:27, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. yes i dont like this, too. can i rename it to "Cameos"?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. deleting?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. yes, thx-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]

  1. k-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    i just found 2 non-album singles. should i separate them anyway?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 09:29, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    what should i do with the unofficial albums? maybe deleting them?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 10:52, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

[Text from JohnFromPinckney removed as copied without permission —JohnFromPinckney 19:55, 18 October 2010 (UTC)][reply]


Brianboulton comments: First, I apologise for the delay in getting to this, having promised a review. I have had very limited online time this week, with several things to keep abreast of. I am grateful to JohnFromPinckney for his detailed review. I don't want to repeat his points, so I'll just say a few things:-

  • In my view the tables are overcomplicated. I've looked at various discographies at FL; none of them that I have seen have a sales figures column, which in your case has brought a host of citation tags, and a very unwieldly appearance for some of your tables. Use existing FLs as a model.
what about Madonna albums discography? It has a sales column.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • There are numerous disambiguation links; use the toolbox in the top righthand corner to identify and correct.
  • I am unconvinced by the image licensing. There is no proper source information; was this photograph taken by the uploader, and if so, how do we know this? There is no current WP editor called Magikman6386.
i can replace the image, i.e. or , or are they not correct?-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 08:47, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these few suggestions are helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 00:33, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

(Later): I've no idea why you thought it a good idea to close the review, open a new one, post the old comments to the new one and then insult the editors who previously took time to help you. I can't be bothered to delete my comments, but my interest in this review has finished. Brianboulton (talk) 20:35, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Camp Nou

[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 because I want to get the article up to GA. Any suggestions will be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Mr.Kennedy1 talk guestbook 16:55, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

It is a general protocol here to not strike out someone else's comments, let them do it themselves. Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lede

  • "... is a football stadium in Barcelona, Catalonia, Spain."
    Unnecessarily long location name? Why not "... is a Spanish football stadium in Barcelona, Catalonia."?
  • "It held UEFA five-star status until that rating was superseded by a new system of classification in 2006."
    What category is it now?
    Done. It is now an elite stadium which is still the highest rating only a different name. Mr.Kennedy1 talk 09:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The lede is supposed to be a summary of the main body, so if it calls Camp Nou an elite stadium, where is the text in the main body text and the source to support it? Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I see the five-star status now mentioned in the body, but where is the source for "which means Camp Nou is still at the top level, but is now an elite stadium."?
  • "There were plans for the stadium to be remodeled to celebrate its fiftieth anniversary. FC Barcelona had initially approved the sale of its former training ground Mini Estadi to fund the remodeling, but financial conditions caused the sale to be postponed, and the club’s current president (as of June 2010[update]) is firmly opposed to it."
    "There were plans to remodel the stadium on its fiftieth anniversary. FC Barcelona initially approved the sale of its former training ground Mini Estadi to fund the project, but put the plans on hold because of the financial crisis in 2009. Sandro Rosell had expressed his opposition to the sale of Mini Estadi before his election as club president in June 2020."
    Done. Mr.Kennedy1 talk 09:33, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Construction

  • "After the last renovation of the Camp de Les Corts stadium, ..."
    What is the Camp de Les Corts stadium? Why should it matter to this article? It is better to keep readers on this page (give them basic information of other objects) than to send them away (and possibly never return) to other articles. This clauses also starts a very long setence that would best be broken down into shorter components.
    Done. Reworded paragraph completely and explained what the Camp de Les Corts was. Mr.Kennedy1 talk 14:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... due to his highly attractive play."
    "Due to" is wrongly used here, and what is "highly attractive play" to a reader who is not familiar with football?
    Done. I'm not sure I got it right but I give it a go. Mr.Kennedy1 talk 14:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    It was reworded to (and moved in position) "and is considered to be one of Barcelona's greatest ever players", which still provokes questions. What does this player have to do with the need for a new larger stadium? Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The stadium was opened on 24 September 1957, to a performance of Handel's Messiah."
    I belive the comma is not supposed to be there, and "opened [...] to a performance" is grammatically incorrect.
    Done. Reworded into two setences. Mr.Kennedy1 talk 14:00, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Early years

  • "... Dynamo Moscow, the match going 3–2 in Rangers' favor."
    ".. Dynamo Moscow; the match ended 3–2 in Rangers' favor." See User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing on why noun plus -ing constructs are disfavored and how they should be improved. There are several statements with this construct in the article, so please change them.
  • The first paragraph of information is totally unsourced.
  • "... new markers, and moreover enlarged the third tier by 22,150 seats for a total capacity of 115,000 spectators."
    "... new markers. Moreover, the third tier was enlarged with 22,150 seats, increasing the stadiums's total capacity to 115,000 spectators." Furthermore, markers for what?
  • "... for a small set donation."
    What is a "small set donation"?
  • "This later became a topic of controversy, when the news media in Madrid reported that the name of long-time Real Madrid chairman and Franco supporter, Santiago Bernabéu, had been commemorated in this way."
    What is "this", inscribing names on the bricks or doing it in exchange for a "small set donation"? Furthermore, why would this become controversial?
  • The last part of the second paragraph is unsourced.

Development

  • Opening single-sentence paragraph (which are usually frowned on) is unsourced.
  • "In preparation for these Games, two additional tiers of seating were installed over the previous roof-line."
    "Two additional tiers of seating were installed over the previous roof-line for the Games."
  • "The stadium underwent a facelift in 1993–94, ..."
    Using "facelift" for inanimate objects is informal, unsuitable for an encyclopaedia.
  • "... Camp Nou’s capacity settled to its current level."
    Which is?
  • "In 2000 the fans were polled concerning the stadium's name."
    Please elaborate about the polls. Was it just asking whether the name should be changed to Nou Camp or remain as is, was it a multiple choice poll, or was it one that asked the fans to submit their own names?
  • "... a total of 19,861 ..."
    "A total of" is redundant.

Future

  • "... the club issued an international tender to remodel it."
    "Tender" is wrongly handled here.
  • "... an integrated and highly visible urban environment."
    A what (this proclamation is not even explained in the following sentences)?
  • "Should these renovations be completed, the stadium will be the third largest in the world, after the Rungrado May Day Stadium in North Korea (150,000 capacity) and the Salt Lake Stadium in India (120,000 capacity)."
    Crystal ball material in matters of tone.
  • This first paragraph is unsourced.
  • "... in order to finance ..."
    Wordy: spot the two redundant words.
  • "... Mini Estadí ..."
    Why the special "i" when it is not used elsewhere?
  • "... and his election on 30 June has effectively halted the plan to remodel Camp Nou."
    Does any of the two citations (one of which is dated 20 May) actually support this statement?

Other uses

  • There are at least three unsourced sentences in this section.
  • Section reads too much like a list without significance to the subject (U2's paragraph at least had Bono's explanation on their choice, but this is detracted by a trivial mention of his attire).

References

Images

  • File:Camp Nou - Maqueta (Norman Foster).jpg: this model (not a building) is a creative work of art (artist interpretation of a stadium) and copyrighted for at least 70 years after the death of its author or 70 years after publication (if of collective authorship). This was unveiled in 2007, so neither term is likely to expire soon.[29] This is a derivative photograph and hence requires the clearance of the copyright holders of the model for storage on Commons (or Wikipedia). Note that this is also not a work "permanently located in parks or on streets, squares or other public thoroughfares", so it does not qualify for Spanish freedom of panorama.
    Copyvio deleted. Jappalang (talk) 01:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Several issues here that should be tackled before sending it for GA evaluation. Jappalang (talk) 07:54, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cratendune

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
The search for Cratendune continues though evidence that any one site is the lost village remains sparse. An archaeology dig in Ely, Cambridgeshire during 1999 gained media attention as a possible site, which has subsequently been thought of as unlikely. If this interests you, please do review the article for at least an improvement from start-class but hopefully as a GAN candidate

Thanks, Senra (Talk) 16:03, 22 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: The subject is interesting, but but at 430 words, the article does not yet seem to give comprehensive coverage. Various questions come to mind: when did archaeological investigations commence, who conducted them, what recent investigations have taken place? You say that the search for Cratendune continues; where are these searches being carried out, and what recent reports have been issued? Etc.

  • Why is the "Geography" section presented in this way rather than in prose? What is the reader supposed to deduce from this unexplained chart?
  • What is the relevance of the "Ploughmen" image to this article?
  • Prose: the first sentence of the lead is too long, and awkwardly phrased. There are poor constructions through the article; here are a few examples:-
    • "Traditions of Ely compiled in the history..." Say what history you are referring to.
    • "a shifted site": - did the ground move? Or do you mean a "!different" site?
    • "The church at Cratendune was also thought to have been founded by King Ethelbert..." What is "also" doing here? There have been no previous mentions either of the church, or of Ethelbert. The sentence continues: "and was abandoned, perhaps destroyed, before Penda of Mercia." Do you mean "by the army of..."? What is the context of Penda's involvement?
    • "...though as the West Fen site was still active in the 13th century and there are no signs of early Anglo-Saxon settlements on the site makes West Fen Road an unlikely Cratendune location." Not grammatical
    • "During World War II, during construction..." Repetitive.
  • References: Why does ref 14 go to Fairweather 2005, when the statement it supports is "Under the war-time conditions, little archaeological work could be undertaken. It was subsequently reported by Fowler (1948)." Why isn't this cited to Fowler (1948)? And what, exactly, was reported by Fowler?

This is a reasonable start, but a fair amount of work is necessary before the article is a credible GA candidate. Brianboulton (talk) 18:19, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I very much appreciate the review and comments. I will work through the above over the next few days --Senra (Talk) 18:34, 29 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fixing lead last --Senra (Talk) 16:13, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Automobile Department Of Rajalakshmi Engineering College

[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 because… Give more broad information about the article. Thanks, Vignesh100992 (talk) 02:00, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I want the Wikipedia to cancel the proposed deletion of this article as the reason mentioned by the (talk) on the talk page or Discussion page of the Automobile Department Of Rajalakshmi Engineering College.And also I request to give more information of this article.Vigneshprodigy (talk) 02:24, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article deleted per CSD A7—sending to archive. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 10:40, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

St John's Ashfield

[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 because I've been developing this article almost solo, and would like some fresh eyes to see if I'm going in the right direction. I'm hoping to put it up for GA eventually, but I've never gone through that process before, so would appreciate insight.

Thanks, 99of9 (talk) 07:24, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is certainly broad in coverage, well-sourced, and generally well-written. The maps are good and so are the images, except that there are too many for the size of the article. MOS:IMAGES and WP:LAYOUT#Images have helpful hints about layout and image arrangement. With further work, I'm sure you can bring this up to GA quality. Here are some other suggestions for further improvement.

Lead

  • "Township" has somewhat different meanings in different countries. Would it be possible to briefly explain what it means in Australia? I couldn't find something good to link to. Perhaps, it the explanation is more than a few words, it could be turned into a note.
 Done I think... see if it is clear and concise now? 99of9 (talk) 10:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The expansive church grounds contain a cemetery dating back to the foundation that contains the remains of many notable Ashfield residents." - This is a bit puzzling. "Foundation" usually means the foundation of a building, but it seems doubtful that a building foundation would contain the remains of residents.
 Done replaced with a decade the year since we're talking about time, no point using relative terms. 99of9 (talk) 10:42, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The current rector is the Reverend Andrew Katay." - Generally, the Manual of Style suggests leaving off the academic titles and many honorifics. In this case, "rector" is sufficient. Also, "current" is vague. Suggestion: "Andrew Katay has been the rector since X" or "In 2010, Andrew Katay is the rector."
 Done 99of9 (talk) 12:06, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Early contributors

  • "Another benefactor was Dr William Bland" - Instead of "Dr", the Manual of Style prefers a brief description. "William Bland, the physician after whom Bland Street was named," would probably do. Ditto for other similar constructions in the article.
 Done except for one doctor I can't find a first name for. --99of9 (talk) 12:43, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Text sandwiches are a layout no-no in Wikipedia articles and so are images that overlap sections. The images in this article are excellent, but there are so many of them that they squash the text in places and overlap sections in other places. A variety of solutions are possible, including eliminating subheads for very short sections like "Early contributors", expanding the text, moving the images to different places, removing some of the images altogether and trusting the people who want to see more will click on the Commons link in External links. It might also help to render the inscription on the foundation stone plaque as plain text inside double quotation marks (not single) instead of using a text box.
 Done I've basically fixed this, but will keep an eye out as other things change. 99of9 (talk) 06:23, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Dr William Bland was a doctor and politician who had been sent to the colony for manslaughter after a pistol duel." - I know you mean that he was convicted of manslaughter elsewhere, but this might be interpreted to mean that he was sent to the colony in order to commit manslaughter.
 Done 99of9 (talk) 00:46, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Church building

  • "he purchased an additional 2½ acres of land" - Imperial measures should also be given in metric. I like to use the {{convert}} template, like this: 2.5 acres (1.0 ha). Ditto for other instances of imperial measures in the article.
 Done all areas. Not sure if there are any other imperials. 99of9 (talk) 10:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "After twenty-nine years," - Numbers from 10 up are usually rendered as digits unless they start a sentence. Ditto for other instances in the article.
 Done the 29 example, will look for others. 99of9 (talk) 01:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "These were built during the period 1874-1875 at a cost of around £150 - raised without the help of grants... " - Date ranges and page ranges take en dashes rather than hyphens. Rather than a spaced hyphen for a separator, use a spaced en dash or an unspaced em dash. I'll run a script to fix at least some of these.
 Done Thanks for doing this. 99of9 (talk) 12:34, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "from the Government" - Lowercase "government".
 Done 99of9 (talk) 01:14, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Music

  • "a "pressure equaliser". The façade pipes were sprayed to a dull gold colour, covering over the original diapering, described desparagingly at the time as "all over the pipes without much rhyme or reason; fleurs-de-lys in profusion, dots, bands, triangles in all the colours of the rainbow rioted in confusion".- Each direct quotation needs an inline citation to the source directly after the end punctuation of the quote.
 Done Although I wasn't sure whether the citation went after the final quote mark or after the following full stop.
  • Nothing inside a direct quote should be linked, so "fleurs-de-lys" in the quotation above should be unlinked. You might add a note that explains it or recast the sentence in a way that allows you to link. Ditto for the links inside the quote in the "Site development" section.
 Done I think this is an unfortunate decision by the MOS. I think most of these links would have been useful to the reader, but it would be excessively verbose to recast the quotes just to include the wikilinks (especially those in the foundation stone quote).99of9 (talk) 12:32, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "carried out by R. A. and D. A. Wiltshire.[31][27]" - It's customary to arrange serial citation in ascending order. [27][31} would be the correct order here, and similar sequences in the article should be made ascending.
 Done I think I found them all. 99of9 (talk) 12:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This necessitated removal of floor joints" - Should that be floor joists rather than "joints"?
 Done :-) 99of9 (talk) 12:56, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The 1883 Hill and Son pipe organ, located in the north-eastern corner of the transept." - Captions consisting solely of a sentence fragment don't take a terminal period.
 Done throughout article. 99of9 (talk) 11:25, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Site development

  • "It cost £625 10s" - Most readers will recognize the pound symbol but may not know what 10s means. Should this be linked or spelled out on first use?
 Done wikilinked 99of9 (talk) 10:55, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Surrounding parishes

  • "As the population of Sydney's Inner West grew, many of the Anglican churches in the area were planted by the congregation of St John's... " - "Planted" might be misunderstood. Would "established" be better?
 Done 99of9 (talk) 11:39, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rectors

  • The Manual of Style advises turning bulleted and numbered lists into straight prose if feasible. I think the two long lists near the bottom of the article would be fine as straight with a little tinkering, and that's what I'd advise. WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists has details. Ditto for the short list in the "Cemetery" section.
 Done --99of9 (talk) 12:31, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • WP:MOSBOLD advises against using bolding for emphasis. I would simply unbold all of the bolded names of people in the two lists.
 Done I think this is an unfortunate decision by the MOS. The bolding certainly helped if someone wanted to look up a particular rector (e.g. if he was referred to elsewhere in the article). 99of9 (talk) 12:19, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Current ministry

  • Maybe just "ministry" and then specifying the starting date for Katay. The idea is to avoid creating an article with many words like "today", "now", and "currently" that will seem up-to-date five years from now but won't be.
 Done 99of9 (talk) 11:37, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "There are currently three Sunday services at Ashfield, and two at Five Dock." - This may not be worth adding since it is probably subject to change, and most readers will not find the information useful.
Not sure I agree on this one, congregations are where the most significant ministry of a church happens. They seem fitting for a section about the church's ministry, and give a sense of the size of the ministry. Also they typically change about as often as rectors, so this is no more time sensitive than the rector. --99of9 (talk) 10:41, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Map

 Done 99of9 (talk) 01:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rajalakshmi Engineering College

[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 because… As the article does not contain the data of number of undergraduates, postgraduates, academic staffs and faculty members in college. So kindly provide the details in the article and also provide the total college area size in acres. Also add the history and achievement of the college in the article. And also give more information in the linked article of Automobile Department Of Rajalakshmi Engineering College in the article.

Thanks, Vignesh100992 (talk) 12:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • This article has two major cleanup banners, relating to lack of references and non-Wikipedia style, which specifically disqualify it for peer review. I have no idea who the above request to "kindly provide" further details is aimed at but I think there is basic misunderstanding about the function of a peer review. I have closed the review. Brianboulton (talk) 23:54, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Appley Dapply's Nursery Rhymes

[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 because ... I'd like to take it to GA and FA. What does it need to make FA? I need to know where it is weak. Forget contemporary reviews - I haven't found any. If there is something you think could be said better with a tweak here and there, let me know or rewrite it yourself. I don't have ownership issues. I'll be looking at this article over and over in the next couple of weeks to catch typos, revise a bit, enter pics, etc. but I need your input. I would very much like to have one of the Potter articles I've been working on for some time make it to FA. Not for a gold star that I can put on my brag page, but to know one article has been honed to the point where it can stand with other FA articles. Thanks, Susanne2009NYC (talk) 00:01, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: , here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • Hill Top is linked twice in the Background section - the second link, which is a dab - should be removed per WP:OVERLINK
Done.
  • Randolph Caldecott is also linked twice in one section, watch for overlinking - usually one link in the lead and one at first mention in the text are enough (so move the Norman Warne link up to the first mention of him). Captions and refs may also have repeated links.
Done.
  • It is not clear to me how the rhymes are derivative work - I do not know of a pre-existing rhyme about Appley Dapply or any of the other characters mentioned here (unlike the Country Mouse / City Mouse book she wrote). See ...but her editor Norman Warne preferred her original (rather than her derivative work) and offered only modest encouragement.
  • I would identify who Fruing is at the first mention of him (not the second as is now done)
Done.
  • I think of "in tandem with" as related to two things, but this was released not with one other book (total of two) but with two other books (total of three). See Applely Dapply's Nursery Rhymes was released in October 1917 in tandem with a revised edition of Peter Rabbit's Painting Book and the new Tom Kitten's Painting Book.[10]
Done.
  • Summary starts with The text of Appley Dapply's Nursery Rhymes was reset in 2002 and entirely new reproductions of the illustrations completed. Is there any reason not to put this at the end of the section so that it is somewhat chronological?
Done.
  • The single stanza is accompanied by an illustration Potter believed to be the finest she ever produced.[9] - Why not include this illustration as an image in the article? Both the Composition and Merchandise sections have no images and could use one each. Background also lacks an image - perhaps one of Potter herself?
Done.
  • MacDonald has already been identified with her full name so just use "MacDonald" instead in Ruth K. MacDonald believes the illustrations are some of Potter's best, but the book suffers from its small format ...
Done.
  • I would mention that it is still in print and the number of languages it has been translated into - see my FAC comments on Miss Moppet.
  • I would add the text to WikiSource (only free one not there) and link to an online version that shows all the illustrations too.
  • Is the official Peter Rabbit website from Warne a useful External Link?
Done.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:41, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the review! It's very helpful! I've taken care of some things, but others may take some looking about. I hope to finish it in the next few days. Susanne2009NYC (talk) 01:15, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Boys Don't Cry (film)

[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 because of the relevance of the film itself as well as the life of Brandon Teena. I have spent about a month or more editing the article, expanding it in all areas neccessary, transforming it from what it was previously (full of repetitive inacurate, un-sourced and poorly writen information) and adding further information. There may be a few spelling errors and typos because I have been unable to edit the article on Microsoft Word since my laptop is being fixed. I think as the article progresses further it may become Good Article and once it improves from there I hope to modify it into Featured Article shape. I would like some constructive information and what not on how to improve the current state of the article and fix it wherever applicable.

Thanks in advance, Ashton 29 (talk) 16:18, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Belovedfreak

First of all, well done for the work you've done so far. It's an important article and it would be great to see this featured. I enjoyed reading it, but I think it still needs some work before it gets to GA-level. One big problem I can see is the prose. Apart from typos which you've explained above, the structure of sentences and flow could use some work. I would recommend asking someone uninvolved with the article to go through the whole thing and give it a good copyedit. I'll make some recommendations here, but these are not exhaustive:

Lead *"the film stars Hilary Swank as a transgender man who pursues a relationship with a young woman ... only to be raped and murdered weeks later by male acquaintances after discovering Teena had female genitalia." - the structure of the sentence here implies that Teena was murdered after Teena discovered Teena had female genitalia. I hope you see what I mean; that "after discovering" applies to the transgender man who is raped and murdered, not the male acquaintances. *You have both transgender and transgendered (as adjectives) in the article. Other than in quotes, pick one and stick to it for consistency.

  • "...the film is somewhat dramatized..." - somewhat is unnecessary here. It's either dramatized or it's not.

I used this because parts of the film were dramatized, such as the fact that Lana and Brandon continued dating after Lana discovered he was actually biologically a female. In the film, their relationship is actually stregnethed after this is discovered, arguably while the real Lana only continued seeing Brandon as a friends and strictly that. Ashton 29 (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, but the way I see it, you've already established that it's based on a true story, so we know it's not completely fictional.--BelovedFreak 10:07, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"After reading about the murder of Brandon Teena while in college, director Kimberly Peirce pursued and researched the case as well as Teena's life intently and worked on a screenplay for the film for almost five years." - this sentence is awkward, particularly as well as Teena's life intently. "as well as Teena's life" should be separated with commas, paretheses, dashes or whatever. It's still a little awkward though. How did she pursue the case exactly? Presumably she wasn't investigating it? *"Jones' book initially inspired the screenplay" - this is a little unclear. My first instinct is that it inspired it or it didn't, you shouldn't need initially. I'm not sure though. Was there a significant change in the script? In which case, you could say that Jones' book inspired the original screenplay, or the first draft or something.

Yes, Peirce based idea's for a movie on Jones' book and the two were going to film it however they parted ways and Peirce began writing her own script.Ashton 29 (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"however Peirce chose to film her vision of the story" - this bit is unclear too. What exactly does it mean by "her vision"? Did she disagree with Jones' take on things? Did she consciously decide to add fictional elements to make a better story?

As above.Ashton 29 (talk)

*"Most of the characters were based on the real life people" could probably just be Most of the characters were based on real people *"Swank was awarded the 1999 Academy Awards for Best Actress" - presumably this should not be plural. Also, try to avoid the repetition ("awarded the award") *"Amongst the praise, the film has since been cited as one of the most controversial and talked-about films of 1999..." - I'm not quite sure what "amongst the praise" means here. Are you saying that being cited as controversial is also praise? Or that it's in contrast to the praise? I'm not sure that being controversial & talked-about is inherently good or bad.

Changed to "in contrast to..."Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"The film's title coincides with the song of the same name..." - strange way of putting it. Was it named after the song? If so, say so. If not (or we don't know) you could say it shares the name of the song, which is featured on the soundtrack. Coincides makes it sound random, but I'm sure it wasn't completely random since the song is used.

Plot *"After receiving physical threats for dating a person's sister..." - this sounds awkward. I'm not sure how you could reword it, but presumably he didn't receive threats for dating a person's sister. Presumably it was because he was found out to be female and had deceived either said sister or said person. However, I don't think you need to go into this much detail. It's been a while since I saw the film and I can't remember this bit too well, so I'm not sure what to suggest.

This is correct. I did not write any of the plot section so most of these issues have gone undetected my me. Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

.*"Brandon becomes romantically involved with Lana, who is unaware of his situation." - this is a little vague. I'm guessing you mean unaware that he is in fact female, but it should probably be more explicit. "His situation" could also mean the fact that he's been kicked out of his home, or involved in fights.

Brandon grew up as a very rebellious person and his rebellion had gotten him into trouble (stealing cars, forging checks, etc.) so I changed situation to "rebellious past". Ashton 29 (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Brandon is detained for charges..." - what charges? (I don't know if this is clear in the film, but if it is, it would be nice to know here.)

Brandon was forging checks I believe, however I will have to clarify this by re-watching that part of the film. Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"Lotter, Nissen, and Candace..." - why are some of them referred to by surname and some by first name? Is this how they are known in the film?

Like I said, I didn't write any of the plot, so I have fixed this and just used their first names as opposed to their last. Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"Lotter, Nissen, and Candace discover Brandon has female genitalia and tell Lana after forcing him to remove his pants." - how do they discover this? Why do they force him to remove his pants? Is that part of the discovery, or is it to humiliate him after the fact?

  • Perhaps you could make it clearer what Lana's initial reaction is when they tell her?
  • "...then beat and violently rape him..." - as opposed to gently raping him? I don't mean to be facetious, I remember the scene, but I don't think violently is really necessary. They rape him and beat him, so I think we can assume it's violent.

I think what the author of the plot section was trying to convey was that while every rape is violent and unpleasent, Brandon's rape was especially horrible.Ashton 29 (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, that's fine. If you're taking this to GA though, you need to be 100% comfortable with what's here, not just the previous authors. An article like this attracts a lot of different editors, so it's hard to keep the prose cohesive and flowing well. I won't change this part, I'll leave it up to you, but just be vary of interpreting things too much or straying too much from just stating the facts (in an engaging, readable way, of course!).--BelovedFreak 10:19, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"...in an isolated lot..." - is this a parking lot? If this was just for a US readership, I wouldn't ask, but lot is not a familiar word in this context for many readers outside the US.

I don't think it was a parking lot anyway, so I changed it to "isolated location", the area was pressumably in the middle of nowhere. I'm not sure where it occured in real life but the film is a movie, a work of fiction BASED on an actual occurance and exactly that.Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • "Though injured, Brandon escapes through a bathroom window." - This is ok, but I was thinking "well, why shouldn't he escape, just because he's injured?" It's not a complete non sequitur (I guess it depends on his injuries), but seemed a little strange to me.

*"All the while, Lana and Brandon dream..." - so they dream at the same time that Brandon is discovered to be female, raped, beaten, escapes through the window and files a police report? *"One evening, Nissen and Lotter get drunk, and despite Lana's warnings, decide to kill Brandon..." - what is meant by Lana's warnings? How does she warn them? *"...Brandon, who is hiding in a shed on Candace's property" - the timescale is not clear. How long after the attack is this? Is he hiding in a shed that night? Or has he been hiding out since the attack? Or since filing the police report?

If you remember in the film, Brandon had been at Lana's in her room while Lana was packing for Memphis (I think). Lana heard someone arrive and told Brandon to hide, so he left by jumping out of her window. Lana then goes to see who it is and runs back into her bedroom when finding out that it's John.Ashton 29 (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, could be clearer in the article.--BelovedFreak 10:21, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"...but is stopped by John" - why the sudden switch to using his first name? *"...Lana wakes up on Brandon's dead body, then falls into her mother's arms" - "falls into her arms" is a little romanticised; also, how does she fall into her arms when she's presumably lying on the floor/on Brandon's body?

Background *"Kimberly Peirce's interest in Brandon Teena's ordeal ..." - ordeal is not totally neutral. Don't get me wrong, it clearly was a horrific ordeal, but we have to be careful to not be too emotional. Perhaps call it the "case"? Or just "Brandon Teena's murder"? Or even just "KP's interest in Brandon Teena"?

  • "Teena's life and her eventual murder" - through most of the article you refer to Teena with male pronouns. This really needs to be consistent as it will already be confusing for some reason. I know some of the quotes differ, but outside quotes it should be consistent. I also realise this is controversial, and I'm not saying you should use him or her, but just that it needs to be consistent.

I still need to fix a lot of this. *This first sentence is perhaps a bit unwieldy - maybe it could be split? Or just shortened a bit (eg. you could lose "that had been published in", if you rearrange it slightly) *Is "re-calls" an acceptable spelling in US English? Not recalls? *"Peirce became considerably engrossed" - engrossed doesn't really need an adverb like considerably *pro-longed? Not prolonged? *"pro-longed her attentiveness further" - is a bit... wordy. *"Teena was a trans man whom had been brutally raped " - should be who surely. Also, I'm not sure about brutally for neutrality. It's probably ok. However, I would start the section with this sentence, that would be more logical. Otherwise, Peirce is reading about Teena's murder before you've actually said he was murdered. *"murdered by two former acquaintances" - why former? They still knew each other. *You have a repetition of "brutal" - while it's probably ok to use the word, best to to repeat it in such quick succession. *"Pierce acknowledged she looked beyond the brutality..." - acknowledged is not strictly WP:NPOV here, it implies that it is an indisputable fact that she looked beyond the brutality, and that she is affirming that fact. Actually, it's her opinion that she did so. I would just have "Pierce said she looked beyond the brutality..." *"admiring her "audacity"" - again, watch the use of pronouns. I know she uses female pronouns to refer to Teena, but this is not a quote here. *While we're at it, also check your spelling of Pierce. You have both Pierce and Peirce (whole article will need checking!)

*"Teena's outright search for freedom rather than capatalize on his sexual transgender," - is this the right use of transgender (ie. as a noun?)

I'm not quite sure what you mean here. Should it be changed to sexual identity crisis? Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

What I mean is, I'm not familiar with the use of transgender as a noun, ie. "his transgender". I'm buy no means an expert here, so by all means correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounded strange to me. I'm not sure what I'd change it to, I'll have a think.--BelovedFreak 20:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"...including meeting the real Lana Tisdel ..." - the real Lana? As opposed to the fake one? The fictional one? (I'd just have including meeting Lana Tisdel :) )

Yes, my mistake, there's so many people and then so many characters based on these real life people that I confuse myself! Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Towards the end of this section you use the first names of real people (as opposed to characters), which is inconsistent


Casting

*"The interest from the LGBT..." - the LGBT? LGBT community?

Not too sure what the problem was here. Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I've never heard the use of "the LGBT", as if LGBT is a noun. I've only heard it as an adjective (LGBT people, the LGBT community etc) To me (and maybe it's just me) The interest from the LGBT sounds a bit like The interest from the gays.--BelovedFreak 20:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"High profile actors were drawn away at the request of their agents because of the on-slaught of stigma surrounding the role" - this comes across a bit more strongly than it does in the source. I'm not sure there was an on-slaught (onslaught?) of stigma, or even whether or not you can have an onslaught of stigma. The source also says that some performers were not sent to audition, not that high profile actors were kept away.

  • It would be interesting to know how old Swank was when she auditioned - to give context to the lie that she told about being 21.

*"Swank's anonymity persuaded Peirce to cast her, because she expressed..." - this is a bit awkward *When discussing Swank's preparations, you could perhaps link to Breast binding; not a great article, but it would give a little context. *"Swank had earned only $75 per day for her work on Boys Don't Cry, culminating in a total of $3,000" - does this need to be had earned rather than earned? Also, does it need three citations? If a source is reliable, it should be enough on its own.

I think the three citations are worthy because some are more informative than others. And I think one article only mentions what she earned rather than the total. I'm not sure, but I think three would suffice.Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"Lana Tisdel, Teena's 19-year-old love interest." - "love interest" sounds a bit Hollywood. What about "girlfriend"? *It might be interesting to say how old Sevigny was when she auditioned, to add context to the fact that Peirce thought she was too young.

Sevigny was 22 in 1996. I find it strange that Peirce had considered her "too old" when Lana was actually 19 while dating Brandon. Perhaps Peirce thought she needed a more mature actress, professionally. In 1996, Sevigny only had two film credits: Trees Lounge and Kids. Sevigny looks a lot younger than she actually is as well(especially in Kids, she was a 21-year-old playing a teenager around only 16 or 17). Ashton 29 (talk) 13:34, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*"Peirce then decided that Sevigny would be suited playing Lana Tisdel, having looked old enough before filming began." - awkward sentence *"Peter Sarsgaard, who plays John Lotter, the violent charismatic ex-convict, former boyfriend..." - this is a bit awkward, also, I'm not sure whose description that is of him. I think "former boyfriend" would suffice *You have "Sarsgaard" repeated 4 times in 3 sentences, try to avoid this *"Sarsgaard later commented in regards to his character, as how Sarsgaard made him "likeable, sympathetic even" was because he wanted the audience..." - this is not good grammar *"Peirce had cast Alicia Goranson..." - why Peirce had cast rather than Peirce cast? <S.*"Like Sevigny, Goranson..." - is there a source for this sentence? If it's supported by the previous citation, I'd move it to the end of this sentence. Principal photography *"The budget acquired dictated some of the filming process..." - this long sentence could be clearer. I'm not sure what "coincide with the films budget" means. *"The most notable omission..." - most notable according to whom?Also, how is it an omission, and also an inaccurate portrayal? If something's been portrayed, it's not been omitted *"...when in actuality a third African American male, Phillip DeVine..." - "in actuality"'s not necessary here. Is it relevant that he was African American? Was he the third African American male to be killed? Or the third person (after Brandon and Lisa?) *"These locations—outside of Nebraska—(where most of the authentic locations in which the real-life incidents occurred) were used mainly due to budget constraints." - this is awkward. I'm not sure the dashes help. .*"...techniques that saw the audiences delve into Brandon's situation" - could be worded better *"Initially, the budget allowed Boys Don't Cry for ten weeks of editing..." - allowed for? *"This granted the project an additional twenty-two weeks..." - I think this should be part of the previous sentence; the previous one doesn't make sense on its own. *Was it really 10 weeks editing? Not filming? *"Brandon's sex change surgery ... the sex reassignment procedure." - I wouldn't link both of these terms. I'd maybe link the first one to Sex reassignment surgery (female-to-male) and leave the second one unlinked. There's no need to link to Sex reassignment surgery also. Cinematography *"...particularly when the dimly lit Nebraska landscape." - something missing here? *"Although many scenes filmed occur mostly at night..." - this is a long sentence and is awkwardly worded towards the end. *"Peirce also used visual inspiration from older films..." - this sentence is also a bit unwieldy, I had to read it a couple of times to get it to make sense. *"Peirce used the camera to transform Brandon's experience onto the cohesive film." - Not really sure what this means *"Time lapse photography is used in several sequences, but more significantly in the scene right before Brandon is stripped naked when him and Lana discuss..." - think there could be some commas here. Also, "he and Lana"?

Music *Is kareoke an acceptable US spelling, or is that a typo?

  • "where it appears subtly in the background" - subtly sounds like WP:OR

Themes *I think you need to be a bit more specific when talking about academics and critics; state who exactly thinks these things. Also, try to avoid making quite sweeping statements which are then supported by a single article or review. *"...validating the academic view that the film is about..." - I'm not sure about this. You're saying the marketing of the film validated academics' opinions about the themes? *"...and the lines "who are you?" are even uttered..." - that's just one line, not multiple *"Peirce's film has "captured the mystique and eerie loneliness" " - quotes like this, and others soon afterwards, need attribution. Who is saying this? Critical reception *Strings of several citations disrupt the flow visually. This can be avoided by linking with a single citation to a footnote that then holds the relevant source citations. (see Somerset County Cricket Club in 2009 for an example.)

I'm not sure what you mean, well I know what you mean I think, however I am still unsure how to do this. Do you mean remove citations that aren't at the end of a sentance to increase the overall flow? Ashton 29 (talk) 13:28, 4 October 2010 (UTC) [reply]

*"Some critics declared ... One reviewer considered..." - it's ok to summarise like this because you then go into detail with specific critics, but here you have quotes again, without attribution. *"...mostly due to its intensified subject matter..." - what's intensified subject matter? Controversy *"...the critical and commercial praise showered upon Boys Don't Cry..." - showered upon is a bit over-enthusiastic

Other than the prose, here are a few more things I noticed:

*Check for links to dismbiguation pages. You can use the link in the toolbox on this page. Whenever I click those links, it tells me my access is "disabled". I pressume it has something to do with my internet server, Mozilla. When I get my laptop (hopefully within the next week) back I will be able to use these links thoroughly.Ashton 29 (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC) [reply]

*Try to avoid overlinking common words. Some of the words to consider not linking are: gay, sensational, mythologize, American public, college. Those are just a few I picked out. Look at all the links and decide whether or not they are helpful to the reader. When checking links, check out where pastime goes to.

*In the infobox you have seven people listed as "stars". Are they all really stars of the film? The theatrical poster, for example, only lists Swank, Sevigny and Sarsgaard. *Some sections could use some more citations, eg. Music, Themes, Response Added a few more, still a fair bit to go in regards to themes. Ashton 29 (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC) *In the "see also" section, I don't think there's any need to link to Peirce's next film. Queer Cinema redirects to New Queer Cinema so you might want to consider if that's appropriate. I wouldn't, personally. There's a connection to NQC, but the film's not even mentioned at the NQC article. You could add a link to the LGBT portal as well as the film one. [reply]

Just adding to this: do you want to link to New Queer Cinema? From what I've read of NQC, Boys Don't Cry has been linked to it, although not definitively. Many readers (even LGBT ones) won't realise what NQC is about, and when they get to that article, there is no mention of Boys Don't Cry. If you're sure you want to link to it in the "see also" section, link to the full New Queer Cinema rather than Queer Cinema, as that's a little confusing.--BelovedFreak 11:06, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I've not gone through the references with a fine toothed comb, but you'll need to check that all of the sources adhere to WP:RS.
  • Check citations to make sure formatting is consistent and that there is enough information for verifiability (eg. dates, accessdates for web sources, page numbers, authors)

*There is one dead link marked, this will need to be addressed before a GA nomination. Check the others using the tool in the toolbox above. I can't find a sufficent website that mentions this article, but I do know it's page number in the actual newspaper. Could we just use the issue of the newspaper itself and the page number as a citation instead? Ashton 29 (talk) 13:43, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hope you don't mind, I've unstricken one comment because the citations still need work. I can help with that. Yes, if a source is from an offline source like a newspaper, as long as there's enough information for it to be verified, you don't need a link to an online version.--BelovedFreak 11:03, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments help. I know there's quite a lot here, but don't be put off. The article's really looking good, but needs a bit more work before GA. Let me know if you have any questions and good luck with further developing the article.--BelovedFreak 21:32, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

As far as the citations go, I can do some work there with the templates to make sure they're all consistent and neat & tidy and fill in any missing bits I find. WOuld you like me to do that? There's no one "correct" way of doing it for GA, or even FA, so I don't want to just go in there and unilaterally change things around, but if you want me to, I will. Consistency and adherence to the WP:MOS is picked up on at FAC although it's not as important at GAN.--BelovedFreak 14:22, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
References comments from Belovedfreak

Ok, I've tidied up the citations, they're fairly consistent now. You may want to remove publisher details if you think they add too much clutter for little gain. I've also moved citations down to the references section (when you're in the edit box; see also WP:LDR). I apologise if this is confusing at first glance, but it removes the citation details from the main part of the text and makes it easier to see what you're editing. All the citations are then in a list at the end. A few queries about refs:

  • The legal citation, currently No. 2 could use some more details. I'm unfamiliar with how these things work and did the best I could, but there are some empty fields in the citations template that could be filled, by someone in the know.

*Reference currently at No. 12, the Boston Herald one, could either do with a web link or a page number

  • Reference currently at No. 22, The Last Days of Disco DVD - I don't see the point of this reference. it doesn't support the statement preceding it (ie. that Peirce cast Sevigny on the basis of that performance). The Last Days of Disco article is already linked, so the reference doesn't add anything.

On the DVD commentary, it is mentioned that Chloe's performance had impressed director Kimberly Peirce so much that she wanted to cast Chloe in Boys. So I think it's suffice to stay. Ashton 29 (talk) 11:45, 27 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Reference currently at No. 23, Gay Today, could either do with a web link or a page number
  • Reference currently at No. 33, Herald Journal, could either do with a web link or a page number

*Currently ref no. 39 is the Seattle Post. Is that the full name of the newspaper? I tried to find it but we don't have an article on a paper with that title. Should it be the Seattle Post-Intelligencer or the Seattle Post Globe maybe? This one could also do with either a web link or a page number I just searched for this article. It's the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, so I've added that as well as a link.

  • What is currently ref No. 41 doesn't go anywhere or give any details. To the reader, it displays "2004, p. 117", with a link that goes nowhere. In the code, it says <ref name="Hausmann 117">{{harvnb|2004|p=117}}</ref>, but there is no Hausmann referred to elsewhere. I think perhaps a reference was removed somewhere along the line.
  • I changed the Entertainment Weekly link and date (Gleiberman, currently no. 50). The link that was there was dead or broken so I searched for the review and came up with one from October 15 1999, which I presume is the correct one as it is Gleiberman, and he calls Swank a "revelation". Please amend this if I've got it wrong.

With the following sources, I'm concerned about their reliability. If I was reviewing this at GAN, I'd ask you, what makes the following reliable:

*Films101.com

  • Filmsite.org (is owned by AMC, which is a start, but I'm still concerned) Kept this one because it's owned by AMC, in the mean time, however, I will look for something to replace it, if it's really a problem.
    • I personally don't know of any particular problem with Filmsite. Just be aware that sometimes sources are questioned even if they are owned by "reliable" publishers it the source itself has been demonstrated as unreliable. As I say, I don't know of any problems with this one. Another way to demonstrate reliablility is if you can show that your source has been cited by other reliable sources.--BelovedFreak 11:08, 21 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

*Chasing the Frog That's it for the moment. :) --BelovedFreak 20:46, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

WP:RS says, "Reliable sources may therefore be published materials with a reliable publication process; they may be authors who are regarded as authoritative in relation to the subject in question; or they may be both." For filmsite.org, I think that AMC's ownership of the website indicates a reliable publication process. I cannot say the same for films101.com and chasingthefrog.com, which do not appear to have any reliable publishers. Erik (talk | contribs) 21:53, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Erik

Hello, the article looks great so far! It is definitely a well-explored topic for Wikipedia's readers. You said that you want to continue the push toward Featured Article status, which I heartily encourage. It may be worth delving into publications to find chapters about this film. The way I've researched this is to go to WorldCat.org and search for 'Boys Don't Cry" under "Books". So if the phrase is in the book's title or one of its listed chapters, the books will be listed. Here are a few references I found using this approach: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, and 10. There are probably more, but I decided to stop there. :P I do not have time to look at the article critically now, but I will find some later today. Erik (talk | contribs) 12:02, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gumbo

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I was very hungry one day and looked up this article on one of my family's favorite foods. I was embarrassed by its quality and have rewritten the article in the last week or so. This is the first time I've tackled an article about food, and I'm unsure how to judge its quality. I'd welcome any comments, especially those on its organization, whether its appropriately sourced and whether it makes sense - both to those who have cooked and eaten this dish and those who have never heard of it.

I deliberately tried to rely on scholarly works and avoided commercial cookbooks. For this article, I have a broad disdain for cookbooks, partially because there are literally thousands of gumbo recipes out there and mostly because the few cookbooks I consulted that had any background information on the dish universally had misinformation in them (even as simple as when New Orleans was founded, or how to define a Cajun). That didn't leave me with a lot of confidence in them. Thanks, Karanacs (talk) 19:06, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

Lede

  • Why is "gumbo z'herbes" in bold?

Etymology

  • "In the language of the native Choctaw people, ..."
    Would it be better to state "native American" instead, seeing how the preceding statement puts emphasis on West Africa?

Variations

  • "In theory, any combination of meat or seafood can be used, but in practice oysters are generally the only seafood used in a meat-based gumbo, and sausage and ham are the only meats used in a seafood-based gumbo."
    I think this should be shifted to the end of the paragraph and rephrased as "In theory, meat can be added to seafood-based gumbo and vice versa; in practice, generally only oysters are added to meat-based gumbo, and sausages and ham to seafood-based versions."

Thickeners

  • "Okra is more likely to be used as a thickener in seafood gumbos rather than those with meat."
    I believe "rather" is redundant here.
  • "... before other vegetables and meats or seafood are added."
    It seems uncertain if seafood is a plural noun, so I suggest "... before other vegetables (and seafood or meat) are added."
  • "The longer the cooking process, the darker the roux."
    This seems to be an incomplete sentence to me.

Creole vs Cajun

  • "... celery was rarely used in Creole gumbo, but it is now much more common."
    This sentence structure makes "it" refer to celery, which poses the confusing question on why would the existence of celery be more common now...

Gumbo z'herbes

  • "During Lent, when Catholics were traditionally expected to abstain from meat, a different type of gumbo was often served."
    "In the past, Catholics were traditionally expected to abstain from meat during Len, and a different type of gumbo was often served."
  • "Known as gumbo z'herbes ..."
    Why is "gumbo z'herbes" in italics here but not anywhere else?
  • "... combined a large number of greens – typically including turnips, ..."
    I believe "including" is redundant.

Background

  • "Nobles believes the ..."
    Author Cynthia Lejeune Nobles should be identified here rather than the later Development subsection. I think it is also better to explicitly state her as "Cookbook author" than just "author" to show what expertise she is supposed to have.
  • "... learned new methods of cooking and to identify edible indigenous plants."
    "... learned new methods of cooking and identifying edible indigenous plants." or "... learned new methods of cooking and ways to identify edible indigenous plants."
  • "... the art of making sausage."
    "... the art of making sausages."?

Origin

  • "... its uncertain etymology makes it difficult to pinpoint the exact origins of the food."
    I think "pinpoint" makes "exact" redundant.
  • "When the Acadians moved to Louisians in the mid-18th century, ..."
    Louisiana?
  • "... Acadian colonists substituted local ingredients for those commonly included in the fish stew. Instead of the original fish, settlers used shellfish."
    "... Acadian colonists substituted local ingredients for those commonly included in the original stew. Instead of fish, settlers used shellfish."
  • "They instead served gumbo over corn grits, a pairing common in the stews of native tribes."
    I think not only is "instead" redundant, it is pretty jarring to the reading flow here.
  • "This, and the use of ..."
    "This manner of serving, and the use of ..."?
  • "According to legend, in 1722 female French colonists gathered in New Orleans ..."
    I think it would be best to insert a comma after the year; I can easily imagine several readers misreading it as "According to legend, 1722 female French colonists gathered in New Orleans ..." (overlooking the "in").

Development

  • "It gained a broader profile after the death of Senator Allen Ellender. Ellender, a native of Terrebonne Parish, had often cooked gumbo for his colleagues, including five American presidents."
    "It gained a broader profile after the death of Senator Allen Ellender. A native of Terrebonne Parish, Louisiana, Ellender had often cooked gumbo for his colleagues, including five American presidents."
  • "The dish became more widely popular in the 1980s, when Chef Paul Prudhomme's popularity spurred interest in Creole and Cajun cooking."
    I know the gist behind saying the popularity of a chef spurred this interest, but it just does not sound right to me (lack of specifics). Was it because he hosted a popular TV cajun cooking show, or did newspapers tout his cajun recipes as the next biggest thing?

Preparation and serving

  • "... the okra and/or roux are cooked first.", "... with water and/or stock ..."
    Undesirable construct per MOS:ANDOR.
  • "Occasionally, meat (never seafood) is browned beforehand or in the same pot as the okra ..."
    "... browned beforehand or in the same pot ..." does not compute... the first is a time frame, the second a physical location.
  • "According to author Cynthia Lejeune Nobles, ..."
    I think she does not need another full introduction again so soon.

Social aspects

  • "Before refrigeration, the dish was also an efficient way to finish leftover perishable meats and seafoods."
    Why "before refrigeration"? I think it is also better to replace "finish" with "use up".

Images

Just the above issues. I think this is quite a good article for a food. Jappalang (talk) 08:47, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much, Jappalang! I'll get on these within the next few days. Karanacs (talk) 15:10, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of defunct colleges and universities in Kansas

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Please review List of defunct colleges and universities in Kansas--Paul McDonald (talk) 05:20, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Note: I'll do a full review in a couple of days. In the meantime you could fix a couple of disambiguation links (use the tool on the right to identify), and also try and fix the dead links in refs 6, 37 and 38. Brianboulton (talk) 20:53, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: The dablinks seem to have been fixed, but there is still a dead link in ref 30: Midland Lutheran College. Other points:-

Prose
  • The form of your first sentence is specifically rejected by WP:MOSBEGIN. Furthermore, the next sentence: "For the purposes of this list..." etc. looks like OR, defining your own terms. There is also considerable redundancy in your wording. I suggest you begin with something like: "This listing of defunct higher education institutions in Kansaa includes accredited, degree-granting institutions and bona fide institutions of higher learning if they operated before accreditation existed. All have hosted their primary campus within the state of Kansas, and all have since discontinued operations."
  • After the definition in the opening paragraph the lead should be extend so that it becomes a brief summary of the whole article/list.
  • The "List details" section should not be broken up into so many very brief subsections. The prose should not have so many short, one-sentence paragraphs. The bullet-point format should be avoided entirely; thus the "University vs college/school" subsection needs to be rewritten in prose format.
List
  • This sentence: "Records for several of the schools have yet to be located and verified at this time of this writing to accurately determine how long the schools operated" makes me wonder whether the article/list is yet ready for peer review. With all the ?? entries in the list, the project still seems very much like work in progress. Is there any special reason why you have sought a peer review at this point, rather than when the project is more developed?
  • I am unable to understand some of the entries in the listing. For exampl, what does "Listing found" mean?
  • Some of the notes lack citations
  • How does Utopia College, which granted only "certificates", fit the definition in your opening paragraph? It's the "only" that bothers me.
See also
  • What is the relevance of the second and third entries here?
References
  • Look at 4
  • Many of the online references are not properly formatted, e.g. 7, 8, etc
  • Others do not appear to be high quality reliable sources, e.g. 9, 10 etc
  • All online sources should have retrieval dates.

In short, an awful lot of work is still necessary on this list. As I am unable to watch peer reviews at the moment, please contact my talkpage if you have any queries from this review. Brianboulton (talk) 19:05, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Quick comment

I had looked at this before Brian indicated he would review it. One thing that worried me was citing only one source on the existence of a college, like Central Normal College, and then assuming it had to be defunct, with no other sources of information provided about it. Would it be considered defunct for this list if it had merged with another school or college? What if it had moved and/or changed its name? I suspect not, but unless more sources are provided, there is no way to know what happened to it and others listed here also known from just one source. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Tony Nader

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This biography article is short, but I think it covers an interesting subject. I believe it reflects all available information even though it's missing some key information, like date of birth. The lead section is just one paragraph, which meets the length standard in WP:LEAD. It could be stretched to two if a reviewer prefers. I think the refs are all good. In particular, I'd like help with copy editing. I think it can be a GA-quality article.

Thanks,   Will Beback  talk  08:48, 4 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments added by PanydThe muffin is not subtle 21:13, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a really good start and you obviously know a lot about the subject. The only general advice I would give you is to assume that everyone reading your article is as clueless as I am, and that most people don't want to click through to other links to learn about this article's subject. Which isn't to say that you need to include lots of irrelevant information; it's just to say that perhaps a few illuminative sentences wouldn't go amiss.

The lead needs a lot more context. I had to follow links to understand that the 'Global Country of World Peace' was even connected to the 'Transcendental Meditation Movement'. Even then I'm not entirely sure about the links. Is he head of the movement as well then? What does "Raja Nader Raam" or "Adi Ram" mean? Why is it significant that he was named this? I am very confused.

It would be a very good idea to look into that medical degree a little bit more. I know what it says on his website but finding out from a WP:RS whether or not he actually holds that degree seems like a good idea. I'm guessing, if he's worked at Harvard, that he does have it, but the article currently implies that it's a little fishy.

It would be good to clean up the 'drama' regarding his work in Massachusetts. At the moment I'm not entirely sure what he said he did at MIT. Nor am I sure what his conflict of interest could be as I don't know what he was researching.

Was he awarded his weight in gold by the Maharishi Global Development Fund? Why did they give him so much money? Why do they like his research? I need to know!

A brief sentence outlining the Maharishi Vedic Vibration Technology after its first mention would also be good and illustrative.

I'd really like a section on this guy's political views. Statements like the one made in April 2000 seem to be coming completely out of the blue to me (and I assume anyone else not familiar with his organisation's teachings). I'm sure with someone as outspoken as that you can find enough sources.

What is the mansion? Why is it the capitol of this country? What land is this country made out of? Why do they even exist? What are their stated goals? I know they already have an article written about them but small sentences to explain these things in shallow detail would really really help.

That's very helpful feedback. Unfortunately, about half of what you ask about is unanswerable. But much of it can be addressed, as you say, with a few illuminative sentences or descriptors. Thanks for taking the time to read and review the article.   Will Beback  talk  22:19, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Added notices at User talk:Casliber, User talk:Bibliomaniac15, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Food and drink‎, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Books, User talk:SuperHamster/Bacon Challenge 2011, and User talk:Kelapstick/Bacon Cabal. -- Cirt (talk) 10:33, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon was promoted to GA-quality in January 2010. Looking for some helpful feedback on how to further improve its quality status, with a mind towards possible FAC discussion in the future. Thank you for your time, -- Cirt (talk) 10:25, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Casliber

[edit]
  • "She gained an epiphany.." - ew, odd wording - "had an epiphany" or try something else entirely. "Great idea" or something like it in a thesaurus "Eureka moment"......
  • I think I'd combine the Author and "Research" sections into a "background" section or somesuch. They look too stubby as they are.
  • There are too many direct quotes - they are jarring to read if too numerous. I'd reword a few and de-quote.
  • Multiple recipes from the book were selected .... - "multiple" is a bit ambiguous here. I'd try and use an adjective closer to the actual number - eg "several" or "many" if over 10 or so.
  • Some context around the popularity of bacon. So a newer secondary source noting this book and subsequent bacon phenomena in recent years.

I just logged on for a minute and saw this. I will have more time to copyedit or make more suggestions later but thought I'd take a few minutes to get the ball rolling. Casliber (talk · contribs) 14:22, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hey, thanks very much! I addressed all of those comments, except for that last one. Do you mean something like creating an Impact subsection? -- Cirt (talk) 20:37, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Update: Okay, so far, I have located two sources I had used from 2006 and 2008 that are already in the article, and moved them to a final paragraph in the Reception section. -- Cirt (talk) 20:53, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, that's the sorta stuff I mean. I only skimmed over the article briefly but yes. Any more embellishment I think would be a big plus here. Getting the article to really place the book in the history of bacon's increased popularity. Casliber (talk · contribs) 21:35, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I created an Impact sect, will try to do some research, and add more to it. ;) -- Cirt (talk) 22:05, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Alright - it's generally a good idea to minimise repetition of particular words as much as possible, for instance in the Contents section, "recommend" is used twice in successive sentences. However this might be one of those times when repetition is unavoidable but if possible one should be changed.
  • I have a niggling issue with first para of the Background section - to me it just reads a little too much like the author blurb on a book back cover. If it could be buffed at all with other bio detail about Perry that'd be good, but if no material exists then so be it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casliber (talk • contribs)
  1. I copyedited the wording in the Contents subsection.
  2. I moved some paragraphs around in the Background subsection - perhaps this looks a bit better now?

-- Cirt (talk) 09:35, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

More:

  • Three bacon cookbooks have come out in the last few years: - better to put years (maybe just year range).
  • the book "helped drive the trend" of "cookbooks showcasing the versatility of bacon" - better to reword without quotes. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Casliber (talk • contribs)
  1. Sorry, my mistake, I added an end-quote here, this is a quotation.
  2. Done, reworded without quotes.

-- Cirt (talk) 10:14, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, can't think of anything else specific - good luck with it. Casliber (talk · contribs) 10:28, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks very much! ;) -- Cirt (talk) 10:30, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Herostratus

[edit]

Holy Moley. This is one long article. Can we cut it down some? It's a cookbook. It just seems a tad excessive. Here's a pass at the opening:

Everything Tastes Better with Bacon: 70 Fabulous Recipes for Every Meal of the Day is a book about cooking bacon, written by Sara Perry, an author, food commentator, and columnist for The Oregonian. It was first published in 2002 by San Francisco-based publisher Chronicle Books. In this book, Perry manifests her original concept of recipes combining sugar and bacon with over 70 recipes for bacon-flavored dishes, including desserts.
The book received positive reviews in publications including The St. Petersburg Times[1], The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette,[2] The Denver Post, [3] and The Dallas Morning News.[4] Recipes from the book were selected for inclusion in The Best American Recipes 2003-2004.[5][6]

Herostratus (talk) 04:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Oh, OK, comments go here. I commented on the talk page. It's pretty long and could use a good pruning in general. This article is longer than The Joy of Cooking or Mastering the Art of French Cooking. But it looks like a lot work went into it, so I don't know. There are a lot quotes. If it was me, I would remove all of the quotes from reviews, period. Herostratus (talk) 05:07, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Done. I have implemented the suggested changes to the lede as recommended by Herostratus (talk · contribs): [30]. Cheers, -- Cirt (talk) 06:27, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well that was easy. As to the rest: Cirt, I can see by your user page that you are a past master at good articles/featured articles, which is an important part of Wikipedia (and will even be more so in future) and which I know very little about. So I would otherwise defer to your judgment about what makes a good featured article. Cheers, Herostratus (talk) 16:56, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Thank you very much for the kind words about my past contributions to this project. It is most appreciated. -- Cirt (talk) 19:51, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Burger King

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I have done some work on the article after its delisting from GA status. I need some suggestions so I can get this back to GA status.

Thanks, Jeremy (blah blah • I did it!) 07:32, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I would look very carefully at all of the GA review comments and make sure that they have been addressed. Thanks for your ongoing work on this article and, as requested, here are some suggestions for improvement.

Lead
  •  Fixed - United States is generally not linked anymore , and is linked twice in the lead. Try to only add links that increase the reader’s understanding of the topic, or are subjects not generally known. A good rule of thumb is one link in the lead and one on first mention in body of the article – see WP:OVERLINK
  •  Fixed - Do the founders’ names (Burns and Kramer) need to be in the lead? I think they are only mentioned once in the history section.
  •  Fixed - Per the MOS, spell out billion on first use and indicate the abbreviation after in parentheses ‘’ On 2 September 2010, it was announced that the company had accepted a purchase offer from 3G Capital, a company backed by the Brazilian billionaires Jorge Paulo Lemann, Marcel Telles and Carlos Alberto Sicupira, in a deal valued at $3.26 billion (bn).’’
  •  Fixed - ”there are” seems too vague in ‘’ At the end of fiscal year 2009, Burger King reported that there are more than 12,000 outlets in 73 countries; 66% are in the United States and 90% are privately owned and operated.’’ I would use “it has” i.e. ‘’ At the end of fiscal year 2009, Burger King reported that it has more than 12,000 outlets …’’
  •  Fixed - Problem sentence (makes it sound as if others besides McLamore made major additions before this): ‘’ The Whopper, a sandwich that has since become Burger King's signature product, was the first major addition to the menu by McLamore in 1957.’’ I would rewrite this as something like “The first major addition to the menu was the Whopper, a sandwich developed by McLamore in 1957; it has since become Burger King's signature product.”
  •  Fixed - I would avoid so-called Easter egg links if possible. I assumed the link was just to advertising in ‘’ The company's "Golden Age" of advertising was during the 1970s when it introduced its mascot the Magical Burger King,…’’ until I checked it. I would recast the sentence as something like “The “Golden Age” of Burger King advertising was during the 1970s…” or even just like “The 1970s were the “Golden Age” of Burger King advertising, when it …”
  •  Fixed - Resuscitated seems like an odd word choice in ‘’ They completely reorganized Burger King's advertising with a series of new advertisements centered on a resuscitated Magical Burger King character.’’ Perhaps re-imagined or redesigned would work better?
References
  • I see a major problem with a lack of references in places. For most GAs and especially for FAs nowadays, the expectation is that pretty much every sentence is referenced. Now this can be just one ref at the end of a paragraph, but if there is a sentence or more after the last ref in a paragraph, then it is unreferenced. This is especially true for sentences with dates, figures (like numbers of restaurants or sales figures or monetary values), and anything that is not a transition to the following material or summary.
  • In just the History section, the last sentence of the first paragraph needs a ref (sale to Pillsbury), the last four sentences of the third paragraph (Diageo), and the last two sentences of the fourth paragraph (IPO). International operations, Legal issues, Charitable contributions and services, Products, and Advertising also all have sentences that seem to need refs.
  • The article could use some copyediting. I tired to point out many problems in the lead. Some sentences seem needlessly complex, such as While BK began its foray in to locations outside of the continental United States in 1963 with a store in San Juan, Puerto Rico, it did not have a large international presence. This either needs some sort of time qualifier after "international presence" (until YEAR), or else it is a tautology (until it expanded outside the US, of course it did not have any international presence at all).

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:45, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cocker Spaniel

[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 because I believe it meets the requirements of being a Featured Article, but want to check if I've missed anything technically.

Thanks, Miyagawa (talk) 19:10, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Dablink (tool in the box on the right of this peer review page) shows a disambiguation link in the article; please fix the link.

Lede

  • "Cocker Spaniels were originally developed as ..."
    Should it not be "bred" instead of "developed"? Are living creatures developed?
  • "... with the term "cocker" coming from their use to hunt the Eurasian Woodcock."
    This noun plus -ing construct could have been better rephrased per User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing.
  • "... changes were made which enabled it to specialize ..."
    They manipulated the genes of the breed? Changes can be made to plans, descriptions, specifications, or such, but cannot be made to living things unless operations (or superficial appearances) are involved.
  • "... descended from Ch. Obo, ..."
    What is "Ch."?
  • "... the English variety are ..."
    "Variety" is singular.
  • "... which is not bred to a standard but by working ability."
    "... which is not bred to a standard but to working ability."?
  • Are the flags needed in the Infobox? Are nationalities that important for dog breeds? I truly doubt so. See also MOS:FLAG.

History

  • "... the hawking, springing or springer and the cocking or cocker spaniel."
  • I have to read three times before I realise "springer" is used as an adjective here. There should be a way to rephrase this sentence in a clearer manner.
  • "The maximum weight limit on the Cocker Spaniel would remain until 1901."
    "Maximum weight limit" in what? Classification? Physical characteristic (in which case how can it "remain"; I doubt it is a case of "it looks like a duck, sounds like a duck, feels like a duck, but it weighs 5.5kg instead of 5kg so it is not a duck").

Modern breeds

  • "... the American is smaller with a shorter back plus a domed head and a shorter muzzle, ..."
    Why use the jarring "plus" instead of a comma?
  • "Cocker Spaniels coats can come ..."
    "Can" is redundant, I believe it is either "Cocker Spaniel coats" or "Cocker Spaniels' coats".
  • "... grandson of My Own Brucie was born all-white. My Own Brucie had won the Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show in 1940 and 1941."
    The second sentence is a bit out-of-place. How about "... grandson of My Own Brucie, a Westminster Kennel Club Dog Show winner in 1940 and 1941, was born all-white."?

English Cocker Spaniel

  • "... H.S. Lloyd's Ware Kennel, who won best-in-show ..."
    A dog breeder wins "best-in-show", not the dog? Why is "best-in-show" linked here but not in the first mention of the term (which was in the preceding sentence)?
  • "Their popularity has increased ..."
    Whose popularity? The English Springer Spaniel that was mentioned directly before this sentence? Or the two preceding breeds or all three?
  • "There is a split between the show strains and working strains in the UK."
    Be explicit here. What sort of split?

American Cocker Spaniel

  • "... with the Cocker Spaniel Club of America discouraging breeding between the two types in 1938."
    Noun plus -ing construct.
  • "... won best-in-breed on four occasions since first awarded in 1907."
    "... won best-in-breed on four occasions since its first award in 1907."
  • "... than its English cousin with only 322 registrations compared to the English Cocker's 22,211 in 2009."
    "Only" is redundant and possibly introducing bias.

Common health issues

  • "... with English Cockers living slightly longer, on average at 11 to 12 years."
    Noun plus -ing construct.

Sources

  • How is about-cocker-spaniels.com a reliable source?
  • Dr. Cassidy's studies seem to be a self-published source. Does the scientific community regard her research as conclusive? If not, why is the information cited to her site presented as fact?
  • The same goes for Dr. Smith of peteducation.com.

Images

  • File:111. English and Welsh Cocker.JPG
    On what page of The Dog in Health and Disease? Please fill in the information (publication details and such) on the image page. If you did not scan this, then note the site where the scan was obtained per WP:IUP and WP:CITE#IMAGE. The signature at the bottom left does not look like Stonehenge or Walsh; http://www.archive.org/stream/doginhealthdisea00wals#page/114/mode/1up shows that the signature and hence author is "L. Wells". Considering this is a UK publication, unless Wells is proven to be dead in 1926 or earlier, this image is still copyrighted in UK and should not be stored on Commons. Moving this image to Wikipedia (and resolving the other issues) would resolve this.

Aside from the above, I found this article seems to be missing something significant about the dog. What is its diet? Its behavior? Temperament? This is something an ordinary reader would like to know about. I would expect such characteristics to have been published in respected dog breeding or pet books and such, so there would be no reason such information cannot be included. Jappalang (talk) 05:49, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Cornell University

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because…a user has asked for assistance in preparing this article for GA/FA.GrapedApe (talk) 18:05, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

GrapedApe's review

Images

File:CentralAvenueCornell2.jpg appears to be OK. File:Cornell War Memorial.jpgFile:SageHallsideview2.jpgFile:Cornell West campus dormitories.jpgFile:PictureofMyronTaylorHall.jpg - these have questionable copyright status.
After checking with the OTRS team, these images are OK. (See Commons:Template:Alex Sergeev permission).--GrapedApe (talk) 01:07, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • The image from www.biocrawler.com (File:Biocrawler.Cornell Law School 2.jpg) doesn't appear to have enough evidence to support its license.
  • There are a number of images uploaded by User:Cornell010 that I have some concerns about. Usually when you see web-resolution images with high quality photographic quality w/o EXIF data, that raises red flags.
File:Sage Chapel interior 2008.jpgFile:Cornell med 02.jpgFile:Bhangra.JPG
  • There are some images that could use some photographic restoration/editing
File:Cornell1902Panorama.jpg - could use some cleanup: remove the border, crease lines, and the handwriting in the center.
File:Dragon Day 1901.JPG - remove border
Presumably in the 1880's as the woman buried in the sarcophagus died in 1881. --Xtreambar (talk) 16:16, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of extreme weather records in Pakistan

[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 because i want to make it better by improving its grammatical mistakes and copyediting, and in near future i will nominate this article for Featured list. Thanks

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 15:41, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: Very informative, but needs further work to bring it to featured class.

Lead needs attention/rewrite
  • The lead needs to be a general overview of what is presented in the lists below. It should not simply repeat information that can be read from the lists. For example, the information "The highest temperature ever recorded in Pakistan is 53.5 °C (128.3 °F) which was recorded in Mohenjo-daro, Sindh on 26 May, 2010 it was not only the hottest temperature ever recorded in Pakistan but the hottest reliably measured temperature ever recorded in the continent of Asia" is all recorded in the table. Likewise, "The highest rainfall of 620 millimetres (24 in) was recorded in Islamabad during 24 hours on 24 July, 2001. The record breaking rain fell in just 10 hours. It was the heaviest rainfall in Islamabad in the past 100 years" is exactly repeated in the rainfall chart.
  • WP:MOSBEGIN says: "If the page is a list, do not introduce the list as "This is a list of X" or "This list of Xs..." You will need to formulate a different beginning.
Record breaking 2010 summer heat wave
  • Again, this section begins with information recorded in the following table
Tables
  • Some tidying necessary
    • It might be a good idea to show "Notes" and "References" in separate columns, since I imagine the citation refers to the whole line, not just to the note.

I have made separate columns for references and notes.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 13:09, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

    • Some of the notes are not clearly written, e.g. in the first table: "Last fifty four years record broken in Multan, before this 49 °C (120 °F) was recorded in 1956" would be clearer if written: "Record temperature in Multan; previous highest 49 °C (120 °F) in 1956".
    • In the second table: "48 °C (118 °F) was recorded on 10 June, 2007". Clarify that this refers specifically to Lahore.
    • Also in this table, "Event also occurred" is strange phrasing. Why not: "This temperature was also recorded..." See also last entry in table.
    • In the third table, "It was the heaviest rainfall in Islamabad in the past 100 years" implies that there were heavier rainfalls 100 0r more years ago. I don't see the point of the statement, since this is at the top of the table, and is self-evidently the highest rainfall recorded in Islamabad or anywhere else in Pakistan.
    • Same table: "Record breaking rainfall, previously 187 millimetres..." Clarify that this refers to a local record. Two similar notes later in table.

Done i have re-written the notes more clearly as you said, check if there is any mistake.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 13:17, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]


Floods
  • Write the section in prose, not bullet points.
  • The map needs a more informative caption
Notes A and B
  • A and B should not be bolded
  • It might make sense if these notes appeared immediately after the tables to which they relate, rather than way down here.

Done i have unbolded A and B.

Nabil rais2008 (talk) 13:08, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I hope these comments are helpful. Please contact my talkpage if you have any queries arising from this review, as I am not watching peer reviews at the moment. Brianboulton (talk) 12:00, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bob Widlar

[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 because… I went to an electronics college in the 1980s. We studied Widlar's building blocks and Widlar's amps along with Fourier transforms and Maxwell's equations. I did not realize then that the man was still active, and in fact younger than most of our professors. Only a few years older than my father. Students had quite busy lives in the 80s - girls, booze, discos, course papers, money... there was no place for biographies of great inventors. I frequently ran into his name in the IEEE journals but somehow never connected two and two. Shortly before graduation I ran into an obit in one of the journals and felt surprised - gosh, how did this fossil made it to 1991? Again, sometimes the mind just does not connect two and two.

Twenty years later, it's time to pay the dues. Here's the short life of Bob Widlar, the intoxicated genius, who made himself a legend at the age of 30 and retired into his Mexican hideout at 33. Read, discuss, add and fix. I have three concerns myself: relying on only one comprehensive bio (Bo Lojek), the abundance of direct quotes from primary sources (spoken memoirs of the Gifford, Valentine etc.), and what looks like poor flow/coherence of the material.

Thanks, East of Borschov 16:58, 25 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

I have some electronic engineering background, so the article is fairly accessible to me; however, I think some parts are delving too deep into the technical terms and might alienate those without such background.

  • Dablinks (toolbox on the right of this peer review page) shows two disambiguation links; please fix them.

Lede

  • "In 1964-1970 Widlar and David Talbert created ..."
    I think this should read "From 1964 to 1970, Widlar, together with David Talbert, created ..."
  • "Already a "legendary chip designer" at the age of 33, Widlar voluntarily retired into a hideout in Mexico ..."
    "Already" comes across as biased; furthermore this title was not "given" when he was 33. Suggestion: "At the age of 33, the "legendary chip designer", as later proclaimed by The New York Times's John Markoff, voluntarily retired into a hideout in Mexico ..."
  • "According to Bo Lojek, ..."
    Make it clear on what authority Lojek is: "According to Bo Lojek, author of History of Semiconductor Engineering, ..."
  • "... was born November 30, 1937."
    Missing word.

Early years

  • "The world of electronics surrounded him since birth: Widlar became the first baby monitored by wireless radio."
    Best to mention that the wireless baby monitor was invented by his father; I also think "became" should be replaced with "was".
  • "... (1960[15]), ..."
    footnotes after punctuation
  • "... in Boulder, Colorado to ..."
    Boulder was already linked and established to be in Colorado previously (in the University of Colorado mention).

Arrival at Fairchild

  • "... and after a few hours of discussion Widlar ended up in possession of the transistors. Sanders resolved the incident to mutual benefit, and in September 1963 Fairchild invited Widlar for a job interview."
    Either the language is too flowery for my taste or I do not understand the sequence of events... Is this trying to say "... and after a few hours of drinks and discussion Widlar ended up in possession of the transistors and left Sanders with a good impression of his technical knowledge. In September 1963, on Sanders's recommendation, Fairchild invited Widlar for a job interview." (but see further below for another adjustment I would suggest).
  • "... 'what they are doing is bullshit'."
    The interview ("what they are doing")? Context should be established for this quote.
  • "Instead of R&D, Widlar went to work for Fairchild's Mountain View, California Applications Engineering division headed by John Hulme, who embraced Widlar despite objections from Ruegg."
    Widlar did not make the decision, neither was Ruegg the only detractor, and there were two interviews... I would suggest:
    "... and after a few hours of drinks and discussion, Widlar ended up in possession of the transistors and left Sanders with a good impression of his technical knowledge. Sanders recommended Widlar to Fairchild and in September 1963, the company's manager of research and development, Heinz Ruegg, invited Widlar for a job interview. During the interview Widlar insulted Ruegg by telling him that his team's work is "bullshit". Widlar was sent to another interview with the company's Applications Engineering division, which was based in Mountain View, California. The division head, John Hulme, hired Widlar despite objections from the first round interviewers."
  • "... consisted of only three devices."
    "Only" introduces a bias (condemning the company for its capacity then).

The first op amps

  • "Fairchild engineers before Widlar designed analog ICs like conventional circuits built with discrete components, resorting to nichrome thin film resistors whenever the design values were too high or too low for the silicon die."
    I fail to comprehend this sentence; how are "design values" quantified? I also believe casual readers would be confused with "discrete components" at the first part. What were conventional circuits as compared to analog ICs?
    • (East of Borschov: I'd rather move it into the next section which describes how W. approached the same problems)
  • "Yield of these poorly performing hybrid ICs was very low, resulting in prohibitively high costs."
    "Many of these hybrid ICs failed their quality tests and were discarded, effectively increasing the production costs of a working chip."
    • (East of Borschov: "Many failed" is inevitable for all silicon processes, especially those on the cutting edge of available technology, be it 1964 or 2010. But in case of early analog ICs losses were exorbitant by any standard (even those of contemporary digital ICs) so the price was too high even for aerospace clients. I'm thinking of some workaround here.)
  • "... then the Fairchild R&D chief, steered his organization in favor of digital integrated circuits."
    "... the Fairchild R&D chief then, directed his organization to favor digital integrated circuits."
  • "Digital integration was easily scalable, less dependent on the environment, and promised high production volumes."
    Please rephrase for the general readership.
  • "... Mountain View Semiconductor fabrication plant, ..."
    Why is "Semiconductor" capitalized?
  • "... shared the same approach ..."
    "... shared the same belief ..." or "opinion".
  • "The rest were, at best, static observers."
    What are "static observers"?
  • "... and kept the unwanted co-workers out of the loop."
    "... and kept unwanted co-workers out of the loop."
  • "Gifford, one of the initiated, said that ..."
    I doubt there was a cabal of accepted workers... "Gifford, one of those accepted by Widlar and Talbert, said that ..."
  • "Don Valentine said in 2004:"
    Who is Don Valentine to be an authority here (please do not divert readers to another article to find out)?
  • "... eccentric - or whatever the word is beyond eccentric - individuals"
    Why are hyphens used here?
  • "... permitted matched performance of all components ..."
    Explain "matched performance".
  • "The latter increased the bandwidth ..."
    The latter what? Innovation or device (capacitor)? Do we use latter when there are three options?
  • "... then an unprecedented breakthrough for monolithic operational amplifiers."
    "... an unprecedented breakthrough for monolithic operational amplifiers at that time."
  • "Widlar considered the μA702 prototype not good enough for production, ..."
    "Widlar did not consider the μA702 prototype good enough for production, ..."
  • "The device set the direction for the industry for decades to come, despite poor common-mode rejection ratio, weak output drive capabilities, and a price of $300."
    "The device was an industrial standard for decades, despite its poor common-mode rejection ratio, weak output drive capabilities, and price of $300."
    • (East of Borschov: No-no, it wasn't a standard. This honour goes to uA741. The 709 wasn't good enough (yet). Set the trend, yes, but was phased out by better ones in less than a decade.)
  • "The μA709 which followed the compromised μA702 became a ..."
    "The μA709, which followed the compromised μA702, became a ..."
  • "Widlar increased gain from 7,000 to 70,000 and improved output performance with a push-pull output stage, although lacking protection against short circuit. The input stage was governed by Widlar current source which allowed [...] Widlar's decision to employ lateral PNP transistors[note 4] sparked oppostition among the R&D staff. Widlar locked himself up for 170 hours of continuous experimental work and came out with a robust design that blended two resistive diffusion areas into a lateral PNP device."
    "Widlar increased the device's gain from 7,000 to 70,000 and improved output performance with a push-pull output stage, although it lacked protection against short circuit. Its input stage was governed by a Widlar current source, which allowed [...] Widlar's decision to employ lateral PNP transistors was opposed by the R&D staff. Widlar experimented for 170 continuous hours and came out with a robust design that blended two resistive diffusion areas into a lateral PNP device."
  • "For a few years, Fairchild became the leader in linear ICs. Demand exceeded capacity by a factor of ten; production was sold out for two years in advance."
    "For a few years, Fairchild was the leader in the field of linear ICs. Demand for its products exceeded its production capacity by a factor of ten; Fairchild's circuits were sold out for two years in advance."
  • "None of the competitors came even close."
    "None of Fairchild's competitors came close to matching its status in the market."
  • "Competitors eventually created their own clones of μA709 but only Philco succeeded in fully matching the original."
    Competitors created clones of μA709 but only Philco succeeded in producing one that fully matched the original."

National Semiconductor

  • "Widlar and Talbert realized that the "Traitorous Eight" which ran Fairchild would not share their windfall profits with the designers. In November 1965 they accepted ..."
    Widlar and Talbert realized that the founders of Fairchild did not intend to share their profits with the designers. In November 1965 the two engineers accepted ..."
  • "... then valued at five dollars each."
    "... each valued at five dollars then."
  • "He refused to fill an exit interview form for Fairchild and wrote only one line: "I want to be RICH!" [44]"
    He refused to complete an exit interview form for Fairchild, writing only one line (exact quote): "I want to be RICH!"[44]
  • "For unknown reasons, Robert Noyce continued to pay Widlar his salary until April 1966. According to Widlar himself, ..."
    "For unknown reasons, Robert Noyce, one of Fairchild's founders, continued to pay Widlar his salary until April 1966. According to Widlar, ..."
  • "Gifford said that Widlar and Talbert were actually the founders of National Semiconductor, and that Sporck joined them later."
    How does this tally with "Peter Sprague's offer to join the National Semiconductor's Molectro facility" and who is Sporck?
    • (East of Borschov: I'm thinking of a way to reconcile both statements. Gifford meant that "we all know the legal founders, but the business took off only when they brought in some brains...")
  • "Widlar's solution minimized die area, and current drain, and enabled operation over a wide range of power supply voltages."
    "Widlar's solution minimized die area and current drain, and enabled operation over a wide range of power supply voltages."
  • "... LM108 precision operational amplifier released in 1969."
    "... LM108 precision operational amplifier, which was released in 1969."
  • "These high-gain, very-low-voltage transistors allowed operation at very low input currents at full military range of operating conditions."
    "These high-gain, very-low-voltage transistors were capable of operating at very low input currents within the full military range of operating conditions."
  • "The "Widlar's Leap" ..."
    What is the "Widlar's Leap"?
  • "... and a precise reference on the same die."
    What is a "precise reference"?
  • "... he frequently lectured to fellow engineers, ..."
    I believe it is either "... he frequently lectured fellow engineers, ..." or "... he frequently gave lectures to fellow engineers, ..."
  • "... and on May 23, 1970 spoke ..."
    "... and on May 23, 1970, spoke ..."

Personality

  • "Widlar lived the life of an alcoholic loner."
    I think the advice given in Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Biography/Archive 24#Referencing alcoholism was not taken. There are very little reliable sources that use "alcoholic" in reference to Widlar—in fact, it looks like only George Glider does so in Commentary.[32] Any sentence that states Widlar to be an alcoholic, hence, has to be explicitly attributed to Glider.
  • "According to Bo Lojek, 'as he was older he was for the first time able to keep relationship with one woman.'"
    So who was this woman? What was the nature of Widlar's relationships with women previously?
  • "... in legends and anecdotes which ..."
    "... in legends and anecdotes, which ..."
  • "He did practice widlarising – methodically destroying a faulty component or a flawed prototype with a sledgehammer."
    This statement assumes that the reader is familiar with widlarising. This is unlikely to be true. It would be best to rephrase into a statement that states to some effect: "Widlar's methodical destruction of faulty components or flawed prototypes with a sledgehammer gave rise to the term widlarising."
  • "At the same time, he eradicated all unwanted sounds ..."
    He did this while widlarising?
  • "However, the story about Widlar bringing a goat to trim the lawn in front of his office, ..."
    "However, the story about Widlar's bringing a goat to trim the lawn in front of his office, ..."
  • "Widlar brought her in his Mercedes-Benz convertible for just one day, which included a photo op for the local journalists."
    I do not quite understand this sentence. Does it mean that the whole affair was a publicity stunt? Note: "photo op" is an informal term inappropriate for encyclopaedias.

Retirement and return

  • "On December 21, 1970 Widlar and Talbert ..."
    "On December 21, 1970, Widlar and Talbert ..."
  • "Widlar quit, cashed in his stock option ..."
    "Quit" is redundant when the earlier statement said "resigned". "Widlar cashed in his stock option ..." would suffice.
  • "... Puerto Vallarta, Mexico at ..."
    "... Puerto Vallarta, Mexico, at ..."
  • "... but had not been formally employed ..."
    "... but was not formally employed ..."
  • "His proud statement: "I don't work" caused him frequent troubles when crossing the Mexican border and eventually, ..."
    It bears explaining why "I don't work" can cause troubles at borders. Furthermore, "proud statement" casts a bias on it.
  • "Robert Swanson said in 2006:"
    Who is Robert Swanson? It is better to give readers the basic context than to expect them to go off to another article.
  • "LM10 is capable of operating with only a 1.1 volt power supply, thus instead of a conventional bandgap reference it employs Widlar's sub-bandgap circuit locked at 200 mV and the low-voltage Widlar output stage."
    "Only" is redundant, the same with "thus": "LM10 is capable of operating with a 1.1 volt power supply; instead of a conventional bandgap reference, it employs Widlar's sub-bandgap circuit locked at 200 mV and the low-voltage Widlar output stage."
  • "The rest of the industry caught up with LM10 only a decade after its introduction."
    Again "only" introduces a bias. Suggestion: "For 10 years, no one else in the industry was able to produce a circuit that matched the LM10."

The last decade

  • "... the relationships fell apart upon a patent right dispute."
    "... the relationships fell apart in a patent right dispute."
  • "... the mandatory share repurchase provision of Widlar's contract."
    "... the mandatory share repurchase provision that was in Widlar's contract."
  • "According to Bo Lojek, Widlar's notebooks contain sufficient evidence that many disputed ideas were created by Widlar before the creation of Linear."
    "According to Bo Lojek, Widlar's notebooks contain sufficient evidence to prove that many of the disputed patents were created by Widlar before Linear was formed."
  • "On February 27, 1991 Widlar suddenly died ..."
    "On February 27, 1991, Widlar suddenly died ..."
  • " Apparently he had been jogging on a sidewalk ..."

Honors

  • This section is just two bullet points that could be reworked into prose and integrated into other sections.

General

  • There should be a comma after countries in place locations (state, country) and years in US format dates (month day, year).

Images File:Widlar - NatSemi Ad 400px.jpg: As far as I know, the book does not state this advertisement was Widlar's idea. Although the attitude of the adverstisement seems in line with Widlar's, there is no mention in the article nor source that it was (lack of contextual significance).

Prose-wise, some parts seem brilliant, but some parts as pointed above seem too informal or has bias introduced. A thorough look-through by another would be advisable. Jappalang (talk) 15:40, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Biranchi Narayan(Sun) Temple

[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 because it fails to give information and/or photographs on the article Biranchi Narayan(Sun)Temple. Thanks, Goswamir14- www.rohangoswami.webs.com 19:14, 26 October 2010 (UTC)

Comment: the above is not a valid reason for requesting a peer review. Please see the WP:Peer Review page which states that peerv review "is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work". Questions about the adequacy of an article's content or coverage should be raised on the article's talkpage. I am closing this review. Brianboulton (talk) 23:58, 26 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Bartow, Florida

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've done a lot of work on this article over the past month, think I've improved it considerably (see last edit before I made my first edit here and request comments on where to go from here. I'd like to eventually bring this up for FA (but first GA).

Thanks, VictorianMutant (talk) 10:17, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

Lede

  • "Bartow is a historical city whose origins predate the American Civil War."
    Better to place a timeframe than to direct readers away from this article to find out (not everyone is going to know when the American Civil War occured.
     Done
  • "In 1867, the county seat was established at the site of Fort Blount ..."
    What county? What and where was Fort Blount?
     Done

History

  • "The first Paleo-indians arrived in the Bartow area ..."
    Why is "paleo-indian" capitalized here?
     Done
    I capitalized it before seeing this, while doing a read through...I believe they are a proper name and need to be capitalized? CTJF83 chat 04:38, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... gave way to the first permanent residents in the area, the 'archaic people.'"
    So who were these "archaic people"?
    I see that this was modified to "the 'archaic people' who were the descendants of the tribes who would come in contact with Europeans." This statement is rather clunky. For one, there are two "who"s, which makes repetitive reading, and am I incorrect to say they should be the "ancestors" instead of "descendants"? If so, might I suggest "the 'archaic people' who were the ancestors of the Native American tribes." Jappalang (talk) 12:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Used your suggestion.VictorianMutant (talk) 15:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... diseases such as Small Pox or Yellow Fever were ..."
    Why are these diseases capitalized?
     Done
  • "... these tribes would merge together with Creek Indians ..."
    Replace the wordy "would merge" with the simpler "merged".
     Done
  • "After over 250 years of being in Spanish possession, with a brief British period of rule, the United States ..."
    The United States (50 states) was in Spanish possession?
     Done
    Addition of "Florida" does not help (the addition is in the wrong place); the problem is that the first two clauses (in Spanish possession and under British rule) are applied to the very first noun in the the clause after them; in this case, "the United States" is taken as the target of those two preceding clauses. Please rephrase the sentence. Jappalang (talk) 12:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Changed sentence. In the grand scheme of things, mentioning Britain isn't important. They really never settled Florida (especially not around Bartow) and left little trace.


  • "At the conclusion of the First Seminole War, the United States passed the Indian Removal Act of 1830, which attempted to remove most of the Seminoles to Oklahoma."
    Unsourced
    What's wrong with the Seminole Tribe source?
    Nothing wrong, just overlooked it during a pass (Due to time constraints, I may not be able to give the changes a complete look-through). Regardless, the use of a primary source (descendants of those affected) might be frowned upon at FAC. If possible, get a secondary source (preferably an academic historical article) to cover this. Jappalang (talk) 00:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Geography

  • First paragraph is unsourced.
    (changes in paragraph pending in next few days) VictorianMutant (talk)
    added sources, misc changes
    Changed distance sources to indo.com. Only google source left is to show "triangle" (but it is secondary source- kept to illustrate "triangle" better). Also added better source for "located near the headwaters of the Peace River at Lake Hancock." VictorianMutant (talk) 02:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Physiography and soils

  • "Many soils in the Bartow area are sandy throughout; others have sandy surface layers and clay subsoils, and the eastern outskirts of town have a clay-rich floodplain through which the Peace River flows."
    "What is "others" referring to: soil or area?
     Done
  • "... rich in phosphorus -- an uncommon ..."
    Why is a double hyphen here? Please read up MOS:DASH.
     Done

Climate

  • "Even so, the familiar pattern found throughout central Florida is evident in the climate of Bartow: ..."
    "Regardless, the climate pattern prevalent throughout central Florida is evident in Bartow: ..."
     Done
  • "... hurricane force winds ..."
    "... hurricane-force winds ..."
     Done
  • "In fact, until 2004, the last storm ..."
    Drop "In fact", it is redundant.
     Done
  • "... hurricanes are actually not the most common ..."
    "Actually" is redundant.
     Done
  • "On average, the area can expect freezing temperatures every other year, ..."
    In which part(s) of "every other year"? Be precise.
     Done
  • "... ten straight nights where the temperature ..."
    Nights (time) are not locations.
     Done
    I modified it; "when" is not a good choice either in light of the sentence structure. Jappalang (talk) 12:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Government and politics

  • How are the commissioners selected?
     Done
  • "... set forth by the SWFWMD."
    What is the "SWFWMD"?
     Done
  • "The Bartow Police Department employs 52 sworn officers and 27 civilian employees, while the Bartow Fire Department has 21 full time firemen and 3 volunteers."
    Are these supposed to be permanent figures? Be precise.
Thought I fixed before. Must have been my "edit conflict" with myself
  • "... operates the Bartow Public library founded in 1897, ..."
    "... operates the Bartow Public library, which was founded in 1897, ..."
     Done
  • "... part of the so-called I-4 corridor."
    Why is "I-4 corridor" in italics?
     Done
  • "... the city of Bartow trends even more conservatively in state and federal elections."
    I find this sentence awkward. Can it be rephrased?
  • "... in major races since the 1970s ..."
    Better to use "elections" and not mislead others who might not be familiar with "races" as an electoral term.
  • "Although the residents of Bartow have supported the Republicans in major races since the 1970s, they have been much slower to switch their party affiliation."
    I do not see how this statement is supported by (or is related to) the two statistical sentences that follow it.
     Done What might not be understood by those who are unfamiliar with American politics is that when one registers to vote in the US, most places require you to state a party affiliation (Dem, Rep, independent or other). So most Bartow residents are affiliated with the Democratic party but vote *against* their party routinely in major races (eg. voting against Barrack Obama who was their party's candidate). There are historical reasons for that outside the scope of the article. I have restructured to make it clearer that even though Bartow residents are primarily Democrats in how they view themselves, they tend to not support the party in elections.

Demographics (I plan on overhauling section in next few days, so won't touch for now) VictorianMutant (talk)

  • The first four paragraphs (except for the 2000 date) are unsourced. Each paragraph should be at least cited to a reliable source, even if the source is the same for all.
    They are the same for all. Have added cite to other 3 paragraphs. VictorianMutant (talk) 15:31, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This population reflects the construction of the Clear Springs Development Company east and south of town ..."
    Which population? The Dutch, the French, or the Irish? Or are we talking about "population figure"? In which case, 27,675 or 44,796? Why would such a figure reflect "the construction of the Clear Springs Development Company"?
    Removed sentence because it was kind of speculation anyway.
  • Statistics in the table for "U.S. Census Population Estimates" are uncited.
    Sources added

Religion (I plan on overhauling subsection in next few days, so won't touch for now) VictorianMutant (talk)

  • "... mandated by the original Summerlin grant, ..."
    A grant is "a sum of money given by an organization, especially a government, for a particular purpose". I see no previous mention of such item, in regards to "Summerlin grant". What is it?
    Removed... simply mentioned the two churches, when they were founded and left it at that.
  • "... within the Bartow area of various denominations."
    Bartow is split into various denominations?
    Left out "of various denominations" Obviously if there were 70 churches they wouldn't all be the same denomination (or even a few).
  • The statistical breakdown of religious adherents is applicable for which year?
    2000 from the ARDA archives published by Glenmary Research, added.
  • "... the city has always rented a building to the service center for $1 per year."
    Drop "always", be precise: since when?
    Found and added a date with cite.
  • "... the center is moving to a building twice its size down the road."
    Has it finished moving? If not, when?
    It has. Changed.
  • "... the Lakeland Ledger for ..."
    Italics? Or is the Ledger not a newspaper? Why did they suddenly blame the Ledger?
    Removed Ledger "blame" because it seemed slightly POV anyway.
  • "Religion has always played a significant role in the lives of many Bartownians."
    Is there a source for this? Having churches throughout their history does not necessarily mean religion was a significant role in their lives... Jappalang (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I just got rid of the first sentence... I like the section starting with the next sentence better.

Economy

  • "A couple years after opening his store, William M. Burdines opened a store in Miami and relocated his operations there."
    Unsourced
     Done
  • "... the second largest number of farmland acres in the state ..."
    Grammatically incorrect: I have never heard of "the largest number of square metres", "the heaviest amount of kilograms", or such.
     Done? would this be better? "In terms of area, Polk County has 600,000 acres (2,400 km2) dedicated to agriculture which is the second most of any county in the state." Restructured entire agriculture paragraph.
  • "The new bumper crop in the area has become blueberries."
    "The new bumper crop in the area is blueberry." Be precise, when did this happen?
     Done see above
  • "In the last seven years, Polk County ..."
    "The last seven years" apply to the next two years, 2020, 2025, 2050, and 2100?
     Done see above
    "Past seven years" does not cut it either. Best is to put down the range of years, e.g. "From 1990–97, ..." or such. Jappalang (talk) 12:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Got it. Article was in 2007, so it was 2000-2007
  • Last paragraph is unsourced.
    added sources
    Changed tourist attraction distances to indo.com. Used "Lake Buena Vista, Fl for Walt Disney World (nearest town and actual physical address is in Lake Buena Vista). VictorianMutant (talk) 02:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Annual festivals and other events

  • "Like most cities, Bartow has its unique local events which dot the calendar and remind people of their heritage and culture and give people a sense of pride in their community. Some of these are events in nearby cities such as the Florida Strawberry Festival in Plant City or the Florida Citrus Festival in Winter Haven."
    Unsourced
    Changed sentences. First seemed kind of POV anyway. Sourced second one. Found out Citrus Festival was no more.
  • Second paragraph is unsourced.
     Done removed...'I've seen a link for this somewhere online and will readd if I can find it.'
    Given up on this one... source has been removed so paragraph permanently deleted.
  • "... at 6 PM ..."
    Why "PM" and "p.m." elsewhere? Be consistent.
     Done

Media

  • Several unsourced statements in this sub-section
    (Changes pending VictorianMutant (talk))
    cropped tv/radio info (which was slightly outdated and added sources
  • "Today, only a semi-weekly newspaper ..."
    How applicable is this statement a few months or years from now? Be precise.
     Done Removed historical papers and changed around
  • "The dominant daily newspaper is The Ledger out of Lakeland, although the Tampa Tribune, the News Chief out of Winter Haven and the Orlando Sentinel all have some circulation in town."
    Unsourced and "all" is redundant.
     Done found cite and removed "all"

Parks and other recreational activities

  • "Bartow is typical of most cities in Florida in that many of its activities are outdoors."
    Including commericial and industrial? I suspect "recreational activities of its residents" is the target here...?
    Changed sentence.
  • No sources for the statistics presented (except for Bartow Park).
     Done same ref as Bartow Park
  • "Many of these lakes are strip mine lakes which are closed to the public, ..."
    "Many of these lakes were formerly strip mines; they are closed to the public, ..."
     Done

Transportation (planned restructuring of section)

  • "... a large bond issue in 1914 enabled wide roads ..."
    I find it hard to relate that a "bond issue" (whatever that is) would enable "wide roads". Can this be clarified?
    eliminated, restructured paragraph... important thing was arches not bond issue.
  • "Then county commission clerk W.S. Wev proposed ..."
    "The country commission clerk at that time, W.S. Wev, proposed ..."
     Done
  • Why are there graphics (highway signs) in the text? This seems to me a violation of the MoS's "Avoid entering textual information as images".
     Done
  • Who said the mentioned roads and highways were "important"?
    changed to Us Highways and State Roads
  • "Both Tampa International Airport and Orlando International Airport are less than an hour away."
    Unsourced (furthermore, such times are dependent on speed and traffic condition; lacking of precision)
    changed to distances and sourced
    Changed distances to indo.com. VictorianMutant (talk) 02:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The allusion was to the saying "All roads lead to (imperial) Rome"."
    Linking to wikitionary is ill-advised if this article is to be brought to FAC (it would be akin to linking to an unreliable source, according to FAC delegate SandyGeorgia). Furthermore, what source alludes Wev's action to this saying? Jappalang (talk) 12:55, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    The first paragraph seems to be sort of problematic anyway, so I'll start with the street grid.

Education

  • "In 1923, the first African-American high school was opened in the county, Union Academy."
    The county is Union Academy?
     Done
  • "... with the former black high school Union Academy becoming a middle school."
    Noun plus -ing construct
  • "Today, the combined histories of both pre-1969 Union Academy and Summerlin Institute are treated as ..."
    Avoid using "Today".
     Done Removed... doubt it's really entirely relevant
  • "... with the 1969 desegregation a merger of two schools."
    What does this mean?
     Done see above
  • "... currently seven elementary schools and 2 middle schools ..."
    Why is there an inconsistency in formats for single digits?
     Done
  • Why is "The PSC Advanced Technology Center at Clear Springs" in bold?
     Done
  • Last paragraph is uncited.
    added
    Changed distances to indo.com

Sources (will replace all with more reliable sources or if I can't find remove content VictorianMutant (talk))

  • How are attractions.uptake.com/blog/florida-native-american-museums-7383.html, www.city-data.com/housing/houses-Bartow-Florida.html, www.floridafishinginfo.net/polk_county_fishing.html, www.gorp.com/weekend-guide/travel-ta-frostproof-lake-wales-lakeland-winter-haven-sidwcmdev_058594.html, and www.us-highways.com/dixiehwyw.htmreliable sources?
  • Why are readers directed to thepaperboy.com when it is supposed to be referencing www.polkcountydemocrat.com/?
  • Why is freepages.genealogy.rootsweb.ancestry.com/~crackerbarrel/Holland.html used, especially in light of Wikipedia:Reliable sources/Noticeboard/Archive 69#Ancestry.com as a reference??
  • Why is a forum post (www.firehouse.com/forums/showthread.php?t=72663) used?
    uptake.com and ancestry.com removed: they were duplicates of other sources. City-data was census information which I already had a good source for. floridafishinginfo replaced with American Chronicles. gorp replaced by The Ledger(same info). firehouse source replaced with news chief(removed one sentence which was now unsourced. Eliminated us-highways.com sentences and source.
    paperboy.com is gone. Think that is all of the bad sources.
    The forum link is still there... Note: If American Chronicle is asked about at FAC or such, you might have to defend Capt. Steve McDonald as an expert who is widely relied on. He is a fishing guide of Bassmaster Guide Service, so it might be probable on face value that he is such an expert... Jappalang (talk) 03:23, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Forum is gone now, I think. I think I at one point, I accidentally copied and pasted the firehouse link to the wrong ref and that's why I couldn't find it at first. It's gone.

Images

  • File:Dixietheater1900.jpg
    Just because a photograph was taken before 1923, it does not mean it is in the public domain. That only applies to images published before 1923. Publication (several copies distributed to the public) is not the same as creation.
     Done removed image
  • Captions: incomplete sentences should not end with periods.
     Done

I see several big issues (sourcing, images, and prose) to resolve before going for higher level assessments. Jappalang (talk) 02:45, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the thorough review. I shall start working on it as soon as I can. VictorianMutant (talk) 05:16, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Did some work and think I've made a little dent. a quick question... many of the things above unsourced are things which require distances (distance to airport, neighboring towns, nearby colleges. Can I use google maps directions or is there another source considered more reliable to accurately list as a source for distances between points A & B? VictorianMutant (talk) 11:56, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I am not certain, but I think Google map directions should be acceptable as reliable sources (since their maps are satellite images)... The link/reference should either give instructions on how to check it, or directly show the comparison once it is clicked on. Do not quote me on this though... Jappalang (talk) 14:19, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Eh, I thought you had some way to obtain direct distances ("as the crow flies") from Google Maps, but it appears not. The problem with road distances is that they are subject to changes (and might be different in context with the way they are used in the article). Might I suggest citing to Rand McNally maps, taking measurements from them? Jappalang (talk) 00:52, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think there is a misunderstanding of what I suggested of Rand McNally maps. What I meant was to take direct measurements of the direct distances (epicenter to epicenter of the cities) on their paper-published maps, and use {{cite book}} or the like. Driving distances depend on the roads that might change every day (and as such, any information that depends on them has to declare the dates of the information). Apparently, Google Maps has a direct distance calculator as well.[33][34] Registration is required though (user option), although references to it might note that in the Format field ("Google Map user customisation"). Jappalang (talk) 13:14, 16 October 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Question: Stephens City, Virginia ( a FA) shows distances between two cities using geobytes.com. Would that be okay? VictorianMutant (talk) 21:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Hmm... the site does provide distance "as the crow flies" (and gives a bearing). It is also a service provided by a company that depends on commercial products for survival. The City Distance Calculator is based on their Net World Map database, which they use for GeoWorldMap.[35][36] I would tend towards reliable as a "free" spinoff of a commercial product that has not much complaints and transparent in its workings... but I am a bit worried over whether they check if the user entries for their database are not simply jokes. Jappalang (talk) 22:35, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
How about this calculator at indo.com? I'm not sure how reliable indo.com is, but it does have the advantage of giving the coordinates used for the two cities(so it could be verified) and the program used (along with the source code. VictorianMutant (talk) 00:48, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I think according to http://www.indo.com/distance/distance-details.html, it should be reliable enough (data obtained from the USGS). Jappalang (talk) 01:09, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Okay, changed all distance measurement sources (and a few actual distances) to indo.com. The only google map links left are non distance: (1) To ilustatrate triangle (but have primary source which says "Bartow/Lakeland/Winter Haven" triangle so not exactly necessary). (2) In transportation section I left google map link to Bartow map because it illustrates (0,0) point at intersection of Broadway/Main (google maps usually puts the "a" point of a city at the grid starting point in the US if a city has one.) VictorianMutant (talk) 02:39, 17 October 2010 (UTC) [reply]

Okay, I think all my issues were taken care of. In the scheme of things, I think the removal of sources of uncertain reliability was a very good step to take. I think the sources now used should pass any query at FAC without much issue. I do not really like the bulleted lists prominent in the later part of the article. I think one or two (scattered across the article) would be fine, but having three in one area makes the article looks like a list when one ventures to that region. This is just my opinion though (I am not really sure what to do with the content that is there either). I believe we have good content for the first half, but you might wish to seek opinions for the second before venturing to FAC. It should be a good bet for GA though. Jappalang (talk) 04:20, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Niagara

  • I do not believe it's been stated anywhere when the community was founded or when it became a city.
Founded: sentence before cite 24, incorporated second paragraph, second sentence.
Okay, the incorporation needs to be mentioned in the History section as well (anything in the lead has to included in the body of the article). Putting the years into the infobox would be a good idea as well. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done Incorporation added to history section and infobox.
  • There are two photos of the Old Polk County Courthouse. Might I suggest replacing the second with the photo of city hall from the History section, instead of a repeat of the courthouse.
Perhaps I just like the second image too much (found it on flckr, smiled when I saw it was CC-generic, and decided I really liked it. Think it would be okay to move to the infobox(even though it is a night shot)? I do like the idea of moving the city hall picture to gov't section.
I like to search Flickr, as well, to see what I might find and be able to use. I think people might balk at the night photo (doesn't really illustrate the courthouse as well as the one in the infobox). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done
  • Which colored path corresponds to each hurricane on the map in the Climate section?
Great idea! Done.
Originally had that, but added comparative demograph box and the text was "squeezed." If you tell me the comparative box was too much or overkill then I can move back to the other box, otherwise I'm not sure how to have both.
I did think that it might be awkward to have a "Historical populations" box, too, so there is no reason to change back. I would say to change the title of table from "U.S. Census Population Estimates" to just "U.S. Census populatations", though (only 2009 is an estimate, the rest are considered definitive facts). ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • I don't believe you are supposed to specify the image thumbnail size, so as to allow it to default to a user's preferences.
You mean leave the pixel size out when it's a thumbnail? I'm still new to all this.
Yeah, if you leave out the width in pixel, you are able to go into Special:Preferences and change the default size. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 01:12, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
 Done VictorianMutant (talk) 21:11, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The material is in the article, but a good copyedit might make it easier to get through GA. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:45, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Some things stood out.

Bartow is a historical whose origin dates back over 150 years. - I think there is a noun missing.  Done
According to the U.S Census Bureau, - watch out for instances like this in the article, it should be U.S.  Done
The first paragraph (which is an indication of the rest of the article), has the word "Bartow" four times in four sentences. Try some variety so the reader doesn't see the same word so often.  Done
The first three paragraphs of "History" seem to be about the general history of Florida, and not the city in question. I think it should be trimmed a bit to whatever is vital to the history of the town.  Done restructured history section to make it more "Bartow-centric."
"In 1845 Florida became the 27th state and the time seemed right for the part of Florida south of Gainesville to grow." - the wording is very informal. "The time seemed right" is very out of place, and doesn't make sense. "seemed right" to whom? And again, it's about the broader Florida history, not the town's.  Done... gone with restructure of section.
"however cattlemen eventually moved out of the Tampa Bay area and into the area surrounding the Peace River anyway" - the anyway at the end is unnecessary.  Done changed.
"This proved to be one of the crucial event in the development..." - grammar...  Done... gone with restructure of section.
"The town was incorporated as a city in 1882, the railroad came to town in 1887, and the city would grow exponentially in the last two decades of the 19th Century." - for these such important events, I feel this sentence should be expanded, and not minimized into an afterthought. What happened to make it a city? Why did the railroad come to town? And was it the railroad that caused the city to grow exponentially? (and was it really exponential growth?)  Done Separated. More details of RR's. Removed exponentially and simply listed numbers.
"This school named Summerlin Institute (now Bartow High School) would become one of the most respected high schools in the south" - awkward wording. Try rewriting for better flow.  Done. Eliminated sentence.
The paragraph on the 2004 hurricanes seems out of place, especially since it's before a paragraph summarizing the growth during the 20th century. Nowhere else in "history" do you mention anything meteorological. I should add that - "The damage from the three storms, especially Charley, was extensive." - needs a source. It would be good for some specifics, if you want to keep the paragraph, by mentioning the number of houses damaged/destroyed.  Done... gone
"Bartow is located slightly southwest of both the geographical centers of Polk County and peninsular Florida.[35] and is approximately 39 miles (63 km) east of Tampa and 51 miles (82 km) southwest of Orlando." - is that fullstop after "peninsular Florida" intentional?
"Most soils in the Bartow area are sandy throughout;other soils have sandy surface layers and clay subsoils, and the eastern outskirts of town have a clay-rich floodplain through which the Peace River flows" - not sure what you were intending to do there, but there is something wrong with "throughout;"  Done
"Until 2004, the last storm to bring hurricane force winds to the Bartow area had been Hurricane Donna in 1960." - needs a source  Done
"The city budget is over $62 million" - in what year's USD?  Done
"Both Tampa International Airport(TPA) and Orlando International Airport(MCO) are within 60 miles driving distance from the center of Bartow" - two things. First, why the lack of spacing between "Airport" and (TPA) and (MCO)? And you should provide a metric equivalent to "60 miles".  Done
I also noticed a few times when you do "six miles (10 km). While generally numbers less than 10 should be written out, there should be consistency between imperial and metric units (as in, both should be number-based, not written out).  Done

Hurricanehink (talk) 17:10, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Ctjf83
  • Per WP:LEADCITE you should remove references, as all the other info should be presented in the body  Done
  • Is there a specific reason why it says "city of Bartow" in the opening sentence, is "city of" needed? Unless it is officially in the title, I don't think it is.  Done
  • "...and expanded quickly to become one of the larger cities in central Florida at the beginning of the 20th century" I don't really like the source being used to claim this, in no way doubting the accuracy, but if someone wanted to check it, they would have to compare it to other central Florida cities, which, unless you live in the area, would probably have no idea what cities are included in central Florida...If it was doing the GA review, it would in no way be a reason to not pass it, but if a more specific source can be found, that would be good.  Done... removed in restructured lead.
  • The lead needs a clean up/expansion. Per WP:LEAD it should summarize the article, and from my past FACs or PRs, it should have a note from every section, which it is currently missing most sections.  Done... think I covered most everything.
  • None of the images have alt text, which personally, I don't pass GACs without it anymore  Done
  • "arrival of the Spanish" is Spaniard the proper term or is Spanish ok? I'm not sure  Done sentence gone with restructure of history section.
  • "In 1845 Florida became the 27th state and the time seemed right for the part of Florida south of Gainesville to grow." Searching the reference I don't find the word "grow" or "Gainesville"...either way, is there a specific reason why the time seemed fright for southern Florida to grow? Done sentence gone with restructure of history section.
  • Any reason why a few of the settlements in the history section are bolded?  Done
    • Reading on, I'm assuming those settlements were what Bartow was before the renaming, it needs to be clarified a bit. Also, if those are the former names of Bartow, they don't need to be bolded in the history section, only bolding in the lead.  Done
  • "This school named Summerlin Institute (now Bartow High School) would become one of the most respected high schools in the south." I would definitely not source it to the high schools website.  Done. Eliminated sentence.
  • "Bartow would become the hub of the largest phosphate industry in the United States." [citation needed]  Done
  • I think a good deal of expansion to the history section would be good. You have a lot of early history for Bartow, but then it kind of just dies off. In fact, the "history" section length is great, I would cut back on early history and expand on later history keeping the section length roughly the same, as more details are covered at History of Bartow, Florida  Done With restructure eliminated much early and added a lot more to "middle period" and a little to later history.
  • "both the geographical centers of Polk County and peninsular Florida" slight clarification, when reading it I paused to think if it meant the center of the state, or just the "peninsula part" (which I think the whole state is), like south of Marion County, Florida
  • "it is not unheard of to have a week or more of chilly weather." This needs to be reworded as chilly for you is far different than for me in Iowa  Done
  • Can you expand/clarify on where it says the mayor is elected every year? According to Type=B_DIR&SEC={8451C081-FF71-4DB5-A79C-4906C5E2D265}&DE={7BBAA72A-869B-4347-9CFD-E2FDAE10E464} the city site, he took office in 2008 and the term expires in 2011. Does the city site just not clarify that he wasn't mayor the whole time, and was just a commissioner for a few of the years?  Done
  • Is it possible to link ref 61/62 [37] to be more specific, or is it not possible because of the site?
  • "All of Bartow's local representation in Tallahassee and Washington D.C...." Someone unfamiliar with Florida, or the US, might not know that Tallahassee is Florida's capital and DC is the US capital, can might be confused  Done
  • Is Bartow part of the bible belt? This map, although unsourced, shows Bartow (as best I can tell where it is) to be in the border area.
  • In the religion section is there any Bartow specific data on non-religious data, just for comparison sake?
    • I did attempt to find that data because IMO, that is very important. The problem I had is that the most recent and best source I used for religious data only lists "unassigned" which could be devout unaffiliated people as well as atheists/agnostics/nontheists. The census used to ask about religious affiliation, but that information is over 20 years old. VictorianMutant (talk) 18:41, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • ref 91 (about blueberries) requires a log in, can you find a different reference?  Done...removed.
    • "$14 a pound is not an unusual price for Polk County blueberries" can you find a source for the "regular" price per pound for blueberries so a comparison can be made to $14 per lb  Done... see above.
  • dead link mentioning the 14th largest tv market here is the ref I use for Davenport  Done
  • Radio link not working either what I use  Done
  • I think it would look a little better if the "Parks and other recreational activities" section was in non-bulleted paragraph form
  • An addition of a sports section would be good. I assume they are Buccaneers and Rays fans? Are there any minor league sports teams?
    • The Detroit Tigers train in Lakeland, but no minor league teams in Bartow. College football is big, high school football perhaps bigger, but hard to find good cites which would meet WP:RELIABLE. At one point mentioned the high school football team which played the first high school game in Florida history(and there was a good source until the article went 404 on me...
      • Do you think there should be info about the major league teams? I don't have that problem on the Davenport articles, cause there are no pro teams in Iowa....plus we have local minor teams, which you don't...so not sure. CTJF83 chat 05:25, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The L.B. Brown House is notable as perhaps the only house still standing in Florida built by a freedman" needs a source not published to the house's site  Done-added second source.
  • Any notable natives from Bartow? If not, perhaps a county wide expansion of top notable people would be ok.
    • There's a link at the bottom in the see also section to List of people from Bartow, Florida. When I first started editing the article, there was a long list, none cited- so I forked to a separate article (and have added sources to most). Not sure how to put into prose, so just left out of article and added link to list.

Great job, just these (and the other above comments) and a GA should be good to go! If you need any more help on this, or any thing, please, don't hesitate to ask me! CTJF83 chat 03:49, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Antoine Samuel Adam-Salomon

[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 because I'm curious to see how well I've conformed to Wikipedia guidelines, and want some constructive criticism on how to improve this article, as well as tips on how to become better at creating new articles in the future. Thanks!

Thanks, Scewing (talk) 08:14, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • The lede is a summary of the article; here, it should be expanded to give an overview of who is the subject and why was he notable (interesting to read about). The only sentence currently in the lede serves as a start. Add to it a summary of the information about his works from the main body text.
  • Compared to his photography, information about Adam-Solomon's sculptures seem lacking. Since he made "notable busts", perhaps some information can be found about them to expand the article's mention of them?
  • In my view, a biography should give an idea of the man beyond his work. How did he live? What did he think? Who was he (as a social figure)? The current article gives nothing about his life, just his work.
  • Formatting for the references/citations should be consistent. I spot "pp. 138" (which should be "p. 138") and "p138". Please follow one style or the other.
  • Capitalization of section headers should be treated as if the words are part of a normal sentence (see WP:Headings). I have changed the article to reflect this.
  • Quotations should not be in italics per the project's Manual of Style (MoS). Blockquotes should be used for long quotes. I have changed this in the article to fall in line with the MoS.
  • Links to Commons should be in a External links section, which is typically the last of any section. I have also changed this for the article.

Overall, I think the article is a good start, and if additional information about Adam-Solomon can be found and added (from reliable sources), it could molded to be something better. Jappalang (talk) 07:36, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Codex Gigas

[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 because I'd like to work on getting this to good article status. The only problem being that I've never done this before! So I'd like some pointers from a few other people whilst I'm working on it.

Thanks, and I hope that's appropriate! PanydThe muffin is not subtle 19:43, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Most of the article is not cited to sources. This violates the policy of verifiability. Please cite the information to the relevant reliable source. Without doing so, there is no point in going ahead with a peer review, as no one else would be certain if the information has a source. This violation will also cause the article to be instantly failed at WP:GAN. Jappalang (talk) 02:27, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Eosinophilia

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have decided to list this article for peer review after a major rewrite. I would like to expand further, but due to time constraints I could use some help. All comments are appreciated, but I mostly would like to expand the article in preparation for a future GA review.

Thanks, Ronk01 talk 19:04, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • Hi, I do not think this article is developed to the point that it would qualify for a peer review yet ("Wikipedia's peer review process ... is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate. ... For feedback on articles that are less developed, use the article's talk page or requests for feedback."). One major failing to me is that the article fails to explain what Eosinophilia is or present its importance to us readers. The key to an effective article is to write something that tells the reader what it is, how important it is, the history behind it, and whatever is deemed important about a medical subject. For an article here on Wikipedia, it is also helpful to write it in terms that would be understood by most people instead of being comprehensible to medical students. I think WP:MEDICINE's Featured Articles and their Manual of Style (WP:MEDMOS) are helpful examples and guides on how to proceed. Come back to peer review when the article is more fleshed out. Jappalang (talk) 01:44, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Hackensack University Medical Center

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I listed this article because it is in disarray and I would love to improve it but I don't know where to start. Thanks! Peter.C • talk 23:39, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: Start by fixing all of the many problems with the citations. Also, I would suggest reviewing the Manual of Style at WP:MOS for details about Wikipedia's preferred style. It would also be good to review WP:V; generally every unusual claim, every direct quotation, every set of statistics, and every paragraph needs a citation to a reliable source (WP:RS). (The lead is an exception, but the article is in too rough a condition to worry about that yet.)

  • There should be no direct links to external sites from within the main text. Use in-line citations instead.
  • The link checker at top of this review page finds six dead urls in citations. These should be fixed or replaced. The soft 404s may also need to be fixed or replaced.
  • To format the citations correctly, you may find it helpful to use the "cite" family of templates found at WP:CIT. You can copy-and-paste these into your sandbox to see how they work. If you use the "cite" family, don't mix it with other families like "Citation". Choose one method and use it consistently throughout the article. You might also look at featured articles at WP:FA to see how other editors have handled citations and reference sections.
  • Once you have solved the sourcing problems and at least some of the Manual of Style issues such as turning lists into straight prose where feasible per WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists, you might bring this back for another review.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 23:36, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of Bonanza episodes

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I want to improve it by removing any grammatical mistakes, spelling errors, and general copy editing. In the near future I want to make this article for featured list.

Thanks. — Jimknut (talk) 22:18, 3 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: I have very little to say about this comprehensive and professionally presented list. I have made the odd typo correction to the text, which otherwise looks fine. Just three points:-

  • The lead should note that the series were shown worldwide, and were popular in numerous countries, not just in the US.
    • I've added a sentence stating that it was aired worldwide.
  • With this in mind, and given the international character of this encyclopedia, I wonder whether it is appropriate to show in the overview table the competing US programs, as this information is only relevant to US readers, and to the first showings; the episodes have surely been rerun many times.
    • Bonanza aired in the United States before cable TV, home video, and the internet began, thus people watching prime time TV in America had only the three competing networks or local independent broadcasts to choose from. Therefore, I think that it's relevant to show what the other networks had stacked up against Bonanza. I disagree that this information is relevant to only US readers, as it is quite possible for anyone in any country to be interested in the history of TV in another country. Heck, I'm an American and it would interest me to find out what else aired on British TV up against Upstairs Downstairs or Doctor Who. (And even if it was of relevence only to Americans that would be quite a large group of readers.)
  • As this is a list of the episodes in the Bonanza series, is it relevant to include information about the TV movies and prequel series, which are not really part of the original series?
    • Yes, I think so. David Dortort was involved with these shows and there is a connection to the original so I think a "passing nod" is appropriate.

That is honestly all I can find to criticise. Well done indeed. Brianboulton (talk) 23:28, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Matilda House (person)

[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 because it is my first attempt at an article and would welcome constructive feedback on style and content.

Thanks, Dnb01 (talk) 00:37, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: Hi, Dnb01. This certainly looks a worthy subject; however, the peer review process is intended for articles that have already undergone extensive work, and I don't think this draft is as yet at that stage. This article needs some basic structural work, to put it into the appropriate Wikipedia format. I suggest that you first consult WP:DEV which gives excellent information about how articles should be structured. When you've done this I will be happy to look at the article informally, outside the PR process. Meantime it might be best to close this PR. Brianboulton (talk) 23:59, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The Lion King

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Just how far away from GA is this page on the 1994 Disney classic? (I'll give it a shot soon thanks to LexisNexis and what not.)

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 16:24, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang

Answering your very first question, there is still far to go. This article uses several sources of questionable reliability. How do Kimbawlion.com, UltimateDisney.com, Hans-Zimmer.com. eeggs.com, lionking.org, and tv.com qualify as reliable sources per Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-28/Dispatches? Alleging "One similarity is the protagonists' names: Kimba and Simba" is original research (basically, no reliable source states this comparison). File:Kimbasimba.JPG fails WP:NFCC; it has no detailed fair use rationale to explain why it should qualify, the use of it is only to support a simple sentence that does not explicitly refer to the scenes and is cited to an unreliable source. File:Lionkg2.jpg also requires a more specific fair use rationale. Cast, Sequels and spin-offs, and Impact on popular culture are such short sections or are lacking in any substantial content that they would be better off removed or integrated into other sections. Jappalang (talk) 07:12, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Talbot Baines Reed

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Although little known today, until the 1950s Talbot Baines Reed's name was well-recognised, particularly in English middle-class households, as the sine qua non of school story writers. My father would have known all about him, and my grandfather certainly did – I have some well-thumbed, inherited books which grandpa must have read lovingly in the 1900s or thereabouts. Reed is typical of a kind of Victorian Englishman – industrious, high-minded, multi-talented, successful – that today evokes either admiration or a desire to deliver a sharp punch on the nose. See which way you feel, by reading about him, then tell me how I can improve the story. With many thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 11:24, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • "The Earlsfield Chronicle", "Old and New Fashions in Typography", "On the Use and Classification of a Typographical Library"
    Should these not be in italics instead?
    The Earlsfield Chronicle was a family magazine, not a regular periodical, but I have now given it the honour of italics. However, WP:ITALICS does not list academic papers among the titles requiring italicisation.
  • "... was supported by the leading London printers ..."
    I think the definite article is redundant.
    Removed
  • "... retired from the business through ill-health."
    "... retired from the business because of ill-health."?
    Agreed
  • "... by no mean ..."
    "... by no means ..."?
    Yup, well spotted.
  • "In a recent biographical sketch, ..."
    Be precise (ten years later, how "recent" would it be?).
    Now dated, 2004
  • "... the boating accident, the group rivalries, the noble friendships.", "... the popular games master, the dry pedant, the generally comic domestic staff."
    No "and"?
    I think in this context (a partial listing) the "and" is optional. The same issue arisies in the next sentence; my stylistic preference is to omit the "ands".
  • "From Reed onwards the fictional boarding school, peopled by such as these, was almost invariably represented in terms of "dark passages, iron bedsteads, scratched desks, chill dormitories and cosy, shabby studies"."
    Might I suggest "Reed established a theme in literary circles where the fictional boarding school was peopled by such characters and was almost invariably represented in terms of "dark passages, iron bedsteads, scratched desks, chill dormitories and cosy, shabby studies"."?
    I would not include "in literary circles", which has an inappropriate high culture connotation. Also I think "tradition" rather than "theme". Otherwise I have adopted your wording.
  • "... at the foundry, and his prolific ..."
    The comma seems redundant.
    Agreed
  • "The grave in Abney Park was eventually surmounted by a memorial stone in the style of a Celtic cross;"
    Any source on when this happened?
    Unfortunately not; none of the biographical sources seem to mention it. I only knew about it because of the Find-a-grave information and image that were on the stub article. I will see what I can find out, but I'm not very hopeful.

The above are mostly minor issues; this article is a most fascinating read and FA-worthy. Jappalang (talk) 00:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your comments which I have very largely taken aboard. Most helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 10:58, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Laser brain
  • The Richards URL just goes to the Oxford DNB main page. Is that deliberate? I'm not sure of the convention, but do we normally indicate for the reader that they would have to enter credentials and then search for the subject?
    The convention is to indicate in the reference that a subscription is required to access the article page. I have now added this to the ref. Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Possibly the smallest nitpick of all time, as it involves one pixel, but is it "B.O.P" with or without the terminal period? I see it both ways here. In the publication's own article, no period. In other sources, it's variously referred to with all periods or none (BOP).
    Good point, actually. I followed the convention used by Cox in his history of the paper, which includes the terminal period (though I slipped up on a couple). I have now rectified this
  • Same comment for "M.P." really. In any British press, I've always seen it written "MP" as it is in the caption for Charles Reed's portrait. (This may have been Jappalang's addition?)
    I think you are right; "MP" is the normal format, and I have changed to this.
  • "Eventually he became Hackney's Member of Parliament" Why continue to write out when you've given us "M.P." above? (Jappalang?)
    Amended
  • "The Earlsfield Chronicle": why quotes and not italics? Where can I get a copy? I'd like to peruse "Is total abstinence a moral duty?"
    I have italicised the Chronicle, per Jappalang above. As to where you can find a copy, well, it wasn't a magazine in general circulation. Maybe the Reed library at the St Bride Foundation has some copies. From what I have gathered about Reed, I imagine his take on the abstinence question would have been "No way, José!", though expressed in suitable Victorian language. Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The connection with Ireland was of enduring importance to Reed, and the family's annual holidays were regularly spent on the shores of Lough Swilly in County Donegal." Would you object to removing the passive in favor of "and the family regularly spent annual holidays on the shores"?
    Good suggestion, adopted. Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "As well as his heavy schedule of duties at the foundry" I think "In addition to" may flow better.
    I hate "In addition to"; I don't like "As well as", either, but what can a poor fella do? I've changed it to "Alongside..." How does that sound? Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Works for me. --Andy Walsh (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Some smoothing over is needed of your strategy for logical quotation. Overall, it looks like you only favor the "inside" period when the quotation is a full sentence ending in a period, but the last sentence of "Private life" betrays that.
    Another fine spot, corrected.
  • "Reed generally enjoyed vigorous good health." What is "generally" modifying?
    I meant it to mean that Reed was usually in good health. Does it not convey that meaning? Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I think it's fine after reading it again this morning—no worries. --Andy Walsh (talk) 16:16, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • You never link to school story that I can see—editorial decision? The term is virtually unknown in the States.
    Now linked in the lead and the School stories section. Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Overall a very nice page. Thanks for the opportunity to read it—I enjoyed learning about "school stories" and will be off now to read a few. --Andy Walsh (talk) 01:35, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thnks for your comments. You can read all Reed's school stories if you use the links in the article's Bibliography section. Happy reading. Brianboulton (talk) 11:56, 17 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Kudpug
  • Opinions are split across several MOS and essays on inline sourcing of lead sections. I came across some items where I would have wanted to check the source immediately, even though they receive further attention later:
•and was dismissive of those school story writers: (perhaps also adding 'early school story writers…)
•was widely imitated by other writers in the school story genre. (explained in ref 33)
•and was hailed as the standard work on the subject (probably explained in ref 34)
  • I have always followed the practice, favoured by the great majority of featured articls, of not citing summary statements in the lead which are cited in the main text. As you say, opinions differ on this; I would cite a direct quotation, but not otherwise. I have adopted your suggestion that the word "early" be added. Brianboulton (talk) 10:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Family background: Grammatical inconstancy; The family were descendants… The family was based in… your choice, but perhaps one or the other.
  • Reworded, thanks.
  • Death and Legacy: I'm not sure about this, but isn't consumption just another word for TB?
  • No, "consumption" was an all-embracing Victorian term which was used for all respiratory diseases and other undiagnosed illnesses including cancer. The term does not have a specific medical meaning. Brianboulton (talk) 10:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I also found it a very nice reed (pun intended) and I'm glad you brought it to my attention, BOP was a firm favourite in the library of my boarding schools. I wonder if Buckeridge or Hamilton took their cues (clues?) from Reed.--Kudpung (talk) 02:44, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I have deliberately avoided the pun ("Please reed this article" etc) and now you have done it. Ah well... Yes, Richards/Hamilton's stories are close relations of Reed's (the first Magnet appeared in 1908, only 15 years after Reed's death), and TBR would probably have enjoyed them, despite their irreverence. Buckeridge's "Jennings" stories are much more distantly related since they were still appearing in the 1990s. Many thanks for your comments. Brianboulton (talk) 10:04, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Tim riley

I greatly enjoyed this article. My modest gleanings:

  • Family background
    • "also a hymn-writer of some note" – it may just be me but I find "note" in this sense breaks flow when used about songwriters et al. (One wonders for a instant – well, I do – what the note is, until the brain catches up with the eye)
  • Early life
    • The information that his schoolmaster was a Mr Alderton seems a touch gratuitous. I wonder if knowing the chap's name adds anything here?
    • "claiming that one of his few successes" – I have been Fowlered into using "claim" sparingly, and only when some assertion of right or status is in question (i.e. not to use it as a synonym for "assert")
    • "and had an engaging style of writing" – could this perhaps do with its own citation?
    • "continue for the rest of his professional life" – later (second para of next section) you just say for the rest of his life, which is shorter and better, meseems.
    • Fine, done.
  • Boy's Own Paper
    • "under the selected title of Boy's Own Paper"- oughtn't this to have the definite article?
    • Absolutely, done.
    • "who had not himself attended boarding school" – without wishing to be too Nancy Mitfordish about it, I think "attended a boarding school" would be preferable
    • Again, done.
  • School Stories
    • Pace Isabel Quigly, I don't think you'd get a majority for the proposition that Reed was a better writer of school stories than P. G. Wodehouse.
I find, on skimming through the inordinate number of books about Wodehouse on my shelves, that the maestro praised Reed, having read him avidly when young. The great PGW authority, Richard Usborne, cites Reed as one of the influences on Wodehouse's first major character, Psmith. Details to hand if you're interested; not in the least miffed if you aren't. Tim riley (talk) 18:14, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Private life
    • "his elder brother, The Rev. Charles Reed" – upper case T needed for the definite article?
    • I think you fixed this.
  • Death and legacy
    • "what was identified at the time as "consumption", but was probably pulmonary tuberculosis" – isn't that what consumption always meant? Whenever I read of a Victorian's suffering from consumption I always assume it's TB, but perhaps I assume too much. (Later: I've just spotted Kudpung's comment and your response, above. I leave my comment as drawn, because if two of your peer reviewers both make the same assumption, perhaps most of your readers will too. Changing "but" to "and" would do the trick, I think.)
    • Fortune – I have lately been told on what looks to me to be good authority (User_talk:Fifelfoo#Measuring_worth) that wills etc are better compared with present values using the average earnings index rather than consumer prices.

That's my lot. – Tim riley (talk) 08:01, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your review; as you can see, I have adopted almost all your points. Brianboulton (talk) 10:27, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
From Ssilvers

Just one quick comment: I don't know what they're doing at FAC these days, but I don't think it makes sense to have a heading "References" followed by a subheading "References" for the in-line footnotes. How about "Sources" instead of the 2nd "References"? -- Ssilvers (talk) 18:29, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Good point; I should have spotted this. The main heading should be (and now is) "Notes and references", with the two subheadings following. I have used this format over umpteen FACs, so I reckon it's acceptable. Thanks for noticing. Brianboulton (talk) 21:23, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I enjoyed reading this and have a few nit-picky suggestions for improvement.

  • In the lead, "only" may be seen as POV in Reed died in November that year, aged only 41. (I am OK with it, but have seen similar comments in FAC recently)
  • In Family background, I know Hackney is linked, but would it be helpful to somehow indicate it is a part of London for those not as familiar with British geography?
  • In Early life, would it help to add the year to Instead, [in YEAR] at the age of 17, Reed left the school to join the family firm at the Fann Street foundry, ...
  • I somehow expected there to be a bit more about his History of the Old English Letter Foundries. We are told it became a standard work and that it is "a memorial in a class by itself". I am not sure what else could be said of it, but I somehow reached the end of the article and was surprised there was not more on it.

Hope this helps and please let me know when this is at FAC. I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:32, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for these comments, all of which I have attended to, in particular your request for more information on the Foundries book. There's not a lot to add, but I have included a brief description of the b ook's content/style. Brianboulton (talk) 22:06, 25 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Act on National Flag and Anthem (Japan)

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I tried looking last night to see if there is any featured articles on topics related to laws. While there are FA's related to court cases or legal concepts, I could not find one specific to legislation of any kind. Because of that, I have no earthly clue what else to add into this article. I added a lot of information last night, so I do need to check on copyediting, making sure the links are still alive and also rearrange the citations just like it was done at Flag of Japan. Anything yall can suggest will be helpful. Thanks, User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 19:35, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • The article should be renamed. If I am not wrong, "Law Regarding the National Flag and National Anthem" is an invention by our editors here. The Japanese Ministry of Justice states it to be the "Act on National Flag and Anthem".[38]
  • Any Japanese reference should be stated to be Japanese and provide a translation of its title.
    I had no idea {{harvnb}} had issues with including trans titles; in light of this, I switched the short refs to the English titles, which I think are more accessible to the general readers on this project. Jappalang (talk) 08:46, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Standardise the citations; use the {{cite ???}} templates if convenient.

Lede

  • The lede fails to state in the first paragraph when this Act was implemented, a question essentially raised when the same paragraph states "Before the passage of this law, ...".
  • "After incidents at school ceremonies, including one where a principal took his own life, it was suggested to make both symbols official in 1999."
    This does not work in the lede: why would "incidents at school ceremonies" be keys to making the symbols official?
  • "... in recent history."
    How "recent" would it be in 2015, 2025, 2050, etc?
  • "Politically, it also showed a ... and showcased ..."
    The law showed/showcased, or the events that surround the enactment/rectification of the law did all those?
  • "In the countries that Japan occupied in World War II, ..."
    "In the countries occupied by Japan in World War II, ..."
  • "... a shift toward the right."
    I am often unsure what the "right" connotes, and I am pretty sure many ordinary people outside the United States are unaware what this political jargon means.
  • The lede compares the views of some citizens to the views of nations: "In the countries ..., some felt ... . Other nations felt ...". Scale- and grammar-wise, I feel it is wrong and confusing.

Summary

  • Why the title ("Summary")? Is the lede not a summary of the subject?
  • "The main purpose of the law was to establish the ..."
    "The Act on National Flag and Anthem was to establish the ..."
  • "... provided in appendixes in the law, ..."
    "... provided in appendixes of the law, ..."
  • "The law did not provide any protocols involving both symbols or how they should be used or respected."
    "The law made no provisions for the use of either symbol or how they should be respected."
  • "One reason for the lack of protocols for both symbols is that if such regulations were in the bill, passage in the Diet might not have been able to take place."
    "The rules were not in the bill because of fears that if included, opposition to the act would increase and prevent its passing by the Diet."
  • Again, should this whole section not be integrated into the lede?

Hinomaru and Kimigayo before 1999

  • "However, whenever the song was played at official ceremonies shortly after the war, it was not sung."
    "However, only the score of the Kimigayo was played during official ceremonies that took place shortly after the war; the lyrics were not sung."

Background of the legislation

  • "On one side is the Hiroshima Prefecture School Board, was demanding that both symbols should be used in every school for ceremonies and instructed all principals to follow this. On the other side of the issue was the teachers in Sera High School did not want the symbols used and their opposition was as high as ever."
    "The Hiroshima Prefecture School Board was demanding all principals to ensure the use of both symbols at every school ceremony. However, the teachers at Sera High School were vehement in their opposition to the use of the symbols."
  • "For Hiroshima Prefecture, the use and view of both symbols were low due to their experiences in World War II, which resulted in being attacked by a nuclear bomb in 1945."
    "The people of Hiroshima Prefacture had a low opinion of the symbols due to their experiences in World War II; their capital was obliterated by a nuclear bomb in 1945." Is that their only grouse, that their capital was nuked? Or were there other circumstances that led to their resentment of the symbols?
    To clarify my query over the Hiroshima citizens' WWII experiences, if their capital was nuked, should they not be angry with the US instead? Or do they blame the Emperor or the wartime cabinet for inviting such trouble to their land? Jappalang (talk) 12:41, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    What the citizens were getting at is if the military government was not going around and taking countries over and attacking the US at Pearl Harbor, the United States would not have struck back with the nuclear weapons on Hiroshima. The book also stated that another area where there was heavy fighting, Okinawa, also has a very low opinion on the symbols. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 17:09, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    That is what I had thought, but it is not reflected in the books (only Okinawa's reasons are studied); it should be noted that after the principal's suicide, the support level in Hiroshima shot up. The point is that without explanation (and we need a source for that), the attitude of the Hiromshima people towards the symbols raise questions when simply attributed to "their experiences in World War II" since the general thought is that the defeated would resent the victors. Jappalang (talk) 06:28, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    Seems to have been removed. Jappalang (talk) 11:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I looked and looked and the only info the books would give me is (Prefectures that had dealt with severe consequences fom World War II had a lower view of the symbols) and only cited Okinawa and Hiroshima (nothing from Nagasaki and they got hit by a nuke). So, I took it out. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 18:43, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... decided that not action should be taken with ..."
    "... decided that no action should be taken with ..."
  • "Originally Prime minister Keizo Obuchi of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) decided that not action should be taken with legislation about the two symbols. After the suicide of Toshihiro, Obuchi changed his mind and that he would like to draft legislation to make the Hinomaru and Kimigayo the official symbols of Japan in 2000. His Chief Cabinet Secretary, Hiromu Nonaka, wanted to have it by November 1999, which was the 10th anniversary of the coronation of Akihito as Emperor."
    "Toshihiro's suicide induced Prime minister Keizo Obuchi of the Liberal Democratic Party (LDP) to draft the legislation for making the Hinomaru and Kimigayo official symbols of Japan. He intended the law to be introduced in 2000, but his Chief Cabinet Secretary, Hiromu Nonaka, wanted it in effect by November 1999, which was the 10th anniversary of the coronation of Akihito as Emperor."

Pre-1999 attempts

  • "In 1974, with the backdrop of the 1972 return of Okinawa to Japan and the 1973 oil crisis, Prime Minister Tanaka Kakuei hinted at a law being passed legalizing both symbols."
    "After the return of Okinawa to Japan in 1972 and the global oil crisis in 1973, Prime Minister Tanaka Kakuei hinted in 1974 of the passing of a law that would legalize both symbols to be used in Japanese society."
  • "At the time of his suggestion, the Japan Teachers Union was in direct opposition of using the anthem because it "smacks of emperor worship" and its' connection to pre-war militarism."
  • "At the time of his suggestion, the Japan Teachers Union was in direct opposition to using the anthem because it "[smacked] of emperor worship" and was connected to pre-war militarism."
  • "While Japan also had a literacy rate of 99%, however a lot of students did not know what Kimigayo was or how to sing it. Kakuei, along with getting the schools to teach and play Kimigayo, he wanted mandatory raising of the Hinomaru flag and reinstatement of the reading of the Imperial Rescript on Education pronounced by the Meiji Emperor in 1890."
    "Although the literacy rate in Japan was 99%, a lot of students did not know what Kimigayo was or how to sing it. Aside from instructing the schools to teach and play Kimigayo, Kakuei wanted them to raise the Hinomaru flag and read the Imperial Rescript on Education, which was pronounced by the Meiji Emperor in 1890, every morning."
  • "Kakuei tried to pass a law in the Diet that same year but failed to obtain a majority."
    "Kakuei tried to pass the law through the Diet in that year but failed to obtain a majority."
  • This subsection should perhaps be before the Background of the legislation.

Party positions

  • "The main conserative parties of Japanm, the LDP and the Liberal Party, were the main supporters of the bill"
    "The main conservative parties of Japan, the LDP and the Liberal Party, were the main supporters of the bill"
  • "The President of the Liberal Party (and future leader of the Democratic Party of Japan (DPJ)) ..."
    No same braces for nested parantheses
  • "... echoed the same setiment ..."
    "... echoed the same sentiment ..."
  • "While some of the leadership did concede the fact ..."
    "While some of its leadership conceded ..."
  • "... the idea of a law establishing that fact was only a possibility but could also violate the Japanese Constitution."
    ".. they considered that establishing the idea as a law could be a violation of the Japanese Constitution."
  • "... because of the connotations of both symbols have with the war era;"
    "... because of the connotations both symbols have with the war era;"
  • "... the CPJ was further opposed for not allowing the issue to be decided by the public."
    "... the CPJ further opposed on the basis that the public was not allowed to decide the issue."
  • "The chairman of the CPJ even went further, saying that while they ..."
    "The chairman of the CPJ said that while they ..."
  • "Previously, Prime Minister Tomiichi Murayama of the Socialist Party of Japan (former name of the SDPJ) accepted both the Hinomaru and Kimigayo as the symbols of Japan in exchange for support from the LDP in the Diet."
    How does this tie in with "The Social Democratic Party (SDPJ) ... were opposed to the bill because of the connotations both symbols have with the war era;"
    "This was a change from the stance held by the SDPJ; Prime Minister ..." was added, but the preceding sentences are referring to the CPJ... Might I suggest "The SDPJ's opposition was a change from the previous stance they have held toward the symbols; Prime Minister ..." if it is accurate? Jappalang (talk) 23:07, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "This was done so a possible alternative anthem could be found."
    "This was done to find an alternative anthem.

Public opinion

  • "For the legislation overall, there was roughly 46% in favor of the bill."
    "Overall, roughly 46% of population were in favor of the bill."
  • "Respondents believe that while the Hinomaru is the flag of Japan, a design that is easy, the history behind the flag should be taught."
    Huh?
  • "... felt that the use of both symbols are school ceremonies are desired and that 68% felt a law should be made for both symbols to be declared official."
    "... felt it desirable to have both symbols used at school ceremonies, and 68% felt both symbols should be made official by law."
  • "..., with 68% felt that both the Hinomaru flag and Kimigayo are the symbols of Japan and 71% supported the bill in the Diet."
    "...; 68% felt that both the Hinomaru flag and Kimigayo are the symbols of Japan and 71% supported the bill in the Diet."
  • "... slightly under 2000 ..."
    "... slightly less than 2000 ..."

Vote

  • "It was enacted into law on August 13."
    "It was enacted as law on August 13."
  • I would prefer to have the tables side-by-side than to have that big, disruptive, white space on the right.

Provisions about the flag

  • "The overall ratio of the flag is to two units length by three units width (2:3)."
    "The overall ratio of the flag is two units length to three units width (2:3)."
  • "The diameter of the red disc is 3/5ths of the length of the flag and is completely centered on the flag. placed toward dead center."
    "The red disc is at the exact center of the flag and its diameter is three fifths of the flag's length."
    "... and its diameter is three-fifths of the flag's length placed toward dead center." does not make sense. Jappalang (talk) 02:18, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    I've clarified that. I hope Zscout370 does not mind. Goodvac (talk) 06:58, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
    It works. The reason why for that wording is as follows; before the 1999 law, not only the flag ratio was different (7x10) but the sun disc was shifted towards the hoist by 1/100th. When the 1999 law came out, the position of the sun was placed in direct center (中 in Japanese) and the ratio changed to 2x3. The size of the sun disc is 3/5ths of the length of the flag (so if the flag has a size of 10x15, the size of the sun would be 6x6 and placed in the middle of the flag). I hope that made sense. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 07:38, 22 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... seven by ten units ..."
    "... seven to ten units ..."
  • "... the red disc was shifted 1/100ths toward the hoist."
    "... the red disc was off-center by one hundredth of the flag's length toward the side of the hoist."
  • "Documents published by various government ministries provided different shades of red used on the flag."
    "Documents published by various government ministries provided different shades of red for the flag."

Provisions about the anthem

  • "The text of the law does not give credit to a single person for the lyrics or music, the musical notation does credit Hiromori Hayashi for the musical arrangement."
    "The text of the law does not credit a single person for the lyrics or music, but the musical notation credits Hiromori Hayashi for the musical arrangement."
  • "However, evidence suggests that it was Yoshiisa Oku and Akimori Hayashi (son of Hiromori) who authored the music and Hiromori put his name on it in the capacity of their supervisor and Chief Court Musician of the Imperial Court."
    "However, evidence suggests that it was Yoshiisa Oku and Akimori Hayashi (son of Hiromori) who authored the music; Hiromori put his name on it in the capacities as their supervisor and Chief Court Musician of the Imperial Court."

Reactions

  • "Obuchi hailed the passage of the law as it gave "clear basis by written law" for the usage of the symbols."
    "Hailed" is wrongly used here; "Obuchi was enthusiastic over the passage of the law because it established a "clear basis by written law" for the use of the symbols."
  • "According to Obuchi, this was one of Japan's biggest moves before the start of the 21st century. When asked at a press conference on his birthday (December 23), Emperor Akihito declined to give his personal opinion about the passage of the law."
    "He called the law's passing one of Japan's biggest moves before the start of the 21st century. Emperor Akihito declined to comment on the law when asked at a press conference on his birthday (December 23)."
  • "The legislation was praised by the head of one teachers' federation that with the formalization of the symbols, proper civics education can be taught and reduce incidents such as Japanese booing other countries' anthems."
    "The head of a teachers' federation praised the legislation, believing that it would help them incalculate people with a a proper sense of respect for a country's symbols, thereby reducing international incidents such as the booing of other countries' anthems by the Japanese."
  • "The legislation also drew condemnation because without a formal apology and "true remorse" over the actions of Japan during World War II, Japanese will not be proud of these symbols."
    Comdemnation from who?
    Current: "The legislation also drew some public condemnation because without a formal apology and "true remorse" over the actions of Japan during World War II, Japanese will not be proud of these symbols." Is "public condemnation" from the Japanese themselves? If so, why not "The legislation also drew condemnation from certain Japanese who are disdainful about their country's actions in World War II. They felt that unless their government issue a formal apology—expressed with "true remorse"—for those incidents, they see no reason to be proud about the flag and anthem."? Jappalang (talk) 04:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "Ozawa saw that with the series of laws passed in 1999, including the one on the symbols of Japan, as a "bloodless revolution" toward a new future, changed Japan's national identity and set up for a possible revision of the constitution."
    I am unable to decipher this sentence.
    Current: "Ozawa saw that with the passage of this law and a few others in 1999, he foresaw the coming of a "bloodless revolution" toward a new future, changing Japan's national identity, possibly setting up changes to the constitution."
    "Ozawa saw the passage of this law and a few others in 1999 as the herald of a "bloodless revolution" toward a new future, which would change Japan's national identity and set up changes to its Constitution." (capitalized to differentiate it from the meaning of "composition" or "health) Jappalang (talk) 04:31, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "... both of which had been occupied by the Empire of Japan ..."
    "... both of which had been occupied in the past by the Empire of Japan ..."
  • "... met with reactions of Japan moving toward the right and also a step toward re-militarization."
    "... met with reactions that Japan was moving toward the right and toward re-militarization." Again what is the "right"?
  • "However, the a spokesperson for the ..."
    "However, the spokesperson for the ..."
  • "... that not only the bill is a matter of Japan's internal debate, it should be resolved to move Japan toward a peaceful future."
    "... that the bill was an issue for the Japanese to resolve on their own to move their country toward a peaceful future."
  • "... that Japan occupied, ..."
    "... that Japan had occupied, ..."
  • "In Singapore, the older generation still harbors ill feelings toward the symbols while the younger generation does not hold similar views."
    "In Singapore, the older generation harbored ill feelings toward the symbols while the younger generation did not hold similar views."
  • "The Philippines government not only believed that Japan was not going to revert back to militarism, but the goal of the 1999 law was to formally establish two symbols (the flag and anthem) in law and every state has a right to create national symbols."
    "The Philippines government believed that Japan was not going to revert to militarism and that the goal of the 1999 law was to formally establish two national symbols (the flag and anthem), which every state has a right to do so."

Political ramifications

  • "The entire vote showcased that the unity of the DPJ was in tatters."
    "The split in DPJ's votes for the Act showed that the unity of its members was in tatters."
  • "While the DPJ allowed a free vote, the leadership of the DPJ was split."
    Incorrect use of conjunction, the leadership would still have been split regardless of the "free vote". This sentence is redundant or should be rephrased to "DPJ had allowed their elected members to cast their votes without care for the party line."
  • "... each party voted strictly on party lines and there was no break in party discipline."
    "... each party voted strictly along its party line and none among them broke party discipline."
  • "This was in contrast to the desired hope of Hatoyama, who wanted to not only vote for the bill to support party unity but to also bring party discipline to the forefront. Due to the split of the DPJ, this allowed the easy passage of a bill that could have been made impossible."
    "Ironically, Hatoyama wanted to use his vote for the bill as a call to his fellow DPJ members for unity. Half of the DPJ supported the bill, reducing the numbers that would have opposed it and making it easy for the bill to pass."
  • "... was the union between the LDP, the Liberal Party and the CGP."
    Union or alliance (whole lot of different meanings)? Furthermore, "between" is used for connections of two subjects, not three.
  • "While the CGP only had 52 seats in the lower house, and had nothing in common policy wise with the LDP, the ideal of being a part of the ruling cabinet caused CGP to join the LDP and support this measure."
    "Although the CGP had a relatively small number of seats (52) in the lower house and had nothing in common with the LDP in terms of policy, it was tempted by the idea of being part of the ruling cabinet and supported the LDP in passing the bill."
  • "The SDPJ also had to abandon key party platforms, such as their earlier opposition to the symbols, security treaties with the United States and the existence of the Self Defense Forces, in order to be a part of the coalition government."
    "The SDPJ had to abandon key party platforms, such as their earlier opposition to the symbols, security treaties with the United States and the existence of the Self Defense Forces, to be a part of the coalition government."
    Various redundant words; furthermore, why are we only told now that a coalition government was in place in 1999?
  • "Despite these concessions, the LDP did not advance any of the traditional platforms of the SDPJ and eventually removed any sort of national policy debate on them."
    I am not really clear what is this trying to say.
  • "With the about face by the CGP, Liberal Party and the SDPJ on this issue, the only party that held a consistent stance on the issue of the symbols was the CPJ."
    "The only party that stuck to its stance throughout the entire debate was the CPJ; the CGP, Liberal Party and SDPJ switched sides to support the bill."
  • "This led to one Japanese paper questioning where the rationality of Japanese politics went with the passage of this bill."
    "The vote switching led one Japanese paper to question the rationality of the country's politics over the passage of this bill."
    What is the name of this paper? If it was pointed as "one Japanese paper", then surely it would be a notable one, right?
  • "The political commentary after the vote considers this law to be the most controversial passed by the Diet since the 1992 "Law Concerning Cooperation for United Nations Peacekeeping Operations and Other Operations", also known as the International Peace Cooperation Law."
    Political commentary by who?
  • "The "International Peace Cooperation Law" committed Japan to United Nations peacekeeping operations, which was a deviation from Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution that calls for the renouncing of the "use of force as means of settling international disputes.""
    "The "International Peace Cooperation Law" was an act that committed Japan to United Nations peacekeeping operations; it was a deviation from Article 9 of the Japanese Constitution, which calls on the country to renounce the "use of force as means of settling international disputes.""

See also

Images

References

I think there are serious issues with the article, namely the title and the prose. Several parts are confusing and could be made easier to read with simpler words than with political jargon. Jappalang (talk) 06:16, 20 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Article moved to suggested title, still working on the cite templates. Legislation is uncopyrighted in Japan, so no protection in the US (and no US tag is really needed). User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 03:27, 21 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the political "right" issues may be fine (at least it gives a hint that it is of the "political spectrum"), but I am leaving it unstruck in case someone comes up with another idea. Jappalang (talk) 11:16, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Okay, I think we got rid most (if not all) of my peeves with the article. It might be beneficial to get another (best a proficient copy-editor) to look through since my language has been known to cause consternation among readers (so my suggestions might still provoke "huh"s)... Otherwise, I would say this is ready for a shot at FA. Jappalang (talk) 00:23, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think Goodvac did an awesome job on the copyediting, but I will go ahead and ask others. User:Zscout370 (Return Fire) 06:08, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, I agree. Goodvac did good there (heh). Jappalang (talk) 09:52, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Actually, Sonia (talk · contribs) went through some sections, and found some stuff I missed. Goodvac (talk) 18:15, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments from Goodvac
  • Throughout the entire article Hinomaru is used to refer to the flag. In "Text of the Act", Nisshōki is used. It may be better to just use Hinomaru since that name will be used in the rest of the article. Also, I don't think it's necessary to have the Japanese text in parentheses or to link Hinomaru and Kimigayo since they have already been linked in the lead. Goodvac (talk) 18:47, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the "reactions" section, it says, "The passage of the law also coincided with the debates about the status of the Yasukuni Shrine, US-Japan military cooperation and the creation of a missile defense". This is vague; how did it coincide? Also, "In Singapore, older generations harbored ill feelings toward the symbols while younger generations did not hold similar views". This is vague too; what were the views of the younger generation? Goodvac (talk) 21:53, 24 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Gregory House

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I believe the article is ready for FA status.

Thanks, Talktome(Intelati) 01:25, 2 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Question: You do not sppear to have edited this article, nor have you been in contact, as far as I can see, with the main editors. Are you in a position to respond to a detailed peer review? This may require detailed knowledge of the subject and the sources used. Also, if you haven't done so, it would be a courtesy to inform the main editors that you are interested in getting this to FAC, and to invite their participation. Brianboulton (talk) 09:08, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, I haven't contributed to the article as there is nothing that I see is missing. The major contributor is the community. The changes have been slow with editors adding small bits at a time. I am a fan of House, so I feel I am able to successfully complete this review.--Talktome(Intelati) 20:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Comments by David Fuchs
  • Lead
    • Antihero = Protagonist (it's a more specific declaration), therefor it doesn't need both descriptors. Danger: This descriptor is apparently unsourced (and doesn't appear in the article body), a big no-no.
    • The lead could use a bit more on the actual design and creation of the character, as well as its depiction by Laurie.
    • The description of the character accolades is fairly good, but I don't think TV Overmind should be called out in the lead, and the final sentence is redundant: "In making a list of the 100 greatest television characters of all time, TV Guide selected Gregory House as the greatest TV character of all time."
  • Character history
    • This section can be condensed mightily, cutting out blow-by-blow "House says this; in episode X later, Y happens"-type stuff. without going blow-by-blow. Things that don't have as much bearing on the history of the show itself (as in, his youth, his schooling, etc.) can be cut down the most, as it's all fictional anyhow.
    • "(House eventually diagnosed the infarction himself)" missing period, don't need the parenthetical structure
  • Personality
    • Once again, another section that can be cut. A good rule of measure here is to stick to whatever can be sourced to the creators or important critics; if it's sourced to an episode, it's probably not that important or it goes into excessive detail (that is hard to definitively support if you're using the entire episode as a primary source. ) In this context, secondary sources are good.
    • "and his addiction goes into remission, so to say" what the heck does this mean? It's not encyclopedic writing.
  • Development
    • Many of the issues with the in-universe depiction elements could probably be minimized in part by putting the development section before the in-universe aspects.
    • "Laurie chose not to change his clothing, but to remain in the costume he wore for the film, he also decided not to shave his beard." Comma splice, and not clear exactly that "the film" is the previously-mentioned Flight of the Pheonix.
    • The comparisons to Sherlock Holmes start getting a bit too granular by end, for example: "In episode 89, House is talking to Lucas and he says, "There is only one truth," which was a famous Sherlock Holmes quote.".
  • Misc.
    • You've got all this good reception information in the lead, but it's not in the body. This is essential, and is the biggest criticism I can levy at this article. If I were reviewing this article, I would not have passed this at WP:GAN, and wouldn't at WP:FAC, without this section. Why does this article deserve to exist? Why is this character so important?
  • References that don't seem to be reliable: Zap2It, Popmatters, Blog critics. What makes these reliable or high quality (WP:FA?
    • Current ref #29 is malformed.
    • I would strongly suggest using Archive.org or Webcitation.org to find or create archives of all online links, as you want to ward off linkrot and the decay of substantiation and verifiability.

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 00:14, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments I agree with everything written above. I had a few comments to add.

  • The first sentence of the lead says Gregory House, M.D., is a fictional protagonist antihero of the American medical drama House. In addition to antihero = protagonist as noted above, he is also "the ... protagonist" of the show - "a protagonist antihero" implies that there are somehow more than one in the program.
  • I wonder if the character history might be organized thematically - perhaps a paragraph on his history, one on his relations to family, friend(s), and lovers, perhaps one on his relations with his colleagues and patients, perhaps one on his leg and drug addiction. That might avoid the minute details of the current format.
  • There are two free images of Hugh Laurie in his article that might be used here - he looks very House-like in one. Perhaps put one near some of
  • There are also two free images of Shore and as the creator of the character I would use at least one of him in this article.

Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:04, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Roddon

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
A new article about a term used to describe a geographical feature in the East Anglia region deserves, I believe, a wider audience; especially considering rodham, one of the documented spellings of the term, has other more widely used meanings! Be bold whilst the main contributor still has access to local library sources. Anyway, enough blather, why not tear the article to pieces or perhaps just consider a regrading? --Senra (Talk) 16:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks, Senra (Talk) 16:37, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is interesting, but perhaps too much weight is given to the etymological debate and too little weight to formation and settlement. I'd like to know more about the latter two, and I think expansion of both would improve the article. Here are other suggestions, mostly about prose and style issues.

  • The link-checker at the top of this review page finds one dead citation url.
I checked again just now, and the link checker finds nothing amiss. I either got a false positive or made a mistake. In any case, the links now look fine. Finetooth (talk) 23:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Lead

  • The lead should be an inviting summary of the whole article rather than an introductory paragraph. The existing lead defines roddon and mentions building but says nothing about etymology or formation. A good rule of thumb is to include in the lead at least a mention of each of the main text sections. WP:LEAD has details.
  • "A roddon, also written as rodham, roddam or rodden, is the dried raised remains... " - Since "roddon" is singular and "remains" is plural, this is a bit awkward. Would "bed" be better than "remains"?

Etymology

  • "The term roddon... " - Italicise "roddon" when preceded by "the term"? Ditto a couple of sentences later?
  • "Silvester suggests that the term roddon... " - Would it be helpful here to give Silvester's full name and a brief description? I'm thinking of something like "archeologist Bob Silvester". Ditto for some of the other authors?
  • "is more popular amongst local writers such as Fowler" - The Manual of Style prefers "among" to "amongst".
  • "and Godwin (1978)[7], though" - Punctuation should come before the ref rather than after.
  • as a local term 'used only in the Isle of Ely' - The Manual of Style prefers double quotes to single except in the case of nested quotes.
  • "although the earliest written use of the word roddam was by Skertchly (1877)." - This seems to repeat what was already explained in the previous sentence, but then it becomes clear in the next sentence that the O.E.D. takes a different view about the earliest use of roddam. Would it be more logical to keep the sentences about "roddam" together and to avoid mixing "rodham" and "roddam"?
  •  Done I was trying to keep the discussions by the three sources (Silvester, Astbury and OED) together but I think I failed even at that. Rearranged the prose - hopefully it reads better now --Senra (Talk) 21:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "None of the different spelling variations of roddon are found... " - Should be "None ... is" since "none" is singular.
  • "are found in the Reverend Forby's" - The Manual of Style would prefer "Robert Forby" without the professional title.
  • although he defines gall as "a vein of sand in a stiff soil, through which water is drained off, and oozes at softer places on the surface; otherwise sand-galls." - Is there any connection between a "gall" and a "roddon"? Would sand normally be found in soils consisting of clay and silt? In other words, are roddons normally sandy?
  • comment interesting and possibly true. No source for this and my own insertion of gall may even be WP:OR. (More WP:OR ...) ... old dried up tidal rivers will be sandy so roddons formed from such rivers will contain sand
  •  Done removed the WP:OR --Senra (Talk) 21:50, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Formation

  • suggests the peat in this area was formed by a large marine incursion in about 2400 BC" - It would be helpful to briefly explain the relationship between marine incursions and peat formation. Many readers will know nothing about peat or where it comes from. The term marine incursion suggests that the sea rose and covered formally drier land with sea water for a considerable time. How this leads to peat formation is not clear. What does the sea water do to make peat? What other ingredients are necessary?
  • comment guess I need to explain this in the article because as far as I understand it, peat is formed by the decay of vegetable matter in fresh water and yes I know the source said marine incursion. The fen basin has had a complex marine and fresh water incursion history which I had not wanted to go into here --Senra (Talk) 22:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
If adding an explanation to the main text messes up the prose flow, perhaps the explanation could go into a note. I don't think it would have to be elaborate. Finetooth (talk) 23:13, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The roddons in the area have been sampled confirming their formation from the mid– to late–Holocene age (6000–2000 BP (before present day))." - The double-nested parentheses are best avoided. Maybe just linking to Before Present would do, or you could spell BP out.
  • "the raised nature of the silt banks are due to the 'subsistence' of the surrounding area," - Double quote marks. Also, assuming this means "subsidence", it might be helpful to add a [sic] and a translation.
  • "mainly due to man-made events such as agriculture and drainage" - These two aren't "events". Would "activities" be better?
  • "; a permanent change, which will mean future marine incursions cannot be predicted from past events." - The sentence to which this is appended is a bit too complex. Perhaps splitting off this part would be better. Maybe "These have permanently changed the environment, and future marine incursions may not have the same effects as historical ones."

Settlements

  • "major structures such as the monastery" - Plural, monasteries?
  • To eliminate the one-sentence orphan paragraph at the end of this section, I'd suggest merging it with the paragraph above it.
  • It would be interesting to know how these structures fared compared to nearby structures built on other soil types. Are the "roddon" buildings more sturdy? Are people still building on roddons? Do people consider the roddon structures to be more desirable or less desirable than other structures? Do any building codes or rules apply specifically to structures built on roddons?
  •  Done added a little bit. Sources do not have much to say unfortunately. There are no specific building codes that I can find. Not sure home owners are that aware to be honest. I hope I have done enough --Senra (Talk) 15:21, 18 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Images

  • File:Benwick2.jpg is a duplicate of the same image at the Commons. I have never done the sort of clean-up involved with this kind of duplication, but I'm pretty sure it would be helpful to tag the English Wikipedia version for removal.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page.

Thank you for the review - I will address the issues raised in the next few days --Senra (Talk) 22:28, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Rodw comments: Thanks for inviting me to look at the article. I don't have the copy editing skills you may be looking for, and I'm more familiar with the peat bogs of the Somerset Levels than The Fens but do have a couple of questions/comments:

  • There is no mention of the peat being cut for fuel - didn't this occur in the area?
  • comment Yes it did. I am thinking the article is about the old river beds not the peat. Finetooth asked me to mentioned how peat was formed which I did. I will make a mention --Senra (Talk) 09:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • In the formation section both BP and BC/AD are used for time periods - I found this confusing and I wonder if they could be made consistent with one system or another?
  • agreed the difficulty I have is following sources and I have no reliable method of converting from one to the other. The modern trend is to use BP whilst older sources use BC/AD. I will research this one --Senra (Talk) 09:53, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • stet Most of the dates in the article are either explicit, e.g. 1897 or calibrated radio-carbon dates quoted as years before present (BP). There is currently one BC date (due Worssam & Taylor 1975, p. 93.) which I considered converting to BP. I raised this on the reliable source noticeboard and I was advised not to convert BC to BP --Senra (Talk) 13:47, 23 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • This sentence ""subsidence" of the surrounding area, mainly due to man-made activities such as agriculture and drainage." could do with expansion - when did drainage start? why? Should a link to the work of the Middle Level Commissioners be considered? This is certainly an issue on the Levels where large areas are drying out & archaeological sites are having to be kept artificially wet.
  • The phrase "X is built on a roddon" referring to various places, is reused multiple times - perhaps this could be reworded in some instances?
  • The final sentence about Rodham Farm could be rewritten and the reference details removed.

I hope these comments are helpful.— Rod talk 08:39, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

  • General comments
  • I think I am struggling with this article. Two reviewers have now asked for further details on peat and drainage. The former is entirely incidental to a roddon whilst the latter has had a recent (post 17th century) minor influence. I need to take note of the review comments whilst finding enough material to keep the article centred on roddons. Yes, I am struggling.
  • The article discusses a specific local geographical feature that has not been widely studied so the literature is sparse and cannot even agree on the etymology never mind the formation mechanism.
  • Any help from other editors would be appreciated on this
--Senra (Talk) 10:18, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I think the comments about Peat & drainage are related to the elevation of the Roddons above the surrounding land. You might want to acquire a copy of Jennings paper - The Origin of the Fenland Meres: Fenland Homologues of the Norfolk Broads, Geological Magazine (1950), 87: 217-225 Cambridge University Press, doi: 10.1017/S0016756800076950 & Godwins 1975 paper Studies of the Post-Glacial History of British Vegetation: XVI. Flandrian Deposits of the Fenland Margin at Holme Fen and Whittlesey Mere, Hunts.].— Rod talk 10:35, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Fair enough. I have requested the above articles --Senra (Talk) 11:10, 19 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Romania

[edit]
Previous peer review
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 because I have been working on it significantly lately and I would like to know what are its weaknesses (other than the citation tags that I left for myself).

Thanks, Nergaal (talk) 09:36, 28 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Many thanks! Feel free to leave behind tags if that is easier for you. Nergaal (talk) 21:23, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is a huge article that took a long time to review. I tried to be thorough, but I know that I did not catch everything. Still, I am hoping this will help you along the road toward FA. I think you would do well to trim the article here and there to try to get it down closer to 100 kilobytes than it is now. I suggest a couple of places in my notes below where I think it could be compressed. Here are other comments and suggestions:

  • The tools at the top of the review page find seven dead urls in citations and a couple of dabs.
  • I see a lot of overlinking. A good rule of thumb is to link something no more than once in the lead and no more than once again in the main text. For example, Moldavia is linked once in the lead and at least six times in the early sections of the article. Many of the geographic entities are linked multiple times. "Cities" and "communes" are linked twice in consecutive sentences in the "Administrative divisions" section. These are just a few examples.
  • Captions consisting solely of a sentence fragment don't take a terminal period.

Lead

  • "monarchy, it gained recognition" - Semicolon instead of comma?
  • "has the 9th largest territory" - Generally, numbers from one to nine are spelled out as words, and 10 or bigger appear as digits. Should this be "ninth"? Ditto for seventh and sixth? Ditto for other numbers in the article?
  • "(with 21.5 million people)" - Generally anything like "21.5 million" needs to be held together with a no-break code per WP:NBSP to avoid awkward separation on line-break. I'll just point out this first one and leave the rest to you. Others to watch out for include things like 25 AD and 19th century.
  • The lead is quite well-written and of appropriate length, but it is not a true summary of the whole article because it leaves out Culture, for example. A good rule of thumb is to at least mention in the lead each of the main text sections. It shouldn't be hard to sneak those in there without damaging the prose flow or making the lead too long.

Prehistory and history

  • "in book IV of his Histories" - Italics for Histories?
  • "in book IV of his Histories (Herodotus) written 440 BCE, where he writes about the Getae tribes" - Maybe tighten to "in book IV of his Histories, Herodotus in 440 BCE writes about the Getae tribes"?
  • "between 82BC - 44 BC," - Use "and" rather than spaced hyphen?
  • "but this was split into 4 or 5" - Four or five instead of 4 or 5?
  • "Consequently, Roman Empire held only Scythia Minor province at present Romania after this withdraw." - Three problems. Suggestion: "Consequently, the Roman Empire held only Scythia Minor province at present Romania after this withdrawal. I'm not sure how to fix the third problem, because I'm not sure how to interpret "at present Romania".
  • "group both South and North of the Danube" - Lower-case "south" and "north".

Middle Ages

  • "until middle of the 19th century" - Missing word? "until the middle"?
  • "The Habsburgs in turn expanded their empire in 1718 to include an important part of Wallachia, called Oltenia (which was only returned in 1739) and in 1775 over the north-western part of Moldavia, later called Bukovina. - Doesn't make sense as written. Maybe breaking it into two sentences would help.

World Wars and Greater Romania

  • "on August 14/27 1916" - The front slash is rarely used. Better would be "on August 14–27, 1916"
  • "(almost 300,000 km2/120,000 sq mi)" - Here I would recommend (almost 300,000 square kilometers or 120,000 mi2) with no-break codes to hold things together. Generally, the main units are spelled out and the secondary units abbreviated. Ditto for the other similar constructions in the article.
  • "The authoritarian King Carol II abdicated in 1940, and succeeded by the National Legionary State" - Missing word, "was"?

Communism

  • "which were won with 80% of the vote" - Generally, "percent" is preferred to % in simple cases like this. Exceptions would include complicated listings such as demographics sections, tables, and scientific documents in which % is repeated many times.
  • "drained by mixed Soviet-Romanian" - En dash instead of hyphen?
  • "In 1965, Nicolae Ceauşescu came to power and started to pursue independent policies such as being the only Warsaw Pact country to condemn the Soviet-led 1968 invasion of Czechoslovakia, and to continue diplomatic relations with Israel after the Six-Day War of 1967; establishing economic (1963) and diplomatic (1967) relations with the Federal Republic of Germany." - This is a little too complex and is glued together awkwardly with a semicolon. Maybe two sentences would be better.

Politics

  • "The president is elected by popular vote for maximum two terms," - Maybe "a maximum of two terms"?
  • "Each county is further subdivided into cities and communes, which have own mayor and local council." - "have their own mayors and local councils"?
  • "level divisions of European Union" - "the European Union"?

Armed Forces

  • "The total defence spending in 2007 accounted for 2.05% of total national GDP, or approximately US$2.9 billion (39th in the world), and a total of about 11 billion will be... " - "Percent" instead of %. Probably no need for US in front of $2.9 billion. "$11 billion".
  • "will be commissioned until 2010" - "in" rather than "until"?

Environment

  • "In Romania there have been identified 3,700 plant species from which to date 23 have been declared natural monuments, 74 missing, 39 are endangered, 171 vulnerable and 1,253 are considered rare." - Suggestion: "In Romania 3,700 plant species have been identified, of which 23 have been declared natural monuments, 74 missing, 39 endangered, 171 vulnerable, and 1,253 rare."
  • "The vegetation is distributed in an storied manner" - "a storied manner"?

Economy

  • "Romania is an upper-middle income country economy" - Tighten to "Romania has an upper-middle-income economy"?
  • "1855 lei" - Comma separator here and in $1,110.39 in the next line?

Transportation

  • Spell out and abbreviate ISPA on first use? Lowercase "government"?

Tourism

  • "In 2006, Romania registered 20 million overnight stays by international tourists, an all-time record,[162] but the number for 2007 is expected to increase even more." - Some of this section seems out-of-date, particularly this sentence.
  • "are among the most popular attraction" - Plural, "attractions"?
  • "Other major natural attractions in Romania such as Danube Delta,[99] Iron Gates (Danube Gorge), Scărişoara Cave and several other caves in the Apuseni Mountains have yet to receive great attention." - This sentence seems self-contradictory. If they are "major attractions", they are receiving "great attention", no?
  • This section seems a little rah-rah to me and might be a candidate for compression.

Religion

  • "Church officials place the number of believers at 80,000-100,000.[2]" - Something's gone awry here with the citation.
  • "Unitarians represent 4.55%" - Would these percentages be more readable if rounded to the nearest whole number?

Education

  • "It has subsisted and even prospered during the Communist regime." - Past tense, and is "subsist" the right word? Maybe "It persisted and even prospered during the Communist regime."
  • "Out of these, 650,000 in kindergarten, 3.11 million (14% of population) in primary and secondary level, and 650,000 (3% of population) in tertiary level (universities)." - This sentence needs a verb.
  • "The results of the PISA assessment" - Spell out and abbreviate PISA on first use? Ditto OECD?
  • "was included in the first 500 top universities world wide" - Tighten to "was included in the top 500 universities worldwide"?
  • "Using similar methodology to these rankings, it was reported that the best placed Romanian university, Bucharest University, attained the half score of the last university in the world top 500." - A bit awkward. Suggestion: "The highest-ranking Romanian university, Bucharest University, attained a score half as high as the last-place university in the world top 500."

Culture

  • I would consider deleting the cultural overview, which largely repeats information from the "History" section. I think you could just start the section with the "Arts" subhead.

Arts

  • "The German philosophy and French culture were integrated into modern Romanian literature, and a new elite of artists led to the appearance of some of the classics of Romanian literature such as Mihai Eminescu, George Coşbuc, Ioan Slavici." - The writers aren't the same as the classics, as the sentence implies. Suggestion: "German philosophy and French culture were integrated into modern Romanian literature, and a new elite of artists such as Mihai Eminescu, George Coşbuc, and Ioan Slavici created some of the classics of Romanian literature."
  • "Although they remain little known outside Romania, they are very appreciated within Romania for giving birth to a true Romanian literature by creating modern lyrics with inspiration from the old folklore tales." - This needs a source and maybe should just be deleted; its meaning is vague. I think it means, "Although little-known outside their homeland, these poets are popular in Romania."
  • "a central figure of the modern movement and a pioneer of abstraction, the innovator of world sculpture by immersion in the primordial sources of folk creation." - Like the "Tourism" section, this section seems a bit over the top. Would it be better to use plain language and to skip some of the adjectives?
  • "a composer, violinist, pianist, conductor, and teacher,[200] the annual George Enescu Festival is held in Bucharest in his honor." - The festival isn't that list of things. Needs re-casting.

Monuments

  • "The UNESCO List of World Heritage Sites[206] includes Romanian sites" - The sentence that starts this way is a bit of a run-on and might work better if re-cast as two sentences.
  • "Also, in 2007, the city of Sibiu, famous for its Brukenthal National Museum, is the European Capital of Culture alongside the city of Luxembourg." - Here is another example of something that needs updating. In this case, just changing the verb from "is" to "was" will do, but other dated claims might need a bit more re-working.

Sports

  • Spell out UEFA and FIFA on first use?

Notes

  • Since this is the English Wikipedia, would it be helpful to include English translations of the notes?
  • Note 3: Italicize the titles if they are books.
  • Note 4 should not have direct links to external sources. Instead, use inline citations.

References

  • The formatting of all of the dates in the citations need to be consistent; that is, choose one kind of formatting and stick with it.
  • The refs that are in languages other than English should indicate which language. I believe you can use the |format parameter for this information; e.g. |format = Italian. Not quite sure since I haven't had to do this yet myself.
  • Some of the citations are incomplete. For example, citation 118 could include the publisher and the publication date, which are available from the source document. When the information is available, web citations should include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and access date.

External links

  • I would try to pare these down. You can delete any that are already linked in the main text, for example.

Images

  • File:Mamaia above.jpg has a description page that is incomplete. Where did the image come from? How can readers verify that the license is correct?
  • File:Bran Castle.jpg has a description page with too little information to verify the license claim.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for all these comments and the tweaks in the text. I will go through them during the next weeks and then hopefully through GAN. Nergaal (talk) 04:59, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Scabies

[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 because it is a pretty important subject and I don't know where to start improving it.

Thanks, Peter.C • talk 23:41, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Jappalang
  • Dablink (tool in the box on the right of this peer review page) shows a disambiguation link; please fix it.
I check and it is still up. Might be your ISP or they might have had temp down time. Peter.C • talk 10:18, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Yes, indeed it is back up. Jappalang (talk) 02:50, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  • Several information in this article are not cited. This does not allow others to verify the statements made. The basics of Wikipedia's verifiability policy demands citations for statements that are likely to be challenged. In practice, this is usually most of the article's text and one would expect each paragraph to be cited to a reliable source.
  • The skimpy sections could indicate either:
    • there is still information that was not included: look up more reliable sources to find what else can be written about that theme.
    • there is insufficient information for that section: group the information with others to present a more substantial look.
    • the information may not be relevant to the article: consider removing it from the article.
  • I found information repeated across the article. They should be grouped.
  • Even if images are perfectly "free", I think it is much more effective in being selective than to splash many of them across the article.
  • I believe that we should strive to have our articles accessible to the general readership, and avoid terminologies (medical or scientific) that can be quite foreign to readers.
  • "Scabies may be accurately diagnosed clinically in places where it is common when diffuse itching presents along with either lesions in two typical spots or a household member is also itchy."
    Okay... I have a hard time understanding this sentence.
  • Citations are inconsistent; use a template or make sure they follow the MOS and are consistent in format among each other.
  • The language really needs a copy-edit. I gave it one, but I am pretty sure someone else could do better.
  • There seems to be a few contradictions in the presented information.
  • Medical articles are held to much higher standards than others (because of the issues that might arise if faulty or nonsensical information are inserted and read by the public). Generally, peer-reviewed papers are the sources of choice for medical articles. Not having a medical background, I am unable to effectively judge the sources used here, but tertiary sources (encyclopaedias) and certain books and websites worry me. Have you contacted WP:MEDICINE for advice on this article?
  • The lede is supposed to be a summary of the article; everything in it should be in the main body text and sourced accordingly. So where did "[known] colloquially as the seven year itch" come from? Jappalang (talk) 01:09, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

This article requires serious work. I have made some changes in terms of structure and such, enacting what I said above about the sections. Feel free to revert if it introduces severe errors but take note of the tags I added to highlight what I said above. Jappalang (talk) 08:04, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Speed of light

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
The article has under gone substantial revision since the previous PR last year and the failed FAC earlier this year. Since the article will not pass FAC at the moment due to stability issue as the result of local WP:DRAMA caused by the activities of a now banned editor, it would be nice to get feedback from a broader audience in the meantime.

In particular, it would be good to have comments about accessibility from editors with a less technical background. From editors with a more technical background, it would be nice to have feedback on whether they think the article covers all bases and whether they think some aspects are given too much coverage. (See last thread on the talk page.)

Thanks a lot in advance,TimothyRias (talk) 12:09, 27 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: This is a very important topic so thanks for working on improving the article. I am somewhere in the middle on technical background, not a physics person, but know a fair amount about Physics. Anyway, here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • The external link checker in the tool box finds two dead links and two possible problem links.
  • I also wonder about some of the references used - one of the things checked at FAC will be the quality of reference sources, so what makes refractiveindex.info a WP:RS? Why not use some peer reviewed published source?
  • I also note that some refs appear to have incomplete information - for example access dates for internet refs, which need URL, title, author if known, and publisher. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • There is also at least unreliable source? tag that should be addressed before the next try at FAC
  • Be consistent on names. For example, Albert Einstein's full name is spelled out and linked in the lead, and then on next mention in the body of the article he is just referred to as Einstein, which is as the MOS suggests. However the third time he is mentioned he is Albert Einstein again, which is against the MOS (just Einstein is enough). Similarly, there are a fair number of people referred to by just their last names, i.e. Maxwell. I believe by the MOS these should be spelled out on first use (James Clerk Maxwell).
  • There are some places that still seem to need references - for example the whole thrid paragraph in Fundamental role in physics has no refs, and much of the second paragraph in the same section needs a ref (everything after Note 4).
  • Distance measurement - the whole section has no refs.
  • Second paragraph under Measurement is a direct quote, but has no ref.
  • WP:MOSIMAGES says to avoid sandwiching text between two images - on my monitor at least, there is such a sandwich in the Fundamental role in physics section.
  • I would also watch WP:OVERLINKing - most links appear once in the article lead and on first mention in the article body (plus refs and perhaps captions). James Clerk Maxwell and National Institute of Standards and Technology are each linked twice in the body of the article.
  • I am not a physicist, but I think the coverage of relativity is not too much. Given the importance of c for the development of relativity and vice versa, I am OK with the level of detail.
  • I wonder if the History section could come earlier in the article. Much of the Numerical value, notation and units section is historical. Some repetition might be avoided this way (not sure)
  • I also think this needs a copyedit - the prose seems OK, but as I read for comprehension, I also noted some typos like In the second half of the 19th century and the beginning of the 20th century several experiments were performed to try to detect this motion, the most famous of which is the experiment performed by Albert Michelson and Edward Morley in 1887.[118] the detected motion was always less than the observational error...

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 21:11, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your comments. I've started addressing some of the issues you raised. (This may take awhile). About the history section, I'm not sure if having it earlier is such a good idea. This would delay discussing many of the more significant topics.TimothyRias (talk) 15:50, 13 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

RJH comments: It looks to be in decent shape to me, with just a few entries tagged for issues. Here's a few remarks that I hope are of some use:

  • The lead has two separate instances where it mentions the types of particles that travel at the speed of light. This is somewhat redundant.
  • I'd like to see some mention of why the index of refraction is significant (beyond merely existing), both in the lead and in the "In a medium" section. (Yes I understand why. :)
  • "...limits the theoretical maximum speed of computers" appears to ignore both parallelism and possibly quantum computing. I think it should say "maximum speed at which computer components can communicate".
  • These should have a year specified: "more recent observations", "a new approach to tests". "Some authors use" is vague; it might be better to just say "sometimes c is used". These use unnecessary additive terms: "Also in the 11th century", "Another counter-intuitive consequence", "It also is generally assumed"
  • "it is normally impossible for any information or energy to travel faster than c". This doesn't clarify the terms of normality.
  • I think it would be worth stating somewhere that we don't currently understand why the speed of light has the value it has; that it just appears to be an inherent property of the vacuum.

Thanks.—RJH (talk) 21:11, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the "standard" answer to the question why the speed of light has the value it has is that, since c is a dimensionful scale parameter of the theory, the question is meaningless unless we specify which units it is to be measured in, and even then the answer would tell us more about the units than about c itself (IOW a better question than why light is so fast is why we are so slow).[39] Anyway, I agree that that could be mentioned somewhere in the article. A. di M. (talk) 13:35, 11 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I understand that c is inextricably linked with the other properties of the universe, so my question then is whether c must have the value it has, or can it be scaled to possess different relative values in, say, other universes in the multiverse? But really I was just trying to look at the topic from a very basic perspective.—RJH (talk) 17:22, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
My view is that an universe with a different value of c but the same values for all dimensionless physical constants would be indistinguishable from ours, but I know there are different views (though I'm not sure I understand them). A. di M. (talk) 18:42, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

List of manga series by volume count

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm completing this PR listing for the anon 117.195.6.146 (talk · contribs · WHOIS). I'll ask them momentarily to swing by and add thoughts on what they're looking for with this PR.

Thanks, 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 17:35, 8 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I think the ongoing series should still have the last release on it. The color coding can be keyed so that people reading it realize green=ongoing. Knowing the last release date for ongoing seires is just as relevant as finished series, especially if that series goes into hiatus periods.陣内Jinnai 08:29, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
That's been my intent with the list for a long time, but other editors periodically replace the last released date on ongoing series with "Ongoing", and I don't necessarily feel like fighting over it. Similarly, while it is pretty easy to do this with the last volume release, the last chapter release is a different story; I'm not sure how best to handle that. 「ダイノガイ千？！」? · Talk⇒Dinoguy1000 14:44, 9 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
Well both collums should be the same, either serialized or tankoban. You'll just confuse the readers otherwise, even those who are familiar with manga.陣内Jinnai 23:25, 12 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting and well-developed list. Here are some suggestions for further improvement:

  • Readers who can't see the colors might find a key box with a special symbol to be helpful. The key box could replace the explanatory line, "Ongoing series are highlighted in light green." Here's how the box might look:
Key
† Ongoing series

The † could then be inserted in each appropriate box in the "Volumes" column to show that the row is colored.

  • It would be good to expand the lead to include a brief explanation of manga and tankōbon. They are linked, but it would be helpful to non-fans to give them a quick start without having to read other articles. The lead should also include a more detailed summary of what the list contains. For example, it might mention the series with the most volumes through October 2010 and the series with the fewest. It might say something about the range of sizes. It could also give a summary of the kinds of contents; i.e., baseball, racing, or whatever.
  • "Manga" should not be double-bolded in the lead. Since linking adds the second layer of bolding, you might have to link to "manga" on second reference instead of first. Other work-arounds are possible.
  • The list has an awful lot of red links. I would not redlink anything in the list more than once. There's no point in linking Ushio Shuppansha twice in the "Reference" section as well as in the list. A lot of red links would go away if you eliminated this kind of redundancy.
  • You'll need to address the "citation needed" tags.
  • The all-caps and bolding in the "Title" column should be replaced with words in Wikipedia house style; i.e., title case without bolding.
  • As many of the question marks as possible should be replaced with sourced data.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 17:40, 14 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Somalis in the United Kingdom

[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 because it has been the subject of significant debate in the past, and with only a few editors contributing there has been rather a lot of edit warring. Now that a stable version of the article appears to have been achieved, I'd like to get an outsider's view on how to improve it further and perhaps get it to good article status. Comments on the Money transfer operators section of the article would be particularly welcome, given the discussion here. Cordless Larry (talk) 13:55, 14 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I was one of the "edit warriors" Cordless Larry is talking about. After my last edit I disengaged and only came back recently to see that the single-purpose account had also disappeared. Still, the article has been much expanded recently and looks in reasonably good shape. I think we should add some info on topics such as education, clan structure (touched upon in Community organisations), and expand Community organisations and some other sections. I still think the Social issues and solutions section is disproportionately small and unbalanced given the large amount of stuff written on this. I realise it's a sensitive topic and might offend people, though that's no reason to keep it out the article.
We also need to have page numbers for all the citations where it's needed; some have them but a few don't. For this, I prefer splitting the citations to each page rather than combining them and using the rather clumsy {{rp|3}} template to give the page number. There was also a problem with the single-purpose account erasing reliable sources that disagreed with his opinion, or of demanding very up-to-date sources where this may not be available.
The music section seems to be a discussion of Somali music in general rather than in the UK. Some sources that link the two would be good. There may also be too much detail on Mo Farah. The Money transfer operators section was an insertion by the single-purpose account and goes into excruciating detail ("including one [branch] in Dubai") and reads like advertising: "In 2008, Dahabshiil's CEO, Abdirashid Duale, was awarded Top Manager of the Year by the International Association of Money Transfer Networks in recognition of the outstanding services that the firm offers its clients." "Outstanding services"? Somewhat surprised that Cordless Larry has been reluctant to touch this section.
Also the 250,000 estimate has been reported by many media organisations not just the BBC e.g. [40]. I suppose the main issue is the general sweeping-under-the-carpet of the problematic issues like crime, terrorism (which has no mention at all), poverty etc. It may also be worth notifying the main editors of the article of this peer review, including the single-purpose account. Christopher Connor (talk) 06:52, 15 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]
I've now informed other recent editors. Thanks for the tip. Cordless Larry (talk) 07:29, 16 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Just to note that the money transfer operators section has been trimmed since I posted the review request. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:13, 1 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for all of your work on this, here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • There is a major cleanup banner at the top of the article "This article cites its sources but does not provide page references. You can help to improve it by introducing citations that are more precise." This would actually disqualify the article for PR normally
  • I think that the lead does not meet WP:LEAD. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way but most of the headers in the article do not seem to be mentioned in the lead.
  • Is there any chance for more images? Perhaps a map or two? Or are there more prominent Somalis in the UK who there are free iamges of?
  • I would try to make it clearer what sentences like this refer to - just the UK or all of Europe? Between 1985 and 2006, Somalis figured among the top ten largest groups of asylum seekers.[14]
  • Try to avoid vague time expressions - use things like the current year or as of YEAR instead. Over time these can quickly become outdated. Just in the lead there is Recent unofficial estimates reported by media organisations suggest that up to 250,000 Somalis may now live in the UK. What is recent here? When does now refer to? Or this During the 1980s and 1990s, the civil war in Somalia lead to a large number of Somali immigrants, comprising the majority of the current Somali population in the UK. might be better if ended with ... comprising the majority of the Somali population in the UK as of 2010.
  • Provide context to the reader - for example in The UK has historically been close to Somalia, through its involvement in the British Somaliland protectorate. it would help to give the year this was established.
  • Is any sort of number known for Refugees and asylum seekers? How many refugees fled Somalia and how many of these came to the UK originally?
  • Secondary migration - can anything more be said about Somalis coming to the UK from Sweden and Denmark? Currently this section is almost all Netherlands.
  • First sentence of Population and distribution is pretty long and complex - could it be broken into two sentences for clarity?
  • Since we later learn Arabic is also an official language of Somalia, change this from "the official language" (implies one and only) to "an official language" The Somali language is the mother tongue of the Somali people, and the official language of Somalia.
  • There are some short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections that impede the flow of the article. These should be combined with others where possible, or perhaps expanded. For example, Education and Community organisations are each only two sentences long.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:31, 6 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Ruhrfisch. These comments are very helpful and I'll try to act on them when I get the time. Cordless Larry (talk) 09:08, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

An Oak Tree

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Article on an abstract Australian artwork from 1973. Listing at PR now; request has not been addressed since July 2009 (!).

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 11:35, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting and amusing article. I have several suggestions for further improvement.

Lead

  • The lead should be an inviting summary of the whole article, not simply an introduction. The existing lead says nothing about the critical reaction, for example. A good rule of thumb is to include in the lead at least a mention of each of the main text sections and not to include anything important that is not mentioned in the main text. WP:LEAD has details.
  • I would not link "artwork" since most readers are already familiar with the term. On the other hand, linking to conceptual art would be helpful.
  • What does the "RA" after Michael Craig-Martin stand for?
  • "The text takes the form of a Q&A about the artwork" - Q&A should be spelled out, probably as "question-and-answer text".
  • Assuming that nothing in the lead is not repeated in the main text, the place to add in-line citations is in the main text rather than the lead.
  • It's not a good idea to use a lot of direct quotations in the lead. Use them in the main text, and paraphrase in the lead.
  • The Manual of Style advises against extremely short paragraphs and extremely short sections. The last paragraph of the lead should either be expanded or merged.

Artwork

  • "whose ideal height is 253 centimetres" - This should also be expressed in imperial units, thus: 253 centimetres (100 in).
  • "whose ideal height is 253 centimetres with matte grey-painted brackets screwed to the wall." - Should that be "the ideal height of which is 253 centimetres (100 in) and which rests on matte grey-painted brackets screwed to the wall"? Also, what is the meaning of "matte" in this context?
  • "the brackets should be resprayed and the glass and shelf even replaced" - Delete "even"?
  • "The text contains a semiotic argument" - Link to semiotics?
  • "and "It would no longer be accurate to call it a glass of water" - Sentences don't start with a small letter.
  • "prior to it his concern had been deconstruction" - Link deconstruction?

History

  • More short paragraphs here. I would consider merging or expanding.

Critical reaction

  • "art involves an act of faith comparable to the belief that, through transubstantiation" - Nothing inside a direct quotation should be linked.

Derivative works

  • Consider expanding this extremely short section. Tell us a bit more about the play. Tell us a bit more about Little Artists and what the Lego business is all about.

See also

  • No need to link anything here that is already linked in the main text.

Other

  • The link checker at the top of this review page finds several dead urls in the citations.

Image

  • File:Oak tree.jpg might need a different sort of license, but I'm not sure exactly what. In the U.S., the three-dimensional work itself would be protected by copyright and could not be photographed for use in Wikipedia, I think. I'm not sure about the law in the U.K., but I think such photos are OK there. There might be a special kind of license for this particular situation, though. I don't have time to research this, but I thought I should mention it. If the image license proves to be OK, you might want to upload the image to the Commons.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 05:02, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Russell T Davies

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article failed a FAC about two months ago for lack of support, and after talking to Karanacas, she mentioned there were prose issues to work on too. That, and the two month gap may have made the writing look somewhat "stale". I'd like to get this to FA soon enough, but I want to make sure it's good enough too. Thanks, Sceptre (talk) 20:42, 7 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to focus only on the lede so if others want to jump in and take on the body of the text, please do!

Lede:

  • Citations don't belong in the lede.
  • I think the lede is stiff and difficult to follow. The lede should invite the reader to continue into the body of the text but there's something that distances the reader here and makes the whole uninviting and inaccessible. Try something less wordy, more relaxed. Alternate short simple sentences with longer, more complex ones. Alternate single syllable words with multi-syllable word.
  • This, for example, is stiff: "aspired to work as a full time comic artist in his adult life"
  • This can do without all the syllables and hyphens: "he consequently refocused his aspirations to play- and screen-writing." All those syllables and hyphens are unattractive.
  • Too many commas, commas, commas, here: "After he graduated from Oxford University, Davies joined the BBC's children's department on a part-time basis in 1985 and worked in varying positions, including producing and writing two series, Dark Season and Century Falls, until leaving in 1994 to become a freelance writer." Cut it up into two sentences and get rid of the commas.

Write for the general reader:

Davies was born in Swansea, Wales and entertained youthful dreams of becoming a professional comics artist. He redirected his energies to writing for theatre and film when a career advisor suggested he study English literature. After graduating from Oxford University in 1985, he produced and wrote two series for the BBC's children's department, Dark Season and Century Falls.
He left the BBC in 1994 to write adult television dramas exploring religion and sexuality. etc.

-— Preceding unsigned comment added by Susanne2009NYC (talk • contribs)

Comments by David Fuchs
  • Random comment: Shouldn't it be Russell T. Davies? Is "T" his actual middle name?
  • The first paragraph of the lead isn't really a paragraph (it's just one big long sentence.)
  • I think there might be a tad too much detail in the second paragraph. I think it's important that you tell us in a nutshell what kind of themes he was grappling with and what shows he was working on, but a blow-by-blow synopsis of each series might be a tad much.
  • Echoing Susanna above, there's a few spots where there are technical or esoteric terms that should be explained or can be axed (for example, us young people in the era of cable have no idea what closedown means.)
  • "The show, originally called The Adventuresome Three, would featured the [...]" - would have featured?
  • "He accepted Home's offer and the show was allocated the budget and timeslot of [...]" The reference to "budget" give me pause. Did they inherit the money left over after that series was axed? Or did they receive the same sized budget as that show? This might not be important to mention here anyhow.
  • It's at "Dark Season and Century Falls" that I start feeling that the article hews too closely to the structure and style of Aldridge & Murray; this was a bigger issue during the FAC but I still see the same underlying structure (for example the "Saving it from extinction" quote at the end of the article). As this isn't a book, it doesn't need the same type of framing and context, which means you can cut down on specific examples and reciting of plots. Maybe this is just something that requires greater sourcing variety. I just get bogged down the further I get into the article.
  • Jump back to the lead: "His most notable achievement was reviving" Usage of "was" implies he's dead, secondly where's the source for this being his most notable achievement?
  • "After the cancellation of the series and the death of Princess Diana, an existential crisis and near-overdose persuaded him to detoxify to make a name for himself by producing a series celebrating his homosexuality." - The way this is phrased makes it sound like Diana's death caused his existential crisis. Is this true?
  • "most notably given to his pansexual time-traveller Captain Jack Harkness" - I'm pretty sure this exact same descriptor was used earlier in the article, and it should not be linked again (there are other items that are overlinked as well.)

--Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 19:04, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Flag of Brazil

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I want some feedback on how to make this article featured. I believe we have a pretty solid article that might meet FA requirements. If anyone can come up with some ideas.. that would be very helpful. Thank you! Limongi (talk) 15:06, 10 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments This is interesting and generally well-written. It seems comprehensive or nearly so, at least to an outsider like me. It is well-illustrated. However, it it not ready for GAN yet because a good deal of it is unsourced. I would suggest as a first step that you find and add sources for the unsourced parts, then work on other improvements, then re-write the lead. Here is a short list of suggestions:

  • Many parts of the article lack sources. In "Colonial Brazil (1500–1816)" for example, the first paragraph is unsourced, and the second paragraph includes one source that apparently supports one sentence but leaves the rest of the paragraph unsourced. A good rule of thumb is to provide a source for every set of statistics, every unusual claim, every direct quotation, and every paragraph. If one source supports an entire paragraph, it's best to put the citation at the very end of the paragraph.
  • The lead should be a summary of the entire article and not simply an introduction. A good rule of thumb is to include in the lead at least a mention of each of the main text sections. WP:LEAD has details.
  • The dab tool at the top of this review page finds five links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.
  • To avoid repeating important words from the article title in the heads and subheads, I would suggest changing the subheads in the "History" section to "Colony", "Kingdom", "Empire", and "Republic". Further down in the article, I would make the subheads more telegraphic to avoid repeating the word "flag"; i.e., "Anthem" instead of "Flag anthem".
  • The spaced hyphen is not used in Wikipedia articles, and page ranges and date ranges take an en dash rather than a hyphen. I ran a script to fix most (if not all) of these.

Colonial Brazil (1500–1816)

  • "The green and white colors representing the House of Braganza and the national colors of Portugal." - This is not a complete sentence.

Empire of Brazil (1822–1889)

  • This section has many extremely short paragraphs. The Manual of Style advises against them. Two possible solutions are to expand or merge the paragraphs.

Construction

  • "The flag's length is twenty modules and the width, fourteen, translating into an aspect ratio of 7:10." - Should an explanation of "module" be included here? Are any concrete dimensions specified in the law? Do flags have to be of any particular size, or is the aspect ratio all that is specified?

Stars

Naval jack

  • Would it be possible to expand this extremely short section by a couple of sentences? This would make room for the image, which now overlaps into the "Governmental flags" section and displaces an edit button.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 16:24, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Line Mode Browser

[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 because I want list the article as GAN, but I'm not really sure that the article would pass. What is missing? What parts are good or must be improved to achieve the GA status? Thanks, mabdul 15:14, 30 September 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is a good start, but the article is not nearly ready for GAN. Here are suggestions for further improvement.

  • The lead should be a summary or abstract of the main text sections. Nothing should appear in the lead that is not covered in the main text. A good rule of thumb is to include in the lead at least a mention of each of the main text sections. The existing lead does not mention the main text sections; instead it is a kind of introduction rather than a summary. WP:LEAD has tips on writing a good lead.
  • Rather than adding a lot of in-line citations to the lead, it's customary to cite claims in the main text. Since the ideal lead is a summary of the main text, any claim that appears in the lead will have a citation later in the article. Exceptions to this rule would be direct quotations or truly extraordinary claims made in the lead.
  • "is the second web browser" - Does this mean the second ever created?
  • "The browser is developed by the" - Should this be "was" rather than "is"?
  • "test application for the libwww library" - Abbreviations like "libwww" should be spelled out as well as abbreviated on first use.
  • Most abbreviated terms should be spelled out and abbreviated on first use. I mentioned libwww above, but I am thinking also of MicroSoft Disk Operating System (MS-DOS), Deutsches Elektronen Synchrotron (DESY), What You See Is What You Get (WYSIWYG), and so on. Many readers do not know what these and other abbreviations (HTTP, WAIS, etc.) mean.
  • "Berners-Lee and his team didn't have any" - Wikipedia generally avoids contractions like "didn't" and instead uses "did not".
  • "The distribution was by telnetting info.cern.ch in beginning of the web and was announced in June 1991 by Berners-Lee in the alt.hypertext in the Usenet." - Some strange grammar occurs here and there in the article. I think this means "Users could obtain the browser by telnetting info.cern.ch. Berners-Lee announced the browser's availability in June 1991 in the alt.hypertext category of Usenet."
  • Generally, the Manual of Style deprecates extremely short paragraphs and extremely short sections. Two possible solutions are to expand or merge. Perhaps the three short sections, for example, could be smoothly merged with "History".
  • Any unusual claims or statistics need in-line citations to reliable sources. Every paragraph needs a citation, but if the citation appears in the middle of the paragraph, everything thereafter will appear to be unsourced. This is the case in both paragraphs of the "Operating mode" section, where the later claims of the paragraphs do not appear to have a source.
  • Date formatting in the "Further reading" and "References" sections should be consistent.
  • Reference numbers should appear after the end punctuation of the phrase or sentence being sourced, not before the punctuation.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:09, 5 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I believe I've addressed many, if not all, of the issues raised here.
--Gyrobo (talk) 14:49, 16 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]
  1. ^ Cite error: The named reference bounty was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  2. ^ Cite error: The named reference parrish was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  3. ^ Cite error: The named reference husted was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  4. ^ Cite error: The named reference ehret was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  5. ^ Cite error: The named reference mccullough was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
  6. ^ Cite error: The named reference bonwich was invoked but never defined (see the help page).
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/October_2010&oldid=765852686"