Wikipedia:Peer review/2011 White House shooting/archive1

2011 White House shooting 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 eventually nominate it for FAC. It's currently third on my intended FAC nominations list, so we've got plenty of time for a peer review.

Thanks, Freikorp (talk) 14:42, 30 January 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I'm closing this peer review as it has been open for four weeks and someone has offered to co-nominate it for FAC. Freikorp (talk) 04:05, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Royroydeb edit

" fired a semi-automatic rifle at the White House" mention in bracket what the White House is. " fired a semi-automatic rifle at the White House (the official residence of the President of the United States)" - not the lead should be informative. Also include the motive of this shooting.

Thanks for your comments, but i'm not sure if that is necessary. It's one of the most famous buildings in the world, and just in case someone isn't familiar with it, it is wikilinked. I'll wait for a second opinion on this one. Freikorp (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

The second line says " At least seven bullets hit the second floor.", but later on "realize that bullets had struck the White House."? RRD13 দেবজ্যোতি (talk) 10:49, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I don't understand what the problem is here. Just because nobody realised for four days doesn't change the fact that it happened. The events are listed in chronological order, not the order they were discovered. Freikorp (talk) 13:33, 9 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Matthewrbowker edit

There are two images missing alt text, it's a really good idea to include with screen readers. Other than that, MOS:ACCESS appears to be in order.

Added alts, thanks. Freikorp (talk) 00:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Article text itself is very complete, good job with the chronology.
Sources are complete and look good.
I'm curious as to why there are no navboxes, only portals? It's not a requirement, more of a stylistic choice.

Hmm, I never thought of that, i'll have to have a look for any relevant ones to add. Cheers. Freikorp (talk) 00:27, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Overall, a very good article, well deserving of its GA. ~ Matthewrbowker ^{Give me a ring!} 21:42, 26 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comment: This would be the navbox to add: {{US Presidential Assassinations}} Prhartcom (talk) 14:45, 27 February 2015 (UTC)[reply]