Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows/archive1

Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows edit

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

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for July 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Thisa article has gone through numerous GA nominations, and the latest one would have been productive if the page was semi-protected, but most of the edits were reverted by IPs, so it did not pass. I would be willing to work on this article to bring it up to at leat GA, and a peer review would help a lot in getting the article there.

Thanks, ~ Bella Swan^? 14:59, 11 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and needs to be expanded. 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. Please see WP:LEAD
The plot section seems way too long and too detailed, especially when compared to the other sections of the article. See Wikipedia:WAF#Plot_summaries and Wikipedia:Plot summaries
The Reception section needs to be expanded - the Wall Street Journal had an excellent review of the novel, as did Newsweek (which was on MSNBC.com). Since this is the last book of the series, could there be some mention of critical reaction to the book as the end of the series as well?
The article has some very short paragraphs (one sentence on John Williams composing the film music, for example) and some fairly short sections (Choice of title, Spoiler embargo, etc.). These could be combined with others or expanded.

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). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:05, 16 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]