Wikipedia:Peer review/L'Opéra of the Palace of Versailles/archive1

L'Opéra of the Palace of Versailles

• 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.
I've listed this article for peer review to obtain suggestions for improving the article.

Thanks, E. Lighthart (talk) 12:58, 4 July 2008 (UTC)

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

• The article needs to be divided into sections - the first section will be the Lead section, which is required as a overview and summary of the whole article. See WP:LEAD. I think other sections could be on the predecessor theaters, and history.
• Why are the last names of the architect, etc. all capitalized in the infobox?
• The article has too many images and galleries / tables of images are frowned on in FAC - Template:Commonscat is one way to deal with this. A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - see Her Majesty's Theatre, which is a Featured Article about another royal opera
• Watch out for peacock language - try to make the article more encyclopedic in tone. Generally the examples themsleves prove the point - Show, Don't Tell and WP:PEACOCK. See for example superb, magnificent, and finest in Today, with its superb acoustics and magnificent décor, the Opéra represents one of the finest 18th century opera houses extant in Europe. If these are from a source, it might be better to quote the source.

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 _><>°^° 02:00, 12 July 2008 (UTC)

Newly revised layout with sub-headings

I've spent a lot of time on revising the layout of this article to make it more readable and not allow it to flow all over the place when viewed on screen.

It will make any review of content much easier, I think. Viva-Verdi (talk) 23:49, 22 July 2008 (UTC)

Since editor User talk:Elighthart has chosen to create a gallery of images, I've posted this on his talk page:

"While I see no problem per see in setting up a Gallery, most people's regualr-size screens cannot see 4 images in row without considerable scrolling back andf forth.

To make this easy to see in a single scroll down of the page, I am going to change those sectiuons with more than 3 images across back into 2 below 2.

However, one reason for creating a series of sub-heads is that the piece is long and unbroken. Sub-heads would help. Your comments please - on the TALK PAGE where I am posting this also." Viva-Verdi (talk) 01:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Any comments? Viva-Verdi (talk) 01:39, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

I thought Viva-Verdi's revisions were good, the article needs sections direly. The images looked elegant centered, with headings, and in few numbers together but the formatting seemed difficult and strained. I think that most of them should go in a gallery at the Commons, rather than at the end of the article as they are now, with the best arranged individually throughout the article. Here is a link to the gallery that can be added to the page:

Regards, dvdrw 01:45, 23 July 2008 (UTC)

Upon further inspection I noticed that the photographs are templated with Commons:template:PD-Art which I think is the incorrect license as they are original photographs of architecture and interior design not reproductions of prints or paintings. That template is for "[...] reproduction[s] of an original two-dimensional work of art." So I wouldn't spend too much time on galleries and image placement, they may be deleted for being not under suitable licenses.

Regards, dvdrw 04:01, 23 July 2008 (UTC)