Seth Material edit
- 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 December 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the page has underwent some major updates recently and there has been a lot of controversy surrounding whether or not it is suitably presented. Feedback would be most helpful.
Thanks, NoVomit (talk) 13:40, 7 December 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement.
- If at all possible, there should be an image in the article, preferably in the top right corner of the lead. Since the author is dead, I think a fair use rationale could be made for an image of her.
- Article needs more references, for example there are many citation needed tags throughout and several paragraphs have no refs at all, such as the second paragraph in the History section. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
- The article has most of its references from the book itself, but most of the refs should be from sources about the book. This is a WP:NPOV issue, see also WP:IN-U (describe things from outside the perspective of the book) and WP:PCR (provide context for the reader)
- At least some of the refs do not seem to be reliable sources - what makes this a reliable source?
- The refs are not consistent - books need author, publisher, place of publication, etc. {{cite book}} and other cite teplates may help here.
- Since the official title seems to be "The Seth Material", should the article title be that 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). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:51, 20 December 2008 (UTC)