GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Just a few things that need to be fixed before this is a GA:
- Fewer lists
- Could you specify which lists strike you as problematic? Vicenarian (T · C) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Looks OK to me now. -- Beland (talk) 17:10, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- Could you specify which lists strike you as problematic? Vicenarian (T · C) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- Fewer one-sentence paragraphs
- Again, which in particular strike you as problematic? Vicenarian (T · C) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- History doesn't mention Wikipedia. Maybe I am vain but I think this is important?
- History of wikis is the main article and includes detail about the history of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is also mentioned (and wikilinked) in the lead and "Communities" section of this article. Vicenarian (T · C) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
- I agree; Wikipedia is probably the most important thing that has ever happened to wikis, other than their invention. I added a quick mention to that paragraph. -- Beland (talk) 15:50, 25 June 2013 (UTC)
- History of wikis is the main article and includes detail about the history of Wikipedia. Wikipedia is also mentioned (and wikilinked) in the lead and "Communities" section of this article. Vicenarian (T · C) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Shii (tock) 16:38, 17 July 2009 (UTC)
Please see my responses above. Thank you for your time! Vicenarian (T · C) 20:28, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
The "Characteristics" list could be written in non-list form. Ditto with "research communities". All one-sentence paragraphs are frowned upon unless necessary. Shii (tock) 03:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
I'm going to close this since there have been no further responses. Shii (tock) 23:28, 13 August 2009 (UTC)
- Alignment of the rows within the table, giving examples of MediaWiki syntax vs Equivalent HTML and it's Rendered output would give greater clarity — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.106.149.130 (talk) 07:31, 12 October 2012 (UTC)