Wikipedia:Peer review/December 2010

This page contains the Peer review requests that are older than one month, have received no response in the last two weeks, are not signed, have become featured article or featured list candidates, or did not follow the "How to use this page" principles in some way. If one of your requests has been moved here by mistake, please accept our apologies and undo the archiving edit to the peer review page for the article.

---

GNOME

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
WP:LINUX wishes to take this article to FA quality. I copyedited the article recently but received no attention at Talk:GNOME#Peer_review_imminent. I just finished rearranging the sections in order to convey a stronger article structure and I would like some outside input on the scope and depth of coverage in this article. I think it is sourced fairly well, but I do not know what all is expected of an FA-class article in terms of what is already present in this article and what else should be added. A quick glance at current FAs would lead me to believe this one is short.

Many thanks, –Paul M. Nguyen (chat|blame) 02:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

• What is the GPL and why is it important? (Yes, I know the answer to this)
• The third paragraph of the History section is actually about KDE and appears to be taken from an article about KDE or desktops
• I don't think having a gallery in the body of the text is stylistically acceptable
• The "Future developments" section appears vestigial and extraneous.
• The "GNOME 3.0" section does not explain why this is an important version that deserves inclusion in the article, considering the main History header is only 3 paragraphs. Remove it?
• The article should not be primarily constructed around primary sources. Please find outside sources such as Ars Technica or reliable Linux news sites, and fix {{fact}} tags
• Too many lists in the "Project structure" section
• Too many one-sentence paragraphs
• Screenshots are too squinty and could be improved

Shii (tock) 00:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you! I'll be going over all of that and any dangling issues from the previous PR on my way to FA. Thanks, again! –Paul M. Nguyen (chat|blame) 02:43, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be useful to explain what KDE is in the start of the History section. The text presupposes a knowledge of these projects. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:51, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Czech Republic national football team

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have been away for quite a long time and would like somebody to be able to tell me what I/people need to do to make this article better! I've lost track a bit of what has happened to the article recently - silly me for not being here I suppose!

Thank You in advance for your time :) // Finns 13:56, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Oldelpaso

• The biggest issue facing the article is a severe shortage of references. Any fact which could reasonably be challenged by a sceptical reader should be supported by a reference. See Scotland national football team, a featured article on a similar topic, for an example of the approach we are looking for, and also for further tips about article structure.
• The history section is unbalanced. The qualification phase for the most recent World Cup is covered at length, but Euro 96 is covered in a couple of sentences, even though the team reached the final. Aim for an even coverage throughout the team's history, with extra focus on the team's biggest accomplishments where appropriate, like the 1996 and 2004 European Championships.
• Some of the sections which are currently tables could do with some prose to accompany them. Again, see the Scotland article for some examples.
• A number of the comments from the previous peer review look as if they are still relevant for the article in its current state, so it may be worth revisiting them.

Hope this helps. Oldelpaso (talk) 15:29, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Draconian (band)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Fair amount of reliable sources is available. The article was completely unreferenced, so I added some references, but it is still too short. There should be more sections about band's albums and style instead of pushing everything into Biography section. Also, if possible, some images of the band performing live should be found. Since I am not experienced with finding free images, I would kindly ask someone who is to take that responsibility. — NikFreak (leave message) 18:30, 3 September 2010 (UTC)

This review began two months ago, but has not been properly formatted with {{subst:PR/subst}} and {{Peer review page}} per PR instructions. Listing at WP:PR now with those templates in place. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 16:17, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for adding references and for your work on this article. Peer review is a place for pointing out areas where improvement is needed, but not necessarily a place for doing those fixes. I agree with your description of some of the issues with the article, and below give some other suggestions for improvement.

• The current lead is one short sentence - it needs to be expanded so that the lead is an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. 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. Please see WP:LEAD
• My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but I agree that the article's structure needs to be reorganized first.
• I agree that some images would really help. Unfortunately, when I went on Flickr and searched for freely licensed images, I could not find any that appeared to either be o the band or the lead singer. If you know of a website that has some images, it might be worth contacting them and asking if they would consider releasing an image or two under a free license.
• A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many WP:FAs on bands that might be useful models. See Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Music for a list of all Music FAs
• There are several major issues remaining with the article. One of the most important is still a lack of references, despite the refs which have already been added. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
• Make sure refs that are used are complete. Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. So the first ref (from Allmusic.com) has an author, which needs to be listed. See WP:CITE and WP:V
• The language is rough in spots and could use a copyedit. One example The demo counted with flutist and vocalist Jessica Eriksson, keyboardist and vocalist Susanne Arvidsson and with a special participation of Andreas Haag on the introductory section of “My Nemesis”. I have no idea what "The demo counted with" people means, and the special participation part is just awkward. This sounds as if it were perhaps written by someone who did not speak English as a native language.
• The article also has many short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that break up the flow and need to be either combined with others or perhaps expanded.
• The article has comprehensiveness issues. The "Biography" section (usually called something like History) ends in 2006 and does not mention their 2008 album.
• Not much else to say now as the article is still pretty short.

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:20, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. It has been very helpful. I don't really have time for editing articles on Wikipedia at the moment, but if I find some time, I will try to follow your suggestions. — NikFreak (leave message) 23:08, 29 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Hoboken, New Jersey

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like it to be brought up to at least a Good Article standard. Any feedback welcome.

Thanks, Rhvanwinkle (talk) 16:57, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Belovedfreak

I found this an interesting article. I've never heard of Hoboken and don't know too much about New Jersey, or even US history/geography in general! Hopefully that will be an advantage here, rather than a disadvantage. I don't think the article's quite up to GA standard, although hopefully with a bit of work it could soon be there. I'll detail some more specific concerns I have section by section, but first, some general thoughts I had when I first read the article:

• I'm not sure if the structure works as well as it could. I'm more used to British settlements, and using [Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements this guide to structure]. I don't know if there's an equivalen for US articles, but looking at some current FAs might give you some idea (and seem to be more what I'm used to). For example: San Francisco, Erie, Pennsylvania, Ann Arbor, Michigan, Hillsboro, Oregon and others in Category:FA-Class WikiProject Cities articles. Note that they tend to start with the history section, which I think would make sense here.
• The article is quite sparse on inline citations at the moment. I think quite a few more will need to be added and there are complete sections that are unreferenced. At a bare minimum, make sure that all quotes, statistics and extraordinary claims are referenced, but I'd also add refs for all statements that aren't common knowledge.
• The prose needs tightening up a bit. In general I'd say it's good enough for GA (with a few exceptions I'll point out) but it would really benefit from being copyedited from an uninvolved editor.
• Articles with maintenance templates are likely to run into trouble at GA. Make sure they're all addressed and removed, whether by doing what they say (eg. adding citations) or by determining that they're unnecessary

Ok, now I'll go through by section. I'll try and be thorough, but some issues crop up several times, so please try and check for other occurrences of things I mention! Infobox

• I don't think you need "United States of America" in the infobox title, it looks a bit unwieldy. Compare to those other articles. They don't all even have the state name.

Lead

• The lead seems a bit short and doesn't really adequately summarise the rest of the article. This is sometimes best left until you feel the rest of the article is ready, but WP:LEAD is part of the GA criteria.

Geography

• As I mentioned, I don't think this should be the first section
• The first sentence is a bit long and could perhaps be split into two. It's not grammatically 100% clear whether "between Weehawken and Union City" refers to Hoboken or to the West Village and Chelsea.
• I'd probably combine the first two paragraphs. They're not on dramatically different subjects. Here, and elsewhere in the article, you have some short paragraphs that make the prose a little "choppy" and disjointed.
• Is there a reference for these area statistics?
• "...though Clinton Street likely honors 19th century politician DeWitt Clinton." - reference?
• "Neighborhoods ... often have vague definitions ... subjective. " - reference? If it is covered by one of the ones at the end of the paragraph, I think it would benefit from moving it to the end of this sentence.
• Although this section is probably broad enough for GA, perhaps it could be expanded a little. Look around at similar sections in other articles. Climate, for example, could be mentioned.

Demographics

• In this 1st sentence perhaps link to the 2000 US census rather than to census
• Is there any reason this 1st-sentence reference is in the middle of the sentence, not at the end? (Also, I'll check sources later, but clicking on this link doesn't tell me anything about Hoboken census figures. This sentence mentions statistics from at least two sources & needs relevant refs)
• "The racial makeup of the city ... 7.63% from other races..." - perhaps link "racial makeup" to Race and ethnicity in the United States Census rather than "other races"
• "Furthermore 20.18% of those residents also consider themselves to be Hispanic or Latino." - who does those residents refer to? The total population of the city? The "other races"?
• Do all the statistics come from one cited source? (I'm asking because when I've worked on UK census figures, stats for one place tend to be spread over several pages) A reference for each paragraph would be helpful.

Name

• This might be able to be incorporated into the history section.
• "pronounced by some as HO-bo-ken" - this needs a source. Also, if that's how some pronounce it, how do others pronounce it?
• First two paragraphs can be combined
• "It is believed that the Lenape ..." - believed by whom? (see WP:WEASEL)
• Delaware Indian doesn't need to be linked as it redirects to Lenape, which is linked to three words earlier.
• "...settlers ... who may have bastardized the Lenape phrase, though there is no known written documentation to confirm it." - reference?
• "It also cannot be confirmed that the American Hoboken is named after ... It is not known what the area was called..." - presumably statements like these are as a result of some kind of research, or someone reliable somewhere has written down that these facts are unknown/cannot be confirmed etc?
• Last paragraph needs a reference

History (Early and colonial)

• This is one big paragraph that might be a bit more digestible split into two
• There is a weird wikilink to Michael Pauw
• This section is completely reliant on one source, are there any other reliable soures covering the early history?
• New Netherland or New Netherlands? Be consistent
• "...brewery, North America’s first." - an extraordinary claim, needs a citation
• The sentence ending "...may have discouraged more settlement" could really use a citation
• 1674-75 needs an en dash rather than a hyphen (see WP:DASH)

History (19th century)

• "...developed the waterfront as a resort for Manhattanites, a lucrative source of income..." - slightly unclear. Was the waterfront the lucrative source of income, or the Manhattanites?
• More refs needed for this section
• "...he world's first steam-powered ferry..." - extraordinary claim, needs a citation
• The sentence about Sybil's Cave could be slightly clearer. I'm not really sure what it is.
• "(In the late 1880s, when the water was found to be contaminated, it was shut and in the 1930s, filled with concrete.)" - I'm not sure why this needs to be in brackets
• "Stevens founded the Hoboken Land and Improvement Company, which during the mid- and late-19th century was managed by his heirs and laid out a regular system of streets..." - this doesn't quite work. It's unclear what "and laid out" refers to, Stevens or the company.
• "The advantages of Hoboken as a shipping port and industrial center became apparent." - how so? This is a bit vague.
• Who is Edwin A. Stevens in relation to John Stevens?
• This may be my ignorance, but I'm not sure what a "great shipping line" is. Do we have a relevant article?
• There's no need to link "German" or "immigrants", or at least if you really want to, link to a more directly relevant article

History (Birthplace of baseball)

• Any reason why the first sentence's citation is in the middle of the sentence rather than at the end?
• Should "between Knickerbocker Club" be "between the Knickerbockers Club"?
• The first two paragraphs can be combined
• the Knickerbockers Club is linked twice in quick succession (see WP:OVERLINK)
• The end of the second paragraph needs a reference (as does most of this section)
• There is some underlinking in this section. Relevant links can be added to: Henry Chadwick, Alexander Cartwright, St George's Cricket Club, Harry Wright, George Wright, Cincinnati Red Stockings
• "America" is used a few times instead if the US. It's ok in quotes, but "America" shouldn't normally be used in this context outside quotes
• The beginnings of baseball could be a bit clearer, as I get the impression from this that the game just kind of sprang up in the New York/New Jersey area, but after reading the baseball article, it was brought over to North America by immigrants and had been played before 1846, just not officially recorded.
• "Henry Chadwick believed that baseball and not cricket should become America's pastime after the game drawing the conclusion..." - I don't really understand this
• It might be worth adding a sentence about when Elysian Fields closed.

History (World War I)

• "When the USA decided to enter World War I ..." - this sounds a little odd. A country can't make decisions.
• link World War I?
• You should consistently use either the US or the U.S., not the USA. (see MOS)
• "...many Germans were forcibly moved to Ellis Island" - given the fact you're discussing the war, when you say Germans what do you mean exactly? German Americans? German immigrants?
• "...forcibly moved to Ellis Island or left the city altogether." - presumably Ellis Island is/was not part of the city of Hoboken, so this sentence doesn't quite make sense, as going to Ellis Island would be leaving the city altogether. Perhaps forcibly moved to Ellis Island or left the city of their own accord. or something
• no need to link heaven, hell or Christmas
• more refs for this section!
• The Great Depression can be linked
• Why is the word tenements in quotes?

History (Post World War II)

• "The war provided a shot in the arm..." - which war? It might sound silly, but you've just finished talking about World War I, and you can't rely on the subheading to introduce the topic.
• Todds Shipyards is linked twice in quick succession
• GI can be linked for your non-US readers
• "Though some returning service men took advantage of GI housing bills, many with strong ethnic and familial ties chose to stay in town." - I don't understand this sentence. What were GI housing bills? What did they have to do with staying in town or leaving?
• fifties → 1950s, sixties → 1960s
• "...the throes of inexorable decline as industries sought (what had been) greener pastures" - What does the "what had been" mean? it seems to be referring to something not explained here at all. Where these other places no longer "greener pastures"? "Greener pastures" may be a little too colloquial, can you think of a more formal way of saying it?
• I'm no longer going to mention it every section, but, references!
• plane → airplane
• "so-called slums" - so-called by whom?
• "wasn't much work " → "was not much work " (avoid contractions)
• "Stevens stayed a premiere technology school..." → "Stevens stayed a premiere technology schoo stayed a premiere technology school" (also, according to whom?)
• "Maxwell House kept chugging away" - this is too informal
• "Italian-Americans and other came back to the "old neighborhood" ..." - and others?
• "Some streets were "iffy"..." - way too informal, and who has said this anyway?
• "...most were not pulled in at night." - I don't know if this is a cultural thing, but I have no idea what this means

History (waterfront)

• No need to say that the film "consistently listed among the five best American films ever" - this is irrelevant to this article. You could mention year & director for context. Maybe Elia Kazan's 1954 film On the Waterfront was shot in Hoboken. the rest of the sentence is not very neutral, or formal enough: "dramatically highlighting", "rough and tumble" - it sounds like it came from the DVD case.
• In general this section is not quite WP:NPOV and even verges on promotional, as if telling perspective buyers what the area has to offer. Eg. "smell of coffee wafting over the town", "provide contiguous unhindered access to the water's edge", "the spectacular backdrop of the New York skyline."
• "engaging in sometimes nasty, sometimes absurd politics and court cases" - wow. Really needs attribution and reference.
• The panorama would look better centred and not surrounded by text, as the text is pushed into a tiny space, making it a bit more difficult to read.

Before and after the turn of the millennium

• Not sure about this subheading; maybe "recent history"?
• That first sentence is really long and kind of lost me half-way through. Can it be split?
• "a wave of fires, some of which were arson" - "caused by arson" perhaps?
• You have a strange mix of informal language, word in quotes, and unsupported attributions: "upwardly-mobile commuters (known as yuppies), and "bohemian types"", "became a "hip" place to live", "so-called "newcomers" displaced some of the "old-timers" " Who is using these words? What sources are these descriptions from? Why are words in quotes if they're not quoted?
• "...and quick, train hop away" - this is a bit informal, and you're missing an article
• What's a "transplanted American"?
• "NY/NJ region" - is this an official name? If not, please spell it out. Many non-Americans are not familiar with your state abbreviations.
• "Hoboken felt the impact of the destruction of the World Trade Center intensely..." - does a city have feelings? (I'm sure there's a better link for the destruction of the WTC)
• Wouldn't hurt to add the year of the WTC centre destruction for context.

Government

• No need for those external links for the city councillors. WP isn't a directory. If they don't have articles, just leave them unlinked.
• Do we need two references for that list? Isn't there one that covers them all?

Fire Department

• There are words here which seem to be common nouns but have capital letters. Eg. fire station, engine, ladder - please check these.
• Hazmat can be linked to Dangerous goods; not everyone will know what that means
• "An interesting fact about the Hoboken Fire Department is..." - not very encyclopedic. (see also MOS:NOTED). Also, no apostrophe in that it's!
• I'm not 100% sure you need the list of Fire Station Locations and Apparatus.

Transportation

• "...currently undergoing extensive renovation...", "Currently, the City of Hoboken is planning..." - please give some indication of time here. This section could stay the same for 5 years.
• I don't think you need to include transport fares here. "...it is a well known fact that NY Waterway will charge ~$8.50 to travel some 400 meters across the Hudson River." "well known fact"?
• This section is mostly made up of lists that would work better as prose. Compare to FA standard city article to see how they've achieved it.

Education

• For us non-Americans, what's a K-8 school?
• These paragraphs are a bit too short and could be combined to make it less choppy.
• New Jersey Monthly can be linked
• The list of private schools should be prose
• Try to write a summary about the university rather than just linking to it.

Commerce and innovation

• This sounds slightly non-neutral
• Is this basically an "economy" section? I think it could be expanded a bit. compare to those other articles.

Notable residents

• No need to have this here. I'd move the link to the "see also" section

Local attractions

• Try to summarize the landmarks rather than just linking to another article
• The event section would be better as prose. They seem a bit random and many are linked to primary sources. it would be better to find a good source that details the notable events of the city. Otherwise, you're likely to get all sorts of people coming in and adding their event, with a link to their website.

Parks

• Again, less list, more prose, more references

Media

• "most of it daily papers " - missing letter?
• Is the blog listed notable? Or has someone just randomly added it?
• "This "In popular culture" section may contain minor or trivial references" - it's true! Try to turn this section into prose, and keep only the most notable appearances.

See also

• at least several (I haven't checked them all) of these links appear in the article already, so shouldn't be included here.

That's pretty much all I have for now. I haven't looked at the sources yet, but I will come back and have another look. Let me know if you have any questions/comments. --BelovedFreak 15:53, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Further comments from Belovedfreak

Citation format Generally the citations look pretty good, someone's worked on them, and some look like they've been added later with minimal information. Some of the following is just good practise rather than strictly required by WP:WIAGA, but it's important to make sure each one has enough information to meet WP:V

• Link sources if they can be (eg. newspapers like The Union City Reporter)
• Make dates consistent, either yyyy-mm-dd or Month Day, Year" It's your choice but I personally recommend the latter since the yyyy-mm-dd format is not familiar to everyone outside north America. Many don't know which number refers to the monthe, which to the day. (see WP:DATESNO for more info; not a GA requirement)
• Include all of these where you possibly can: title, author, page numbers, work, date of publication, date of retrieval (for online-only sources), isbns (for books). Not all of these are strictly required by GA, but the article must meet WP:V. For example, if the information comes from a book, it really needs to include page numbers to allow readers to find it. Bare URLs and refs consisting of just a title will not necessarily fail GA, but they should eventually be dealt with.
• The IMDb is not generally considered a reliable source. Although it's generally considered ok for cast lists, or to demonstrate that a film exists, some reviewers don't like to see it at all and I'm pretty sure you could find a better source for the fact that On the Waterfront is set in Hoboken.

Sources

• Make sure that each source used meets WP:RS. If any look dubious, don't use them. If you're not sure, you can ask at the reliable sources noticeboard. The main thing is that you know about the sources and can explain how/why they're reliable if they get questioned. You'll need to check each one (especially if not added by you) before you nominate at GA. Just looking at the first few:
• Ref #4 (American FactFinder) doesn't mention Hoboken or its FIPS code. If it's not possible to link to the actual page with the data, and the database must be searched each time, a note to that effect should be in the citation. However, there are two citations for the same thing, and the other one is ok, so I don't think this one is necessary
• Ref #6 ("US Board on Geographic Names") seems to be a generic "about" page, not about Hoboken
• Ref #7 (Hoboken Museum). This may not get questioned at GA, but it may do. The "history" page doesn't cite its sources and its hard to know if the information was added by someone authoritative or some more lowly museum employee.
• Ref #9 ("How Hoboken became a city," ) is broken
• Ref #11 ( "Our Towns;In Hoboken, Dreams of Eclipsing..." - I don't know if I'm missing this but I can't see where that source says the Knickerbocker Club started playing at Elysian Fields in 1845.
• Ref #12 (Doughboys of NYC) - I can't see anything at this website suggesting that it would meet WP:RS
• Ref #15 (Port Authority if New Jersey) - this doesn't really back up that sentence. Its nothing hugely controversial, but it doesn't say anything about agreements being made in the 1990s
• In general, the article (the parts that are well-sourced) seems to rely quite a bit on newspapers and possibly-reliable, but not exactly authoritative sources like the museum and fire department. What would be great would be to see some books consulted. I'm sure there must be some relevant to the city, particularly its history. If you live locally, try your local library. If not, I did a quick search on google books and immediately found a few possible sources.
• Check for dead links using the link checker

Images

• All look ok with regard to licensing although some may need more source information

External links

• I think you've got a few too many links, remembering that Wikipedia is not a directory. Try to only include the most important ones, that really add something to the article if it was at a complete, FA level. I'd say you don't need unofficial guides, or for example, the website for the local newspaper (especially as it has its own article here)

Anyway, that's all I can think of for now! Don't be put off by the big long list. I see you've already started work on it. It shouldn't take too much to see this passing GA. Good luck! --BelovedFreak 22:02, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Baby Boy (Beyoncé Knowles song)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because an editor has expresed that this article should be taken to WP:FAR. I'm not good with prose and, according to him, this has some issues with it. The main contributor Efe (talk · contribs) is almost innactive, so I would not work with him. Any comment is welcomed. Thanks and Happy Thanksgiving Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 19:49, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Its an easy pass, and very small copy-editing is required. And that's coming from someone who promoted "4 Minutes" to FA. Would you like me to do it Tbhotch? If so, reply on my talk page instead. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 04:12, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Key (basketball)

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

• I'd want this to be an FA, and PR is the first step in flushing out the bad parts.
• If possible other additions or clarifications is appreciated. Needed are comments from people if they understand this if they don't know anything about basketball.
• Another thing is what would be the appropriate WP:MOS guidelines to make this FAC-ready.
• Does anyone know of an FA-level similar article I can pattern this with?

Thanks, –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:39, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This has nice illustrations of an important basketball term. However, the article needs copyediting; you might be able to find a copyeditor through WP:GOCE. Here are a few other suggestions:

Lead

• "Free throw" should not be double-bolded. WP:MOSBOLD has details.
• FIBA should be spelled out (Fédération Internationale de Basket-ball) as well as abbreviated on first use.
• "Usually painted (some courts leave it blanked, with the adjoining area, "the perimeter," which is painted)... " - The material in parentheses is ungrammatical. Suggestion: "Usually painted (although blank on some courts with painted perimeters)... ".
• "starting with FIBA's amendments on their rules" - Maybe "starting with FIBA's amendments to its rules"?
• "The key, in all games, starting with FIBA's amendments on their rules in 2006 (to be first implemented after the 2010 FIBA World Championship), is rectangular; prior to 2006, the key in FIBA-sanctioned tournaments (mostly basketball played outside the United States, and almost all international tournaments including the World Championships and the Olympics) is trapezoidal in shape." - Too complex. It would be better to break this into at least two sentences without the parenthetical remarks.
• "Both NBA and FIBA keys are 16 feet wide... " - Measurements are usually given in metric as well as imperial units; i.e., 16 feet (4.9 m).
• "Another rule enforced is the lane violation where... " - A lane violation isn't a "where". Perhaps "A lane-violation rule prohibits players from either team from entering the lane... "?

Dimensions

• The first paragraph needs a source or sources. My rule of thumb is to source every paragraph as well as any unusual claims, statistics, or direct quotes. If one source covers a whole paragraph, the citation goes right after the end of the terminal period of the last sentence of the paragraph.

• "The free throw circle is with a universally-recognized 6 feet (1.8 m) radius from the free throw line, with the half of the free throw circle farthest from the backboard traced in solid lines." - To define the circle, you need to say where its center is; the radius is not enough. The center of this circle appears to be the midpoint of the free-throw line. Suggestion: "The free-throw circle, centered at the midpoint of the free-throw line, has a universally recognized radius of 6 feet (1.8 m)." Or maybe I am not understanding what the free-throw circle refers to.
  • I'm guessing here, but the center of the free-throw circle, which is the yes, the midpoint of the free throw line. is about ___ ft. from the center of the hoop. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:50, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

• "with the half of the free throw circle farthest from the backboard traced in solid lines" - This does not appear to be an accurate statement. Look at the free-throw circle in File:NokiaArena.jpg, for example. There are no solid lines inside the circle. Do you mean the perimeter of the circle?

• "In the NBA, the half closer to the basket must also be traced in a broken line... " - I think you mean the perimeter of the half closer to the basket.

Layout

• MOS:IMAGES suggest placing the images within the sections to which they relate. The key images stacked on the top right might look better if three photographs of actual basketball courts were combined in a triple image placed completely inside of the "Dimensions" section. This would be worth a try, I think.

• To make File:Free throw.jpg fit inside a single section, you might merge the subsections (deleting the heads) to make one larger section under the single heading, "Rules".

Other

• It's generally a good idea to write in full paragraphs rather than one-sentence orphans. Merging and expanding are two ways to turn orphans into full paragraphs. Extremely short sections and extremely short paragraphs make an article choppy. I particularly notice the shorties in the "Rules" section.

• The link checker above finds two dead urls in the citations.
  • Yes this is a problem. Those articles were published 2004 they must be gone by now. Most links have a working life of ~5 years. I'd take a look if there's one archived somewhere. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:15, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

I'd do most of your suggestions, but I'd hold off on a couple:

• I'd say adding the French name of FIBA won't probably help since a) it's French, and b) most people know "FIBA" and not Fédération Internationale de Basket-ball and may actually be confused instead of helping. How about "FIBA, the authority in world basketball" or something to that effect?
• The first paragraph in the "Dimensions" section is the thesis statement, and the details are cited in the paragraphs after that.
• How about putting the three images at the top right either at the top or at the bottom of the "Dimensions" section? They should be pretty big considering the differences between the three keys should be seen at first sight.
• I'm considering splitting the one-paragraph/section "Lane violation" and "Restricted area arc" into 2 or more paragraphs each, then chop off File:Free throw.jpg's caption and incorporate it to the main text. –HTD (ITN: Where no updates but is stickied happens.) 19:56, 17 November 2010 (UTC)
  

---

21st Century Breakdown

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to promote it to FA status, but since I don't have much article editing experience I do not know what exactly needs to be done to it for it to be promoted. 21st Century Breakdown is a well-known (perhaps worldwide) album by Green Day so it's notable enough to qualify for FA status.

Thanks, Addihockey11 (talk) 02:20, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Note to nominator: You are not an active editor on this article. You say you'd "like to promote it FA status"; but you have not, as far as I can see, discussed this possibility with the article's main editor, User:IllaZilla, who has more than 300 edits to the article, the most recent on 9 November. You are brand new to Wikipedia (9 edits in total); I think that you could use a bit more experience of editing before trying to steer an article through FA. If you would like to work on this article and help bring it to FA quality, I suggest that you post a message on the article's talkpage, offering your services as a helper to this end, and see what transpires. Brianboulton (talk) 00:53, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I agree with Brianboulton's comments above. As far as the article goes, I don't see much to complain about, although I don't know enough to say whether it's comprehensive or not. Here are a very few suggestions for improvement.

• Citation 2 is incomplete.

• The link checker at the top of this review page finds four dead urls in the citations.

• Citations 71, 75, 80, 82, 89, and apparently 101 and 104 are incomplete.

• The date formatting in citations 101 and 102 are nonconforming; that is, they do not use the same formatting as the other citations.

• I fixed a very few minor prose and style problems.

• The image licenses look fine to me.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:35, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Villa Park

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've requested a peer review to get some feedback on recent changes I have made to the article with regards to a FAC in the future. I'm particularly interested in people's opinions on the prose. The article is already a GA and I follows the same sort of structure as most Featured association football stadium articles (eg Old Trafford, Portman Road etc. Many thanks for your time. Woody (talk) 17:38, 11 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from The Rambling Man (talk · contribs)

• Infobox seems to be missing the odd "stand" (for instance, "... and The Doug Ellis to the ...")
• "is under a mile" -> less than a mile.
• "England internationals at senior level" some kind of link to England national football team wouldn't go amiss here.
• "It has hosted 16 England internationals at senior level. The first international was in 1899 with the most recent being in 2005." merge.
• " Villa Park is the most used stadium in FA Cup semi-final history" reword perhaps to "has hosted more FA Cup semi-finals than any other stadium" and link FA Cup.
• "The 1999 UEFA Cup Winners' Cup Final was held at Villa Park, the last ever final of the European Cup Winners' Cup. " would have "the last ever..." before "was held at Villa Park"
• Be consistent on capitalisation of stand "North stand" vs "North Stand" for instance.
• Infobox - Trinity Rd->Trinity Road.
• Infobox - £25M - not sure I've seen M used for millions for money. But that's just me.
• History quote needs a proper reference (in the references section) including isbn, publisher etc.
• Seems a little whimsical to open the history section with a direct quote like that as well.
• "The previous location of Aston Villa..." not really, perhaps "Aston Villa's previous home..." or something.
• "to an estimated crowd of 15,000" when it opened, was there some kind of event that drew this 15,000 or was the ground simply able to host 15,000?
• "21 year" hyphenate.
• " the construction of a new cycle track constructed " - quick repeat of "construct" here.
• Suggest linking "snagging".
• "could house 40,000 spectators most of whom" comma before most.
• "one week after Aston Villa" don't relink Villa here.
• Holte Hotel caption doesn't need a full stop.
• "at a cost of £887. At a cost of £1,300, t" repetitive.
• "£8250," (etc) comma needed to separate thousands.
• You have "Blackburn Rovers" but "Everton F.C." - be consistent.

That takes me two paras into History. Hope this has been useful so far, will continue to review if prompted (although I am away this long weekend, so patience!). The Rambling Man (talk) 18:23, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Very useful thanks, take all the time you need. I've fixed all those issues above apart from snagging, I couldn't find a link for that. I've removed the Billy Walker quote as it was a bit fawning wasn't it. I had been wondering about it when I rewrote the section but you confirmed it for me. Thanks again, regards, Woody (talk) 21:38, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

You're welcome. I'll try another section or three tomorrow. All the best. The Rambling Man (talk) 21:39, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again. Take your time, on Sunday I have an appointment with Sky Sports and apparently Mr Pires now. As a note, I didn't do the European Final sentence in the lead either as I couldn't see another way of keeping both a link to the final and to the Cup article. Regards, Woody (talk) 21:44, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Pires. One of my favourites. Top three with Kanchelskis and Lee Sharpe. Odd, I know, but there you have it. Good luck v Blackburn, don't fancy your chances but then again, I'm a Tractor Boy so what would I know?! The Rambling Man (talk) 21:48, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Star Trek IV: The Voyage Home

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm interested in getting it to FA sometime down the line. The content has mostly gelled, and it's passed GAN, but I suspect that my usual issues in regards to organization and prose are probably the biggest issues. Also, I'm interested in feedback on the illustration of the topic; right now there is only the infobox image as non-free media, but considering the setting of the film I'm at much more of a loss as to what are the best elements to illustrate (a video clip may be warranted, I'm not sure yet.) Any and all comments welcome.

Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 20:22, 10 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• First thing, the last Cast paragraph isn't cited.
• Now, this was a while ago, but I believe I was reading Shatner's Movie Memories about this film. He noted an incident where Sulu was supposed to meet his great-great-something grandfather as a boy, which Takei really wanted to do. But the child actor was under a great deal of pressure and couldn't do the scene, meaning it got cut. As I remember, this really annoyed Takei. I mention it because, if I've got the details right, I imagine that would be quite a relevant piece to add to the article; I know Takei wanted Sulu to have more depth as a character. Skinny87 (talk) 09:59, 12 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I imagine that content readily available in the credits and through multiple outlets such as simple cast lists don't really need to be cited; things like uncredited appearances do (and are), as are any facts beyond the simple matter of appearance. The element about the child actor was present in the article, but I removed it as I don't have access to the source right now to verify (it didn't offer a page number). Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 22:08, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Sarastro1.
I've looked at the first part of the article so far.

Lead:

• "the former crew of the USS Enterprise travels to Earth's past in order to save their present from a probe attempting to communicate with long-dead humpback whales." Should it be the crew travel or travels? I'm never sure in this case. Also, the sentence is quite long and packs too much in: "in order to save their present" is a little ambiguous, and "long-dead humpback whales" perhaps needs its own sentence.
• "After dissatisfaction with the first screenplay..." Presumably Paramount's dissatisfaction, but needs spelling out.
• "assisted in postproduction chores." Chores redundant possibly?
• "Almost none of the whales in the film were real..." Would "Few" be better than "almost none"?
• "Composer Leonard Rosenman wrote the film's score, which was nominated for an Academy Award." Possibly add this to next paragraph, which mentions other nominations.

Plot:

• "The crew use their ship to travel back in time by a slingshot maneuver around the Sun; the plan is to go into the past and return with whales to repopulate the species and answer the alien signal." Possibly change to "The crew use their ship to travel back in time by a slingshot maneuver around the Sun, planning to travel to the past and return with a whale to answer the alien signal." (I seem to remember (correct me if I'm wrong) that the original plan was simply to answer the signal, not to repopulate the species.)
• "Arriving in the year 1986, the crew finds that the time travel drained the Bird-of-Prey's power." Maybe it's me, but are the tenses getting confusing here? Also, "that" could probably go. I might be inclined to rework the sentence to "the Bird-of-Prey's power drained by the time travel".
• "Kirk and his allies": Suggests some other people are involved, when it was just McCoy and Taylor.
• "causing the object to restore Earth": a little vague?
• Possibly mention Taylor travelling to the future when it happened rather than at the end.

Cast:

• "Shatner was initially unwilling to reprise the role of Kirk until his salary was increased to $2 million and he was promised that he could direct the next film..." A little loose, maybe "until he received a salary of $2 million and the promise he could direct the next film".
• ..."the part had been created because Shatner had demanded a love interest, something Kirk had frequently had in the television series but that had been absent in the films..." What about: "created after Shatner demanded a love interest, a regular aspect of the television series which was absent from the first three films." I also think the next section of the sentence, about Meyer's explanation, should be in a new sentence.
• "The choice for Taylor came down to Hicks and another actress." Name of actress? If it is unknown, maybe replace this sentence and the next part with "Hicks was chosen as Nimoy believed she and Shatner had good chemistry when they met [or had lunch, or a lunch with Nimoy, Shatner and candidates for the role]."
• Any reason for the cuts in Barrett's role?

More to follow. --Sarastro1 (talk) 13:18, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Development:

• Although the lead says so, it doesn't state here that Nimoy directed the third film. And if he was "asked", who asked him?
• Is it possible to add why Nimoy was chosen? Presumably, bosses were happy with his work before?
• This section doesn't state when the film was commissioned. It might be useful to say who decided to make it, when producers were put in place, when it was decided to give the go-ahead, etc.
• "Whereas Nimoy had been under certain constraints in filming the previous picture...": Is it worth spelling these out?
• Overlinking: William Shatner already linked and not sure "time travel", "violin makers" and "oil drillers" need linking.
• "but it also meant the film might be panned": not sure about "panned", a little informal.
• "Murphy disliked the part, explaining he wanted to play an alien or a Starfleet officer (Nimoy was unaware of this),[11] and chose to make The Golden Child (a decision Murphy later said was a mistake)." Not sure the brackets are necessary, and is Murphy's belief that The Golden Child was a mistake relevant to the article?
• "Paramount was dissatisfied with the script": Presumably a person or people in Paramount?
• "and Bennett finished with the ending..." Doesn't read well. Maybe "and Bennett completed the final part of the story."
• "Meyer and Bennett also cut out Krikes and Meerson's idea of the Klingon Bird-of-Prey flying over the Super Bowl (where the crowd assume it is part of the halftime spectacle) and the hint that Saavik remained on Vulcan because she had become pregnant with Spock's child." I'd imagine this would be the case if Meyer never read the first script! I think this needs tightening up.
• "He would write a few pages, go to Nimoy and Bennett and show it to them. After a conversation about the pages Meyer would return to his office and write some more." Maybe change second sentence to "After a consultation, Meyer would return to his office and write some more."
• "who offered his own notes and started the rewriting process over again" Does this mean Shatner re-wrote? Or the script was returned for re-writes based on Shatner's notes?
• "The completed script was shown to Paramount executives, who loved it." Not sure "loved" is the best word. Were pleased with it?

Design

• "Because the original, whalelike probe design did not seem menacing enough, the modelmakers repainted the probe a shiny black and pockmarked the surface for greater texture and interest." Was this before or after the filming described in the previous sentence? If it was after, was the decision made after viewing the film or just on the appearance of the model?
• "to wear their future clothing": Should be "futuristic", as future implies clothing they will wear at some point later.

Filming

• "The film's opening scenes aboard the starship Saratoga were also the first to be shot" No need for also.
• "although the computer monitors in these scenes featured new graphics (the old reels had deteriorated in storage.)" Should the period be outside the bracket or should there be two? And not sure about relevance of computer graphics.
• " scene where Kirk is nearly run over by an irate driver required 12–15 cars that had to be repositioned if the shot was not correct, taking a half-hour to reshoot." Presumably this did happen? Maybe rephrase as "required the repositioning of up to 15 cars when the shot was incorrect, taking a half-hour to reshoot".
• "The production had planned..." The production team?

I don't really have time to do much more now at the moment, and there is still quite a bit of the article left. One thing I have noticed is an overuse of brackets which disrupt the flow. If such information is necessary as an aside, I prefer mdashes. Otherwise, the article reads fairly well and no obvious problems or shortcomings. Hope this helps. --Sarastro1 (talk) 21:13, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Your help is invaluable; these kinds of comments are helpful to making me more mindful of issues throughout, so thanks for what you could offer. One thing, you mention brackets—are you referring to parenthesis ()? (I dunno if they're called other things outside the US.) Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 21:56, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Sorry! Yes, parenthesis. My mistake! --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:17, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

---

British Pakistanis

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have recently dealt with several issues which were identified on its GA review page. It would be nice to have some feedback on anything else which needs to be done to get the article upto a GA standard.

Thanks, Sansonic (talk) 16:01, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: A lot of work has gone into this article, but it will need even more work to achieve GA. Here are a few suggestions for improvement.

• The lead should be a concise and inviting summary of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to try to include in the lead at least a mention of the main points of each of the text sections. The existing lead says nothing about culture, economics, media, politics, health, and some other topics covered in the main text. WP:LEAD has more information about writing a lead.

• Extremely short paragraphs and extremely short sections and subsections give an article a choppy look and feel. The existing article has many examples of both, starting with the one-sentence orphan paragraph in the lead. Two solutions to the problem are to expand or merge, depending on the situation.

• The article includes an unusual number of tables, some of which may contain unnecessary detail. In the "Education" section, for example, the table and accompanying graphs about GCSE pass rates include a lot of small details. Are the pass rates in 2004 in the London Borough of Redbridge and the London Borough of Ealing (or any of the others) necessary? Couldn't the essence of the tables simply be summarized in a sentence or two?

• Other tables could be summarized nicely in a single paragraph of prose. The table in the "Religion" section is an example.

• Although the article includes many citations, some parts of the article are not supported by reliable sources. For example, the "Radio" subsection is unsourced as are the last two paragraphs of the "Print" subsection. Most of the "London" subsection of the "Notable communities" section lacks sources. My rule of thumb is to provide at least one source for every paragraph in an article in addition to sources for unusual claims, statistics, and direct quotations.

• The Manual of Style suggests using straight prose paragraphs where feasible rather than numbered or bulleted lists. For example, it would be easy to replace the short list in "Awards and societies" with a single paragraph of prose. WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists has details.

• Some of the citation urls link to Google Books previews. Since the previews are incomplete and unstable, they don't make good permanent references. (As Google says, " ...you won't be able to see more pages than the copyright holder has made available... When you've accessed the maximum number of pages allowed for a book, any remaining pages will be omitted from your preview." I use the Google previews to help determine whether a book is apt to be useful to me or not; the previews can be very handy. However, I generally try to find printed copies of books that I want to cite in Wikipedia articles; then I can look at all of the pages (possibly including important material not included in the preview) and source article claims to stable and permanent sources. Most, if not all, of the Google books should be available in lending libraries.

• The link checker at the top of this review page finds three dead urls in the citations.

• Other citations are incomplete or malformed. My rule of thumb for citations to Internet sources is to include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and date of most recent access, if those are known or can be found.

• When all other changes and revisions are made, it would be good to seek a copyeditor to go over the fine points and to check the article against the Manual of Style guidelines. I see many small errors such as sentences that start with digits instead of words, but I don't have time for a line-by-line review. You might be able to get copyediting help via WP:GOCE.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Halo (Beyoncé Knowles song)

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've been working on it many months. I'd like to nominate it for a featured article, but I need comments about what is missed. Thanks, Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 20:34, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: The basics are here, but the article is not yet ready for FAC. The main problems are related to the Manual of Style and prose issues. I made a fair number of small proofing changes, and I have further suggestions about prose, style, and layout. After looking these over and making any changes you think would be helpful, you might ask one of the volunteers at WP:PRV#General copyediting or at WP:GOCE to copyedit again.

Lead

• "It was released as the fourth single of the album on January 20, 2009, in the United States mainstream radio by Columbia Records." - Flip to active voice? Suggestion: "Columbia Records released the song, the fourth single of the album, to mainstream radio in the United States on January 20, 2009." This leads to a question, though. Do record companies typically release songs one-by-one to radio?

  Changed and sometimes songs are released by radio at first. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• "According to Bogart, Ray LaMontagne's "Shelter" was one of the inspirations for pen it." - This does not make sense as written.

  Reworded Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• "It has been modified twice, into a tribute to Michael Jackson following his death, and as a tribute to the victims of the 2010 Haiti Earthquake, which Knowles sang on the television broadcast Hope for Haiti Now: A Global Benefit for Earthquake Relief featuring Chris Martin from Coldplay on the piano." - Probably too complex. Suggestion: "It has been modified twice, into a tribute to Michael Jackson following his death, and as a tribute to the victims of the 2010 Haiti Earthquake. Knowles sang the second version on the television broadcast Hope for Haiti Now: A Global Benefit for Earthquake Relief, which featured Chris Martin from Coldplay on the piano."

  Changed as suggested. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• "Halo" was covered by Florence and the Machine in 2009... " - Since not all readers will be familiar with "covered" in this sense, perhaps link it to covered or add a brief explanation or use a different term such as "recorded by"?

  Linked. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

Background and composition

• "All the instruments, arrangement and recording of the single were in charge of OneRepublic frontman, assisted by Christian Baker; vocal recording was in the hands of Jim Caruana; and Mark "Spike" Stent mixed "Halo", being helped by Matt Green." - The instruments were not in charge of the people. Suggestion: "The OneRepublic frontman, assisted by Christian Baker, were in charge of the instruments, arrangement and recording of the single; vocal recording was in the hands of Jim Caruana; and Mark "Spike" Stent, helped by Matt Green, mixed "Halo"." This leads to a question: who was the OneRepublic frontman? If you mean Tedder, it would be better to say "Tedder" than "the OneRepublic frontman".

  ChaNged. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• "The single, which was launched with the B-side "Diva",[6] was released on January 20, 2009, in the United States by mainstream radio... " - Was it released by "mainstream radio", or was it released by Columbia Records?

  Oops Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• "The writing of the track was speculated to be intended for the British singer Leona Lewis." - Was the writing intended for Lewis, or was the track intended for Lewis? Who speculated? It might be more clear to say, "According to X, the writers originally created the song for British singer Leona Lewis" or something like that. The passive voice often embodies vagueness; the active voice requires identification of an actor (subject) or actors and is therefore often stronger and more informative.

  See Below. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• "There was a rumor that Cowell might have had something to do with the leaking of the... " - Is it possible to say where the rumor surfaced? Was it published? Did it surface in a media interview?

  Removed. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• On my computer screen, the quote box in this section slightly overlaps the next section. This could be fixed by moving the quote box up by about four lines.

  On mine too, so see below. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

"Already Gone" controversy

• The section consists mainly of two long block quotes and two song samples. Since the "Background and composition" section already includes a controversy, you might consider moving the Lewis controversy into this section and renaming it "Controversy" or "Controversies". Then perhaps one of the blockquotes could be rendered in abbreviated fashion as a paraphrase. This would still leave a problem with the first quotebox, which would have to be moved down into the "Controversy" section to make sense, and you might have to eliminate one of the song samples to make the layout work. As it is, these two sections combined seem over-reliant on the long quotations.

  Merged both sections. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• Blockquotes don't need quotation marks. See WP:MOSQUOTE.

  Removed. Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

Critical reception

• "New Music Reviews, a column from Daily Mail wrote "On 'Halo', Beyoncé sings in a lower register... " - Word or words missing? Maybe "In "New Music Reviews", a columnist from Daily Mail wrote... "?

  Reworded. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 07:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

• Nested single and double quotation marks that bump against one another should be separated by an nbsp code. See WP:NBSP to see what the code consists of.

  Done. Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 07:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Chart performance

• "The track debuted on the Billboard Hot 100 on the issue dated February 7, 2009, at number ninety-three." - Generally, numbers bigger than nine are written as digits unless they start a sentence or appear as a mixture of big and little numbers within a sentence. Since I saw that you were using digits (such as 84 in 84 beats per minute), I changed a couple of numbers earlier in the article, but here is another one, and I see more further down in the article. I'll leave them for you to adjust as you see fit.

  Written out, more encyclopedic Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• Constructions like Hot 100 and number 107 need no-break codes to keep them from being awkwardly separated by line-break on computer screens.

  Done Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

• When quoting song lines, use a spaced front slash rather than an unspaced front slash; e.g., "Haiti, we can see your halo / You know you're my saving grace / ". Ditto for the other similar quotations in the article. MOS:SLASH has details.

  Done Tbhotch^{Talk C.}

References

• Does citation 2 need an url and accessdate?

Online source, but as far as I remember, it is not considered a reliable source at all.

• Are the nested parentheses necessary in citation 114?

  Per source?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

• Of course they helped me, and alot!. I may ask for a c/e and nominate it for FAC. For PR, I could take some of the, but I'm incredibly busy now. Anyway, thank you so much :) Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 07:01, 21 November 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Pilot (Desperate Housewives)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to improve it to at least good article status. I am particularly concerned with the Casting and Filming sections.

Thanks, Akcvtt (talk) 01:05, 14 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Looks generally good. I have several suggestions for further improvement.

Overlinking

• I would not link the names of the actors or characters more than once in the lead plus once in the main text. For example, Susan Mayer and Teri Hatcher are linked once each in the lead, again in the "Plot" section, again in "Casting", as well as in the infobox. I'd at least remove the repetitious links from "Casting" and probably the repetitious ones from the infobox. It's a short article, and readers will not find all of these links useful. Also, I would not bother to link "swimming pool", and I would not link "slut" more than once in the article; it's linked in "Plot" and "Casting".

Lead

• "struggles with the disillusion of her marriage to Rex (Steven Culp)" - The word disillusion is so close to dissolution that I'd suggest altering the sentence to simply say, "struggles with her failing marriage to Rex (Steven Culp)".

Plot

• "a plumber who has recently moved onto Wisteria Lane" - Maybe just "to Wisteria Lane" since "onto" would put him in the middle of the street.

• "Meanwhile, Gabrielle, a former model, grows increasingly unhappy with her marriage to Carlos (Ricardo Antonio Chavira), who buys her love with extravagant gifts, and continues an affair with her sixteen-year-old gardener, John Rowland (Jesse Metcalfe)." - It's not completely clear from this whether Gabrielle is having an affair with John or whether Ricardo is having an affair with John. Suggestion: "Meanwhile, Gabrielle, a former model, grows increasingly unhappy with her marriage to Carlos (Ricardo Antonio Chavira), who buys her love with extravagant gifts. She continues an affair with her 16-year-old gardener, John Rowland (Jesse Metcalfe)."

Creation and development

• "The network ordered thirteen episodes of the series." - Numbers bigger than nine are usually written as digits unless they start a sentence; i.e., 13 rather than thirteen.

Casting

• "Marcia Cross, who originally auditioned for the role of deceased series narrator Mary Alice Young, was cast in the role of "Stepfordish perfect homemaker" Bree Van de Kamp." - Words inside direct quotes should not be linked since the links were not part of the original. You might use a work-around like this: [Marcia Cross]], who originally auditioned for the role of deceased series narrator Mary Alice Young, was cast in the role of Bree Van de Kamp, a "perfect homemaker" reminiscent of The Stepford Wives.

Filming and subsequent casting changes

• "Filming took place for thirteen days in March 2004.[3] ABC picked up the series for thirteen episodes" - Change to 13 and 13?

Ratings

• "among the demographic of women from ages 18 to 49" - Tighten to "among women aged 18 to 49"?

Critical reception

• "[a]s involving as any new drama and funnier than any new sitcom [because it] matches high visual style with a witty-but-never arch sensibility." - The first set of brackets look odd. Maybe putting the "as" outside the quotes would make this tidier; i.e., as "involving as any new... "? Ditto for at least some of the other brackets. They make the text harder to read; sometimes they are necessary and useful, but it's good to keep them to a minimum.

• "tragique tribute and back again" - Is the misspelling of "tragic" in the original?

Quote boxes

• Curly quotation marks are generally frowned upon in Wikipedia articles since they don't follow house style. (See WP:MOSQUOTE) Just use normal quotation marks snug against the quotes.

References

• In citations 37 through 40, use Wikipedia house style for the search-engine data; e.g., "Felicity Huffman" rather than "FELICITY HUFFMAN". Ditto for the other words in all-caps.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:04, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

---

William Warelwast

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like some feedback on comprehensibility by the non-specialist as well as prose concerns, prior to taking him to FAC.

Thanks, Ealdgyth - Talk 15:30, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: It's no surprise to me that this article is well-done. I have a list of fairly nit-picky suggestions for improving the prose and making terms more clear to the general reader.

Lead

• "A native of Normandy, little is known of his background before 1087, when he appears as a royal clerk for King William II of England." - This is nitpicky, but "little" is not what should be modified by "a native of Normandy". Suggestion: "Warelwast was a native of Normandy, but little more is known about his background before 1087, when he appears as a royal clerk for King William II of England."

• "The medieval chronicler Eadmer, who was a partisan of Anselm's," - To avoid the double possessive, "of Anselm's", maybe tighten this to "The medieval chronicler Eadmer, a partisan of Anselm,"?

• For readers unfamiliar with Catholicism, would it be helpful to link "papacy", "bishopric", and "archdeaconry" in the lead and "transept" in the infobox?

Early life

• ... in Exeter was given to Warelwast by "Willelmus, avus meus", or "William, my grandfather/ancestor". - Should this direct quotation have an inline citation directly after it?

• "claimed that Warelwast was a relative of the king's" - Double possessive; "of the king" rather than "of the king's"?

• Corrected through to here... Ealdgyth - Talk 17:13, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Royal clerk under William II

• "The first secure mentions of Warelwast... ". - "Reliable" rather than "secure"?

• "This case was between St. Florent Abbey in Saumur and Fécamp Abbey that was held at Foucarmont." - Maybe "This case, heard at Foucarmont, was between St. Florent Abbey in Saumur and Fécamp Abbey"?

• "were back in England with the legate, Walter of Albano, by 13 May 1095." - Since the bit about Walter of Albano is repeated three sentences later, perhaps "with the legate, Walter of Albano," could be deleted from this sentence, and Walter of Albano could be linked in the next iteration.

• Link "legate" to papal legate on first use?

• "while the king may have instructed his envoys to attempt to secure these objects, Rufus probably was willing to negotiate... " - Who is Rufus? I think it is the nickname of William II, but that needs to be explained in the text. Or am I just not seeing it?

• "It was also Warelwast who prevented the excommunication... " - Link excommunication?

Corrected through to here... Ealdgyth - Talk 20:59, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Royal service for King Henry I

• "Warelwast in 1106 was the king's negotiator in the discussions that led to the settlement of the Investiture Controversy in England." - Would it be helpful to state briefly what the settlement was? It's pretty clear from context that the king got his way and was able thereafter to appoint and replace bishops and archbishops, but I can't be certain.

• "Henry had reserved the see of Exeter for Warelwast" - Link "see" to Episcopal see?

• "Unfortunately, Warelwast was unable to change the pope's mind," - Delete "unfortunately" since it expresses a point of view?

• "the primacy in the English Church" - Should "primacy" be briefly explained or linked to something?

• Corrected through here Ealdgyth - Talk 23:50, 1 January 2011 (UTC)

Work as bishop

• "a provincial synod for Normandy" - Link synod?

• "In his diocese he started a new cathedral, which began construction around 1114 and was consecrated in 1133." - Since the cathedral didn't begin to construct itself, perhaps "In his diocese he started a new cathedral around 1114, and it was consecrated in 1133"?

• "Three royal charters granting churches to Warelwast survive, for churches in Cornwall, Devonshire, and Exeter." - Tighten to "Royal charters survive that granted churches in Cornwall, Devonshire, and Exeter to Warelwast"?

• "Warelwast also instituted the two offices of treasurer and precentor... " - Link precentor?

• "As well, the first sub-archdeacons, who were under the archdeacons." - This is not a complete sentence.

• "This office is not attested again... ". - It's not clear which office this refers to. Do you mean the office of sub-archdeacon?

• "He may have resigned his see prior to his death, and the 16th century antiquary John Leland thought that Warelwast resigned his see before 1127, became a canon at Plympton, and died in 1127, however the year of death is incorrect, but it is possible that Warelwast became a canon shortly before his death." - Too complex. I'd suggest expressing this in two or three separate sentences.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 18:24, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Tim riley comments: The article is entirely comprehensible to the lay person (to this one, at any rate), and enjoyable into the bargain. (Having just tangled with Klang (Stockhausen), I found this a breeze.) A handful of exceedingly minor comments:

• The article seems to be written in UK English, in which case, "signaled" needs a double "l". If, per contra, the spelling is to be American, there is a English "favourable" in the lead.
• Two typos: "arrising" and, I imagine, "Wiliam". (I didn't dare amend the latter and have left the former untouched along with it.)
• "… hostile chroniclers claimed that Warelwast was uneducated…" Pray ignore if you wish, but I had it drilled into me when young that one doesn't use "claim" as another word for "assert" or "allege", and reserves it for occasions when a real claim is at issue, such as claiming a right or title.
• "Devonshire" is not wrong, by any means, but is rather old-fashioned. "Devon", tout court is the usual form these days.

Finally, I hope you will permit me to say that it is a pleasure to read an article where the upper- and lower-case distinction between, e.g., "King William" and "the king" etc is scrupulously observed. O si sic omnes.

If (but only if) you have time and inclination, I too have an article up for peer review: Octavia Hill… – Tim riley (talk) 13:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

---

A7 (Croatia)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I plan to submit it to GAN shortly. The article is modeled on similar GA class Croatian motorway articles, it and has recently been copyedited by WP:GOCE.

Thanks, Tomobe03 (talk) 12:59, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Niagara

• "The A7 motorway (Croatian: Autocesta A7) is a motorway in Croatia which is 34.4 kilometres (21.4 mi) long.[1]"
  • Tightened: "The A7 motorway (Croatian: Autocesta A7) is a 34.4 kilometre (21.4 mi) long motorway in Croatia.[1]"  Done per suggestion.
• "...provides access to Učka Nature Park and thus indirectly to numerous resorts, notably in the Istria and Kvarner Gulf regions."
  • Tightened: "...prvides access to Učka Nature Park and, indirectly, to numerous resortsin the Istria and Kvarner Gulf regions.  Done per suggestion.
• "The motorway is nationally significant because it has a positive economic impact on the cities and towns it connects and because it contributes to tourism in Croatia.[5]"
  • Grammar/punctuation: "The motorway is nationally significant because of its positive economic impact on the cities and towns it connects, and because of its contribution to tourism in Croatia."[4]  Done per suggestion.
• "As the route traverses rugged terrain, it requires numerous bridges, viaducts, tunnels, and other structures."
  • Flipped: "Numerous bridges, viaducts, tunnels, and other structures were required as the route traverses rugged terrain."  Done per suggestion.
• "Current long-term plans for developing the A7 motorway define its ultimate southern terminus in Žuta Lokva at the interchange of the A1 motorway. This section is no longer part of any short-term plans, as no funding until 2012 is currently scheduled for the section"
  • Reworded: "Current long-term plans for developing the A7 motorway involves an extension of the southern terminus to he interchange with the A1 motorway at Žuta Lokva. This section is no longer included in any short-terms plans, as no funding is going to appropriated for it until 2012."  Done per suggestion, a section in between the two sentence left as it was.
• "The filling stations are small convenience stores, and they offer LPG fuel."
  • Flipped, Missing verb? (your welcome choose the word): "The filling stations also offer LPG fuel and (are attached to/include) small convenience stores."  Done per suggestion - verb missing indeed, opted for "include" as the convenience stores are operated by the rest area operators themselves and share checkout with the filling station (fuel and anything bought in the store are charged together, unless specifically requested otherwise).

Another fine highway article...nice work! ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 23:11, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments, they were helpful.--Tomobe03 (talk) 01:03, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

---

So Yesterday

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that this could become a Good Article with a little more modification. Thanks, Novice7 Talk 14:26, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Wow! You've done a really good job. I've been meaning to expand this article for a long time. I don't really have anything to say about it really. I've never peer reviewed before, I just wanted to say that. xD ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 21:17, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Background and composition should be in two sections, same as live performances and music video. Not sure the in popular culture section is relevant. And that's really all I can see. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 21:11, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks. Novice7 Talk 05:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Adabow comments

• The music video screenshot does not really meet WP:NFCC, so it should be removed. I don't know anything about the songs, so there may be a more notable scene, but you do not need a screenshot
• See if you can do a bit more research on the video to expand it
• Discogs is not a reliable source, as it is user-created. Try to ind track listings on Amazon, Allmusic or iTunes

Adabow (talk · contribs) 21:51, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

• Fixed discogs and music video screenshot. I could not find any good information on the music video. I'll try. Thanks... Novice7 Talk 05:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - Comments:
• "After signing with Buena Vista Records, Duff recorded songs like "I Can't Wait", "Why Not" and "What Dreams Are Made Of" which became hits on Radio Disney." unsourced, you cannot say they were hits, did they even chart?
• Composition section is too short, it must be expanded if possible, if not the audio sample should be deleted.
• "Upon its release, the song received mainly positive reviews from the critics"... That is incorrect, reading the section it received more so mixed reviews.
• Music video subsections need to removed, unless they look like Bad_Romance#Music_video sections they are not be be sub headed, even We_R_Who_We_R#Music_video isnt long enough for subsections.
• "It received airplay on MuchMusic in Canada." is unsourced. And not really notable.
• Throughout the article there is a number of issues with relevance, what makes AOL so relavent in the Chart Performance section. Onlly real charts are needed, billboard and such.

These are some of the issues i have with the article. If i find more i will let you know. BTW for the most part nice work on the article. :) - (CK)Lakeshade - talk2me - 01:12, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks for your comments. I've fixed those. About composition, what is Duff's statement on the song is added from the Background section? Would it fit? Novice7 Talk 05:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

CrowzRSA comments

• The "United Kingdom" in "United Kingdom cover" should not be linked. CrowzRSA 01:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
• The "Composition" section should be expanded. CrowzRSA 01:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
• The music video section does not need subsections, since they are each too short. CrowzRSA 01:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
• I don't see why the "In pop culture" is really necessary. If you find it necessary, it should be in prose style, instead of a listing. CrowzRSA 01:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
• I don't see why a link to the YouTube video is necessary. CrowzRSA 01:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
• Since Discogs isn't reliable, use allmusic. Lucky for you, they've documented 5 versions of the single ([1]). CrowzRSA 01:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thanks Crowz for your comments. Fixed almost everything. Just, music videos and composition sections. I need to find more sources. Novice7 Talk 05:17, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Metamorphosis should be linked. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• She then decided she would "give [the song] 100 percent" I think this should be changed to She then decided she would give the song a "100 percent". CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• She then decided she would "give [the song] 100 percent" and not comment negatively of it, and, as she put it, she "ended up loving it", stating, "It was such a fun song, and it means a lot. This should be split into two separate sentences. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Make sure that periods are inside of quotes (i.e. "work that she's done". → "work that she's done.") this is not the same for songs though (i.e. both "So Yesterday." and "So Yesterday". are fine) CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Please insure that there should always be a reference directly after any quote. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• The song is also featured on all of Duff's greatest hits compilations including, Most Wanted (2005), 4ever (2006) and Best of Hilary Duff (2008). It is also featured on the popular music video game Band Hero as a bonus download.[4] This does not belong in the background section. Perhaps in the Release and reception section. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• In an interview with Instinct, in 2006, reword to In a 2006 interview with Instinct, CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Tempo should be linked. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• There is inconsistency between the use of US and U.S. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• There is not a ref that verifies Chris Applebaum was the director. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Insure that references go directly after punctuation. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 13 additive terms, a bit too much. CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• That's all I see. This should easily pass GAN if that's what you're wanting to do. Good luck! CrowzRSA 19:29, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• Guess I fixed 'em all. Novice7 Talk 11:26, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Candyo32 comments

• The second to last paragraph in the background talks of themes in the song (which is part of its Composition with the writing and music). So really that paragraph and the one that talks about musical influences and could be split into the composition. Candyo32 14:21, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• I've split the sections just as you said. I hope it is okay now. Novice7 Talk 14:58, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

GreatOrangePumpkin comments

hello,

• Release and reception: gave a neagtive review on the song's title writing, should be negative
• Chart performance: The song peaked at number two ar what is ar?

That is all I have found. Cheers.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 14:42, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Fixed. Novice7 Talk 14:54, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Chasewc91 comments

• Wow, great work! Just woke up so I'm a little tired and may not be able to spot a lot (I may come back here later when I'm more awake/aware), but the only thing I can spot right now is in the lead: "The song was written by the record production team Lauren Christy, Scott Spock, Graham Edwards, and Charlie Midnight, and produced by The Matrix for Duff's second studio album, Metamorphosis (2003)." The Matrix is the record production team, while the writers are only part of it (except Charlie Midnight, I think). –Chase (talk / contribs) 16:50, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Done. Novice7 Talk 17:15, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Hygeberht

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I'd like to take it to FAC, but I'm concerned with two issues - one, prose, which is always a problem for me, and two, comprehensibility by the non-specialist in medieval history. I hope it makes sense to someone who isn't familiar with ecclesiastical history or with Anglo-Saxon history. I'd greatly appreciate any suggestions towards either or both of those concerns.

Thanks, Ealdgyth - Talk 22:53, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I have read this several times and like it - sorry it has taken me so long to review. The prose seems pretty good to me, though I know you often have copyediting lined up, I will try to point out places the language could be improved. I think the main area for improvement is a bit more background to provide context.

• The lead is very concise - the article is 9865 B of readable prose, so WP:LEAD says one or two paragraphs in the lead is OK. If the article is expanded any, it might be worth expanding the lead to two paragraphs.
• Is there any reason not to link the Archbishopric of Canterbury in the lead?
• Since so much of Hygeberht's life was governed by Offa (both are mentioned three times by name in the lead), I think it would help to add a few sentences on Offa and the Kingdom of Mercia and the whole situation in what became England at the time. I think most readers will not know Kent was its own kingdom, or that England was not a unified kingdom at the time.
• I also wondered if one of Offa's coins (three are pictured in the Offa article) might be used as an image in this article?
• I read the article on the Kingdom of Kent but am not really sure what "the recently subjected Kentish kingdom" means. If it was subjected by an external force, why is there still a Kentish king, Egbert II?
• If two versions of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle say the Council of Chelsea was in 785, why does the article say it was in 787? What other sources say that it was actually in 787?
• I assume the other version of the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle do not mention this council? Should that be stated explicitly somewhere?
• There is also an image of the first page of the Peterborough Chronicle in its article - could that be used in the Council of Chelsea section?
• Not clear what "at Rome" means in In 788 Hygeberht received a pallium, the symbol of an archbishop's authority, from Pope Hadrian I at Rome.[18] Assume it means Hygebehrt went to ROme to receive the pallium, but could also be seen as meaning that Hadrian was at ROme when he sent the pallium
• Is the year of Jænberht's death known? If so could it be added to .. though upon Jænberht's death, Hygeberht became the foremost prelate in England.[19]?
• Probably want to somehow identify ALcuin better - I thought he was the Archbishop of York. But, when Jænberht died, Hygeberht consecrated Jænberht's successor Æthelhard; though only after Offa consulted [noted scholar] Alcuin of York about proper procedure.[19]
• This raises the question of what the Archbishop of York thought of the new Archbishop(ric) of Lichfield. How did they interact? Or why was it only a Lichfield / Canterbury power struggle, and not a York / Lichfield struggle as well?
• As for language, I noticed the word "also" a afair amount - could probably be reduced in number
• Avoid passive voice if possible. Try to tighten the text ion places - so look for things like ... but it may have been because of a desire by Offa to supervise the entire southern church or it may have stemmed from an attempt by the archbishops of Canterbury to retain some authority over the province of Lichfield.[24] why not just "because of Offa's desire to supervise" or "stemmed from the archbishops of Caterbury's attempt to retain"
• I know there is a historical present tense, but to me it seems odd to have events that happened over 1000 years ago described with present tense verbs, especially when there are past tense consructions nearby By the time that Æthelhard held the Fifth Council of Clovesho, Hygeberht was no longer even named as a bishop, as he appears at that council as an abbot.[28] He remained an abbot until his death.[27]
• Please let me know when you take this to FAC.

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 06:20, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

PS given the recent concerns over copyright violations etc. I am now adding this to all of my peer reviwes. I know I am preaching to the choir here, but what do you think of the line?

• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for more details

Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 16:02, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Hip-hop dance

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has been over a year since it last had one; with all the updates/changes that have taken place since then, I think it's time for another. I'm not so much concerned about content because I did a lot of research for this article and I honestly feel like it's very thorough. I would like copy-editing help and feedback on anything that may need to be clarified in the article. I know not everyone is familiar with hip-hop dance and I would like for the material to be generally easy to understand for a casual reader.

Thanks, Gbern3 (talk) 15:27, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

• Dablinks (tool in the box on the right of this peer review page) shows a disambiguation link and a redirect that points back to the article; please fix them.
  • Fixed. //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• Why is this article (whose subject is a major theme in modern dance culture) heavily dependent on web and journalistic sources? Google shows 5,650 books published by universities. Why is this article not using these materials that are much preferred as "high-quality reliable sources" under the FA-criteria 1b?
  • Why are you talking (or typing) down to me like a child. To answer your last question, I honestly don't have any plans to submit this article to WP:FAC. All I wanted was a peer review. To answer the first question there are a lot of books published on hip-hop culture and a lot of books published on dance but there are not a lot of books published on hip-hop dance. This is probably because it's a street dance and doesn't have the academic background of a studio based style such as ballet. I have experienced this personally when searching for books at my own local libraries and this is also demonstrated by the link you provided (just for the record I used two books for this article, primarily Can't Stop, Won't Stop). Did you read the list of the 5,650 books that you provided a link to (literally speaking, I don't mean that in a rude way)? I read the results up through page 10. Most of the books on the first couple pages talk about hip-hop culture or dance in general, dance as a performance art. What's wrong with web and journalistic sources? As long as they're WP:RELIABLE there shouldn't be a problem. The fifth page has an except from the book A history of European folk music. The title alone makes me think I can't extract anything useful but I read the results anyway:

For instance, when hip-hop dancing turned up in Scandinavia, this was not a revival of the Norwegian "halling" dance but an import from the United States. Likewise, popping and break-dancing began among the young people of Spanish and African origin in New York, but although their origins have been sought in Iberian and African folklore, it appears that the only close relatives are African-American show dances, including tap dancing.

From this random book that mentions hip-hop dance in passing, the only thing I learned was something I already knew: hip-hop dance came from the United States. Why do I need to go to Google Books when I can read that fact in reliable web and journalistic sources? //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I asked a question. I see nothing in my tone that suggests "talking (or typing) down to [you] like a child". You asked for suggestions to improve the article and I pointed it out (the lack of high-quality reliable sources). Whether you want to go for FAC or not is none of my concern. You asked for suggestions on how to improve the article, I gave it (improving it to a higher standard).

The dismissal of Google books based on a random book is flawed, especially since the book sample below shows a fundamental oversight of the evolution of subject (that of an evolution from the early 1920s. Ignoring the possible academic sources that are available (and which might provide more information) for the convenience of relying on web sites does not help to improve the article. It falls on the editors of the articles to sieve through available resources, and I am pointing out that the article has ignored a pool of high-value resources. Jappalang (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

I understand books are a good resource and I'm not arguing against using them. After all, going to Google Books requires the same amount of effort as the web and journalistic sources I have. I can view them all from the Internet. I haven't ignored books either. Like I said earlier, I went to the library looking for them and I read the results you gave up through page 10. I personally think articles that use books have more integrity. The point I'm trying to make is that almost all the results I read from Google Books talk about hip-hop culture or dance in general (not specifically hip-hop dance) and just like with web results, the lower down the list the result was, the lower the relevance. I'll give you an example of a pretty good source I found that directly addresses hip-hop dance that was still wrong. The following is from That's the joint!: The Hip-hop Studies Reader:

"Breakdance involved acrobatics that used headspins, backspins, moonwalking, waving, and the robot..."

This statement is not correct. Moonwalking, waving, and robot are not breakdance moves/styles. They are funk styles that were created/invented/developed in California. Aside from being into hip-hop culture, I know this because I read it on the lectric Boogaloos official website. The founder of this crew, Sam Solomon, created the popping style of dance so they would be the best resource for information about funk styles history considering that they were eye witnesses to it's development. In this case, the web resource is a better source than the book. On a side note, breaking was created on the opposite side of the country in New York. //Gbern3 (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:IBEcipher1.png: This fails WP:NFCC#1. IBE series is still on-going; anyone can go to the next year's event and take a photograph.
  • Discussion is on the file's talk page. //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
• "Hip-hop dance refers to social or choreographed dance styles primarily danced to hip-hop music or that have evolved as part of hip-hop culture."

  Awkward phrasing with redundant phrasings, "dance style" is evidently a dance. Are there any other dance styles aside from "social or choreographed"? You either dance socially (on your own or with somebody in a casual setting) or not (competition, performance, etc). If "style" is associated with "social or choreograph", then what is "breaking, locking and popping"?

  • Breaking, locking, and popping are both. Hip-hop dance is both "social" because there is the freestyle, street element of hip-hop dance and "choreographed" because there's also the dance industry, music video, Hollywood type of hip-hop dance. The difference is explained in the dance industry section. It's like salsa dancing. You can do salsa on the street or in the club where it's freestyle partner dancing, the "social" aspect. You can also do a choreographed salsa routine in a movie, on a TV show, or in competitive ballroom dancing. These two faces to the dance does not exist in other styles this is why I felt I should mention that hip-hop dance has both. You will never see someone go to a club and start doing contemporary or tap dance. Those styles are always done in a studio or on a stage. Are you saying I should take out the phrase "social or choreographed"? //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Yes. Jappalang (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Fixed. //Gbern3 (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

  Suggestion: "Hip-hop dance combines sexuality and counter-culture subversiveness in its movements; it is a combination of the hop dances of the 1920s to 50s, and the hip dances of the 1960s. Dancers move to a music that "emphasizes lyrics and wordplay over melody and harmony" (p. 88 of Forever Young)."

  • I really think this definition would confuse a casual reader and that's exactly what I'm trying to avoid. I don't even know what "counter-culture subversiveness" means and I've done my research on this style of dance. So if I don't know what that means how will the casual reader. That's first issue. The second issue is the first sentence is vague. What are those hop dances from the 20s and hip dances from the 60s? Where did they come from? What did they look like? Third, this statement is misleading because it insinuates that the dance is called hip-hop because of an evolution of social dancing starting in the '20s and not because of the birth of a cultural movement. Hip-hop dance is called hip-hop dance because it came from hip-hop culture. Not because it combines hop dances from the 20s and hip dances from the 60s. The term itself, "hip-hop", was coined by DJ/MC Lovebug Starski in the '70s. The dance started out as just breaking in the 70s, then locking and popping were incorporated, and then studios created a commercial style. There are references for this fact in the article. Last, the page in "Forever Young" you provided as a reference isn't talking about where hip-hop dance came from. It's talking about hip-hop music and hip from the '60s is referring to "a code word for the counter-culture views of the 'hippies'." That source does not directly support the sentence you came up with; it's on the verge of WP:OR. //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I would suggest you read closely the source material. It talks of the music and the dance that goes with it. The material speaks of the evolution of how hip-hop comes about. The culture does not just pop up overnight in the 1970s: this is a facet of research (deeper and further range of consideration) that is not typically considered in journalistic and popular sources. Jappalang (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
      • The material (starting on page 87) talks about how hip-hop music came about. Even then it states that hip-hop music "...traces its roots to the 1970s reggae and rap music." So it still says it comes from the 1970s. Still not a good source though because the book presents hip-hop music as some other style of music that came about after or from rap music which is impossible because hip-hop is the culture and rap music is an element of that culture. Hip-hop music is rap music. They're the same thing. If hip-hop (the culture) was a person, rap would be it's child along with breaking, DJing, and graffit writing (the other elements of that culture). Does this make sense? Concerning the development, yes, a culture does not just pop up overnight. Can't Stop, Won't Stop talks about this. It talks about the political, social, and economic factors that played into hip-hop culture developing. I'll give you an example of how this happened specifically with the dance. Earl "Snakehips" Tucker was a famous dancer in the 20s and his moves look eerily similar to the popping moves of today. I have a source for this in the article. It came from Dance Spirit magazine and YouTube (external links section). I searched for information about him on Google Books and got eight results. The first one which is probably the the best result is blocked. I can't see/read the page. There are two others that talk about the dance and it's relation to popping/hip-hop but this is limited to one or two sentences in each source. In contrast, Dance Spirit has a full article with more much information. Wouldn't you agree the magazine is a better source? // Gbern3 (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
• What is there no section on the history of hip-hop dances? Its evolution and such?
  • There was a very large section on the history but the article was getting too big so in order to follow WP:SPLIT, WP:SS, and WP:TOOLONG policies I moved it to its own article called History of hip-hop dance. Hip-hop dance is 66 bytes, History of hip-hop dance is 38 bytes. Had I keep the two articles together as one it would have been over 100 bytes right now which is too big. That is why there is a link at the top of the article, right before the lead that takes readers to the History of hip-hop dance article if they're interested in learning more. Foundation, the first book that came up in your Google Books list is used in this article. //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Main topic articles are supposed to be a summary of information. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style (layout. History of hip-hop dance should not be dumped at the top of the article. It should have been headlining a section titled "History", "Evolution" or such. Jappalang (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Good catch, I was not aware of that policy. Working on it... // Gbern3 (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
• There are several instances of dance terminology introduced without consideration of the layman reader. What is a "cipher", which is simply used without context to its meaning or not explained? Links are hazardly introduced, e.g. "however, Apache lines are more appropriate when it is crew versus crew." => so now we have native Americans who form into some sort of queue as "more appropriate" when the operators of a machinery or facility oppose those of another?
  • Why do you have to be sarcastic? I don't know if you need these terms to be defined or if you're trying to say something to the effect of "Gbern3, you're WP:OVERLINKing. You should probably take out those wikilinks to 'Apache' and 'crew'. You could confuse people." A cipher is explained in the first paragraph of the lead: Informal freestyle sessions and battles are usually performed in a cipher, a circular dance space that forms naturally once the dancing begins. Do I need to repeat this again later in the article? Is that what you're trying to say? Apache line is also explained: In contrast to a cipher, opposing crews can face each other in this line formation and execute their "burns". There is also the picture that you tagged that illustrates what an Apache line looks like. Maybe I need to explain it further. It took me a while to realize what you were talking about when you brought up "operators of machinery". You're not stupid though. I can tell by your user page with all your barnstars, your DYK rows, and your FA/A/GA article stats that you're intelligent enough to read the rest of the wiktionary entries for the word "crew" and find out that #9 says "A hip-hop group". Also, a crew is defined in the "dance crew" section of the article: A dance crew is a group of street dancers who get together and create dance routines. However, this definition appears halfway through the article; perhaps I should move it up. Are those three terms (cipher, Apache line, and crew) the only ones you found fault with? //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)
    • No malicious sarcasm intended; it is a very frank explanation of what sort of negative effects such haphazard links produce in a reader. It is the author's responsibility to ensure that any linking done should help readers instead of confusing them. The lede is supposed to be a summary of the article and not a required reading; readers can and do jump straight into the main body without reading the lede (WP:LEDE). The main body should contain everything a lede has. Placing definitions in the lede without consideration for the main body is a disservice to the readers. Wikitionary are not reliable sources of information (search for FAC delegate SandyGeorgia's comment on the issue) and as an encylopaedia, we would not use informal terminology or jargon to present information to our readers, which "crew" is.[2] Jappalang (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)
      • ???? Now I'm real confused. That's a whole new discussion. Are you saying Wikipedia shouldn't use any jargon/informal terms? Isn't that the point of an encyclopedia—to explain things? Do you know how many articles there are on Wikipedia about informal/jargon topics or that use informal/jargon terms? What about the physics, math, or engineering FA articles? I'm sure those use jargon terms and I haven't even read them. The article on new school hip hop talks about rap battles. "Battles" is an informal term but it is absolutely necessary to incorporate it in the article to really understand rap music. Two things: (1) "Crew" is a crucial term in this article. Rock Steady Crew, Electric Boogaloos, The Lockers, Dynamic Rockers, New York City Breakers, Mightly Zulu Kings... I can't even imagine hip-hop dance w/o them. I'm not sure how much you know about hip-hop dance so let me explain. Crews are absolutely essential to hip-hop dance, especially to the development of different dance moves (<--Note, I got this fact from the book Can't Stop, Won't Stop). Jargon or informal, I don't see how you can have an article about hip-hop dance without using/mentioning "crews", what they are, and who the influential ones were. Are you saying I shouldn't use "crew" or describe what crews are in the article because crews are informal? Hip-hop dance itself is informal when speaking of the casual, social, colloquial aspect. How will the reader really understand hip-hop dance without knowing what crews are? You bring up FA. I don't plan on taking this article to FA but if I did, do you really think this article would become featured if I didn't mention crews?
      • (2) Wiktionary is not reliable? Really? That's actually kind'of sad. One of their core policies is the one that you've been criticizing me on (I mean that in the constructive criticism way): they require all of their entries to be durable archived WT:CFI. You tell me that Wiktionary, which uses Google Books (random example 1 and random example 2), is not a reliable source. But you also say that this article is flawed because it doesn't use a lot of the sources found on Google Books??? Can you see my POV (as far as my confusion) as to what I'm suppose to do with this feedback? You got me going in circles my friend. // Gbern3 (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

In light of the above, I believe the article is not yet comprehensive; it is lacking research from scholarly texts. Consideration should also be made for the reader who may or may not know the terms used in certain dance styles. Jappalang (talk) 13:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I didn't say anything about FA. I asked for feedback on copy-editing and on dance terms that may need to be clarified which you mentioned at the end but I can't tell from your use of sarcasm about machine operators whether or not you are genuinely confused and need clarification or if you're still talking down to me. I really wished you would've actually helped me improve the article. Did you read the entire article? You didn't say anything about the lead, the "impact" section which is very large, or the footnotes. I'm guessing that means you found no problems in these areas but I don't know. Consideration should also be made for the reader who may or may not know the terms used in certain dance styles. <-- I know that. That's why I brought it up above when I asked for this review. Again, I wish you would have actually helped me instead of repeating back to me what I asked for. //Gbern3 (talk) 19:17, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Achieving higher standards is an improvement and the FA-standard is the example of what "exemplifies our very best work" (WP:WIAFA). I do not have to nor am I obliged to pick through every little bit of this article. I saw what I felt were its greatest obvious deficiencies and pointed it out with suggestions to improve them. If you do not appreciate them, so be it. You are free to disregard what I have written here, or to stop, think, look through, and analyze the provided information. Either way, I am done. Jappalang (talk) 05:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

You're done? Now I feel like I've been talking to myself in my responses. What do you mean, you don't have to "pick through every little bit of this article" (this is why I don't like it when you're sarcastic, I'm assuming that you mean you don't have to read the whole article). Doesn't a peer review involve reading the entire article? Isn't that what it is: an examination of the article? Aren't you doing a disservice to your "reviewee" (not just me, whoever) by not reading the whole thing? I don't get it. All I wanted was some help. All the work you've done and time you've spent getting all those other articles up to FA/GA/A standard and you give up on an editor who only wants a peer review. How am I suppose to get feedback on this history/evolution section I'm suppose to create if you just give up. I wasn't going to go to FA anyway so I suppose it doesn't matter in the end. Well, if this article/discussion really bothers you that much, no point in being stressed. Thanks for the suggestions you did give. I'll go ahead and close/archive the discussion. //Gbern3 (talk) 18:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Canadian Heraldic Authority

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I plan on taking this article to FAC sometime in the next few months, with an aim to having it appear on the Main Page on 4 June (23rd anniversary of its creation). I'm aware that some of the refs are currently dead links; please don't concern yourselves with that. I know where the updated links are and will be fixing them.

At this time I am more concerned about:

• Clarity of prose
• Adequate coverage of the subject
• Is anything overly detailed?
• Is anything important missing from the article?

Thanks, →ROUX ₪ 19:59, 3 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this interesting article - I think it has some serious issues and need lots of work before it would be ready for FAC. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches
• I have some concerns about close paraphrasing. I checked the first three sourced statements of the History section. The first sentence is a pretty close paraphrase and needs to be rewritten:

This article: Before the creation of the Canadian Heraldic Authority, Canadians wishing to obtain a legally granted coat of arms had to apply to one of the two heraldic offices in the United Kingdom: either the College of Arms in London, or if of Scottish descent, to the Court of the Lord Lyon in Edinburgh.[2]

Original: It should be noted that until the Authority was established, a Canadian wishing a grant of arms had to petition either the College of Arms in London or - if of Scots descent - the Court of the Lord Lyon in Edinburgh.

• The second sourced statement is better, and the third is to the first ref, which does not work (not one of the four dead ones the EL checker finds) so I could not check it. The fourth statement is to a book and seems OK, but please check everything carefully before FAC and make sure nothing is too close to the original.
• The lead is not really a true summary of the article and does not follow WP:LEAD. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. As such, 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 - however the Office of the Chief Herald of Ireland in The Republic of Ireland seems to only be in the lead.
• My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way - the History section (for one) does not seem to be in the lead, nor are the Heralds of Arms or the honorary heralds or the blazon.
• The abbreviation CHA should be introduced in the first sentence of the lead
• Another statement that seems to only be in the lead is well-known for its innovative designs, many incorporating First Nations symbolism. Who says they are well known for this? The words innovative and design appear only here. I assumed this would be referenced to some sort of external sources, like newspaper or magazine articles, but there are no newspaper articles and only one magazine article that I could see. I note that a Google books search finds a fair number of books that at least mention the CHA
• I would try to get more refs that are from independent third-party reliable sources. Google news did not turn up anything, but I find it hard to belive that the CHA has never been profiled or mentioned in a news article - if nothing else when it was established
• The Blazon needs a ref - I did not see one at least
• Please make sure the article follows WP:ITALIC in its use of bold font - why are Heralds Emeritus and Heralds Extraordinary in bold, for example
• I doubt that two uses of File:Coat of arms of the CHA.jpg in this article meets the minimal use criterion of WP:NFCC
• Could a free image of Rideau Hall be used in the article? Are there free images of any of the heralds?
• The article has a fair number of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that should either be combined with others or perhaps expanded to improve flow.
• Any idea how many people have gotten arms through this office since it opened? How many in a year? Any famous people use it (Celine Dion or Wayne Gretzky?)
• Any criticisms of the CHA?
• Any idea of the budget? Staff numbers (or is all the staff listed)?
• Do the See also all meet WP:See also - usually for links not otherwise mentioned in the article

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:43, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Nikola Tesla

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's a top importance article, and I would like to list it here first before putting listing it as a good article nominee.

Thanks, Albacore (talk) 19:40, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Since your goal at this point is GA, I reviewed the article primarily with the GA criteria in mind. The article is generally well-written and quite a few editors have contributed to it. But there are a number of issues and there is some more work required before it is up to the GA standard. Here are some comments I hope will be helpful:

• More than a few of the issues raised at Talk:Nikola Tesla/GA1 when the article was delisted remain unaddressed. All of the issues raised there should be fixed. For example:
  • There are still a couple of dead links.

 Done, dead links removed.

• • Author names in the references are still inconsistent.
  • ISBNs have not yet been provided.
  • There are several direct quotations that are not referenced.

• Images should be relevant to the section in which they appear. Many of the images seem out of place where they appear in the article. There should not by any images in the Further reading section.

 Done Removed image from Further reading section, re-arranged some images to different sections.

• Images should also not force the sandwiching of the text or other strange formatting. Many of them do. Some of them will probably have to be deleted to allow the article to format correctly.

• There are quite a few copyright problems with the images. Most of them are probably public domain, but the claims and/or sourcing are not clear. Unless corrected, the problematic images should be deleted. The issues I found are:
  • File:Tesla young.jpg claims PD-Old, which is life of the author plus 70 years, but does not say who the author is
  • File:RMFpatent.PNG claims PD-US-patent and GFDL. If it is an original patent drawing, only PD-US-patent belongs.
  • File:TeslaWirelessPower1891 adjusted.png claims PD-US, which means it was published before 1923. But there is no source or publication data.
  • File:US390721.png claims PD-US-patent and PD-old-50. Which is it?

 Done, changed to PD-US-patent only.

• • File:Tesla colorado adjusted.jpg and File:WirelessBulb-Tesla.png claim PD-US but there is no date of publication.
  • File:TeslaWirelessLightsCS.png, File:Teslathinker.jpg, File:Milutin Tesla.jpg claims PD-old with no author.
  • File:Twain in Tesla's Lab.jpg has no author (but should be PD under PD-US)
  • File:Teslabust adjusted.jpg claims Non-free 2D art, which applies on to 2D images, not sculptures

 Done changed to Non-free 3D image with a fair use rationale.

• • File:Tesla statue at niagara falls.jpg and File:Aug09 TeslaPlaque.jpg are problematic because photos of 3D art are derivative works. Unless the sculputures are PD, the photos are copyright violations.

 Done, tagged both for deletion.

• • File:Spomen ploca Nikola Tesla 0108.JPG is probably OK, since Croatia grants freedom of panorama to public plaques. But it should use the PD-Art tag.

• There is still some overlinking. Common terms like horse-riding, investors, and the like should not be linked.

 Done, delinked some common terms

• Underlinking: Lord Kelvin, liquefaction, X-rays, Roentgen rays, and similar terms should be linked.

 Done, linked

• The list of devices and principles belongs in a list article, not in the article body. It should be moved and linked to in the See also section.
• Many sections are still undersourced. There are whole paragraphs without a single citation. One citation per paragraphs is a good rule of thumb. Extraordinary claims like his language fluency, mysophobia, and the death of the pigeon (for examples) must be sourced. All of the claims in the Legacy and honors sections should be sourced.
• The external links are excessive. See WP:EL for guidance.

• There are multiple source issues. I did not check exhaustively, but a spot check reveals these issues:
  • 13 does not link to the PDF

 Done, now links to PDF.

• • 16 does not contain the information cited

 Done, now contains the information cited.

• • 21 does not link to the source information. Regardless, page numbers need to be provided for the many claims sources to this book.
  • Teslasociety.com, www.tesla.hu, keyrr.net and www.cyberspaceorbit.net are not reliable sources

 Done, unreliable references removed.

• • 93 does not link to the source.

I hope these comments are helpful and appreciate all the work that has gone into the article thus far. --Nasty Housecat (talk) 03:46, 12 November 2010 (UTC)

I can't say I'm an expert in the field, but I feel I have a reasonable enough armchair understanding of the topic. This sentence in the lead seems highly suspect and I can't see any support for these claims in the body:

"In addition to his work on electromagnetism and electromechanical engineering, Tesla contributed in varying degrees to the establishment of robotics, remote control, radar, and computer science, and to the expansion of ballistics, nuclear physics, and theoretical physics."

Tesla was a gifted inventor and extremely hard worker, but I have to question his ability to contribute to nuclear physics for one. The body of the article doesn't go into this at all, nor does it mention ballistics, computer science, robotics (mentioned, but apparently incorrectly) or theoretical physics. Several of these claims seem to be found on this website, although that might just be copying something else (even this article). And having written the majority of the History of radar article, the claim to priority here is essentially groundless and only leave it in to avoid edit wars. Without real support, these claims need to be removed. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:38, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I take it back, the radar article has been so expanded my contribution is now a tiny minority of the body. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:44, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Oyasato-yakata

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm wondering if it is possible to raise this article to Featured quality. The subject is notable enough but is mostly covered in first-party (i.e. Tenrikyo) publications. The additional third-party publications I've found are listed for now in the "Further reading" section. Let me know what you think.

Thanks, Shii (tock) 00:09, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This article is quite interesting but perhaps not comprehensive. I come to it as an outsider with outsider questions, and like most other readers of the English Wikipedia, I do not know the Japanese language. Still, I can make some general comments about the content and some specific comments related to the Manual of Style guidelines.

General

• I wonder as I read the "Origin" section, what body of thinking led to Tenrikyo. Oyasama was born into a culture without Tenrikyo; so how did she get from A to B in her thinking. What elements of Tenrikyo are new, and what elements are part of a culture much more ancient than the 20th century? Without going into unnecessary or irrelevant detail, could you bring the foreign reader up to speed on connections between Tenrikyo and, say, Shinto or Buddhism, or any other ways of thinking?

• I wonder how many people live in Tenri City in 2010. How many students attend the university? What is taught at the university? Who are the city's residents, and who are the students? Would it be possible to include some demographic details? Is the university expensive? What are its admission requirements? Does the city itself have admission requirements?

• What is a Besseki Lecture Hall? Does Besseki need to be explained?

• Would it be possible to describe more fully the interiors of some of the buildings?

• How does the architecture in Tenri City differ from the architecture of the rest of Nara? How does life in Tenri City differ from life in the rest of Nara?

• Is it possible to include any specific examples of the Joyous Life? What effect might it have on daily activities for example?

• Would it be possible to make more specific comparisons between the architecture of Tenri City and that of Karl Marx-Hof or the utopian phalanstère? Most readers will not know anything about them. The links are good, but just a brief bit in the text might inform them without requiring jumps to other articles.

Manual of Style

• The lead is to be an inviting summary of the whole article. The existing lead seems to be an introduction rather than a summary. My rule of thumb is to try to include at least a mention of each of the main text sections and not to include anything important that is not mentioned in the main text. The existing lead does not mention the influence on the city, and it includes statistics such as the 25 wings and 68 wings that are not mentioned in the text. Perhaps a "Description" section in the main text would be useful; then the new lead could summarize it as well as the rest of the article.

• "an incomplete square 872 meters" - Wikipedia articles generally give measures in imperial as well as metric units. I like to use the {{convert}} template for the conversions, though it takes a bit of practice to learn about things like rounding or adding a hyphen. This conversion would be 872 metres (2,861 ft). Ditto for similar constructions in the article.

• "Currently twenty-five wings of the complex are complete." - Numbers bigger than nine are usually written as digits unless they start sentences; e.g., 25 wings. Ditto for other instances in the article.

• "At the beginning of the 20th century... " - Constructions like 20th century need a no-break code to keep the elements from being separated awkwardly on line-break on some computer screens. WP:NBSP has details.

• The blockquote does not need standard quotation marks around it. MOS:QUOTE has details.

• "The yakata was designed along the lines of Edo-period tenement housing... " - Wikilink Edo period?

• The author name in citation 9 should be last name first: Kidder, Jonathan Edward.

• Citation 9 links to a Google Books preview. When I click on the url, I get this message: "You have either reached a page that is unavailable for viewing or reached your viewing limit for this book." These Google Book previews are, I think, OK for personal research but not OK as reliable sources because they are unstable. If you can track down a copy of the printed book and cite it, that would be much better.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:44, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

This is a very helpful review, and I think I will be able to answer most of these questions and make the article much more useful. Thank you for reading it thoroughly, and I hope I can contribute such useful reviews to the peer review page myself! Shii (tock) 01:36, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Rutherfordium

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it failed GAN due to copyediting issues. I hope some reviewer will help spot some of the problems with the text.

Thanks, Nergaal (talk) 07:27, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Chipmunkdavis Well here goes, with my chemistry knowledge in hand!

• Second paragraph on the lead needs rewriting, probably splitting (History and Properties)
  • First sentence is written badly, probably should split into two sentences with perhaps more exact dates (there was a three year difference)?
  • As much as I love science articles on wikipedia and their use of wikilinks to even more sciencey articles to explain terms, the sentence "Improved experimental techniques allowed for partial chemical characterization of rutherfordium. The chemical properties compare well with the chemistry of the other group 4 elements, even though some calculations had indicated that the element might show significantly different properties due to relativistic effects" needs to be translated into English! Elaborate on the chemical properties of the group 4 elements, explain whatever "compare well" means, and perhaps add an "initially" after "even though". Also, add more wikilinks here.
• History
  • "Researchers there bombarded 242Pu with accelerated 22Ne ions and separated the reaction products by gradient thermochromatography after conversion to chlorides by interaction with ZrCl4", one long run on sentence. At present it is also unclear on the order of events. Are the products converted to chlorides or the ions?
  • The main article you have listed in Naming Controversy youve wikilinked in that section. Remove the wikilink or the main, and if you leave the main perhaps consider changing to a see also or some such, as it deals with more then Rutherfordium.
  • Perhaps more dates in the naming controversy, and reordering. You jump from initial names to IUPAC back to initial names and so on.
  • Last paragraph in naming controversy. NOTHING TO DO with naming controversy!
• Nucleosynthesis, start by removing repetition about names such as in the third paragraph of hot fusion studies.
• You have two main article links to Isotopes of Rutherfordium. I suppose the main link for the Isotopes section would be more appropriate.

• Don't know if this has to be said, but deal with that citation needed. It opens a whole section of the article, definitely not minor.
• Give a short maybe even halfsentence summary of what things like Nucleosynthesis and Isotopes are, for the uninformed.

Most of the article seems to be a basic explanation of the different aspects of Rutherfordium, so I won't go into all the changes that could be made. What I suggest is getting someone you know with little to no background in chemistry, and seeing how much they understand when they read the article. If they have issues and you can explain it to them, try rewrite the article in a similar manner to your explanation. Additionally, add more wikilinks throughout the entire article, just for ease of clarification and help!

As a last point, may I express my own disappointment is wasn't named kurchatovium :( Chipmunkdavis (talk) 18:09, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Cryptic C62 Hey mate! I don't have much interest in writing chemistry articles anymore, but I would be happy to provide some feedback. I'll be leaving comments on the article's prose here and copyediting as I go.

• "Chemistry experiments have confirmed that rutherfordium behaves as the heavier homologue to hafnium in group 4." This sentence overlaps with the chemistry information presented in the second paragraph. I suggest merging this into the second paragraph, and perhaps replacing it with a statement about how the different isotopes decay.
• "The priority of the discovery and therefore the naming of the element was disputed between Soviet and American scientists, and a final decision was taken only in 1997." Awkward phrasing. How about "Because both teams of scientists claimed to have independently discovered the element, a dispute arose over which team should have the right to name it. The final decision to use rutherfordium, as proposed by the American team, was not reached until 1997."
• "The team identified spontaneous fission activity contained within a volatile chloride portraying eka-hafnium properties." This is the first usage of the "eka" notation, which is not mentioned in the lead and not explained adequately in the article. More importantly, how would they have had any idea what properties eka-hafnium had? Perhaps it would be more accurate to say "The team identified spontaneous fission activity contained within a volatile chloride that had properties similar to hafnium."
• "conclusively synthesized" What does "conclusively" mean in this context?
• "The American synthesis was independently confirmed in 1973" Confirmed by whom?

More to come. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 19:52, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

• Sweet, this was really fast. I will take a close look over Thanksgiving break and fix all the issues you guys fount. Thank you very much! Nergaal (talk) 17:41, 23 November 2010 (UTC)
  

---

U.S. Route 30 in Iowa

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take this article to WP:FAC. I've been looking at this article for seven months, I'm certain there is something that's obvious to someone else that I can't see. So, I would like a few more sets of eyes read over it to help it become a better article.

Thanks, –Fredddie™ 23:13, 7 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is broad in coverage, generally clear, and nicely illustrated. I have a fair number of suggestions, most of them related to prose, Manual of Style issues, and layout.

Lead

• "the first transcontinental highway in the United States" - I don't think you need to link United States here since you've already linked U.S. state. Y

Route description

• The first paragraph needs a source. A good rule of thumb is to provide a source or sources for not only every direct quotation, every set of statistics, and every unusual claim, but also every paragraph. If one source covers a whole paragraph, the citation can go right after the terminal period of the last sentence of the paragraph. Y

• "Small towns are dotted along the entire route, connecting the larger cities and towns of Denison, Ames, Cedar Rapids, and Clinton." - Maybe "which connects" rather than "connecting" to avoid suggesting that the small towns do the connecting. Y

Western Iowa

• "For seventeen miles (27 km)" - Numbers bigger than nine are usually written as digits unless they start a sentence. Shouldn't this be 17 miles (27 km)? Y

Central Iowa

• "which is 1+1⁄2 miles (2.4 km)" - I'd recommend expressing all the fractions in the article as decimal fractions. This one, for example, would become 1.5 miles (2.4 km).
  • For imperial measurements, the MOS allows for fractions so long as they're consistent. As a matter of personal preference, I think fractions allow a sense of fuzzy math that decimals do not allow; 1.25 seems overly precise compared to 1+1⁄4 despite their equivalence. In the route description, distances don't have to be exactly precise, because precise measurements are given in the junction list below. –Fredddie™

• "From the interchanges to the Story County line 1.738 miles (2.797 km) away" - The level of precision here seems odd in light of the rounding to whole numbers or tenths elsewhere. I think "about 1.7 miles (2.8 km)" would be better.
  • Keeping the fractions consistent, I changed it to 1+3⁄4 miles. –Fredddie™

• "Continuing east, it travels 6+1⁄2 miles (10 km)" - "It" seems ambiguous here. Y

• "One-half mile (0.8 km) east of the casino, US 30 becomes a two-lane road, a configuration which it stays for the next 30 miles (48 km)." - "Keeps" rather than "stays"? Y

• "It turns east again by a roadside park, on the south side of which is the famous Lincoln Highway bridge." - Delete "famous"? It's an editorial judgment and slightly peacockish.
  • Rather than famous, I called it Tama's Lincoln Highway bridge. –Fredddie™

Eastern Iowa

• "3+1⁄2 miles (5.6 km) southwest of Newhall" - Sentences in Wikipedia articles use words rather than digits to start sentences. Y

• "US 30 / US 67 head east along Lincoln Way" - The front slash may have some special highway meaning; I'm not sure. It's usually best to replace front slashes with something more specific such as "and". Ditto for other front slashes in the article.
  • The forward slash, in highway articles, means the two routes are a concurrency and they're traveling as one. –Fredddie™

History

• The first paragraph needs a source or sources. Y

Lincoln Highway

• "the only certainty being the route would pass through Iowa" - Maybe "the only certainty was" rather than "the only certainty being"? Y

• "The ribbon of concrete, which was 16-foot (4.9 m) wide, 7+1⁄2-inch (19 cm) thick" - Plurals (feet, inches)? Y

• "cost $34,936.81" - Round to "about $35,000" for ease of reading? Y

1960s–1980s

• "In the 1960–1970s, freeway segments along US 30 started to emerge." - "Emerge" might not be the right word. Even though passive, "to be built" might be better. Y

Legacy of the Lincoln Highway

• "In 1992, the Lincoln Highway Association (LHA) was reformed with a chapter in each state through which it passed." - The association didn't pass through any states. Maybe "the highway" instead of "it"? Y

Layout

• On my computer screen, File:Lincoln Highway Bridge, Tama, IA.jpg overlaps two sections and displaces an edit button. You could fix this by moving the image up a paragraph or two. Y

• File:US 30 Iowa 1926.svg also overlaps sections and displaces an edit button. This is a little tougher to fix because the "1930s–1950s" section is so short. You might have to shrink it further or move it elsewhere or perhaps merge two subsections to make a bigger subsection. Y

Images

• The image licenses all look OK to me except that the license for File:US 30 Iowa 1926.svg says that "It was first published in 1926, making it public domain due to age anyway." I don't believe this is true. It would be true if the image had first been published before 1923. Since the image is in the public domain by virtue of having been published in the MUTCD, it's not necessary to add the 1926 claim. I'd recommend deleting the 1926 sentence from the license page.
• I didn't make the image, but I will do that. –Fredddie™ Y

Sources

• What makes the Iowa Lincoln Highway Association a reliable source per WP:RS? The link goes to what appears to be a personal web site.
  • The Iowa LHA is a state office of a national organization whose members pay dues and elect officers. I will admit, the Iowa organization's website is an amateur hack job. But it's not a personal website. –Fredddie™

Overlinking

• I'm not sure it's necessary to link town names like Ogden and Tama more than once in the lead and once in the main text. Ditto for counties and highways. Too many repetitive links devalue the other links because readers stop paying attention to them. Ames and Iowa State University are both linked twice in the "Central Iowa" section. I'd recommend deleting these redundancies and looking for others.
  • I don't have access to AWB, but I will ask someone who does to check for overlinking on my behalf. –Fredddie™

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:46, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Mwng

This peer review discussion has been closed.
After more than five years on Wikipedia I've finally decided to brave the FAC dragons. I'd like to go in as prepared as possible so any and all comments would be useful. The article has recently passed a GA review and has been copyedited by Macwhiz Cavie78 (talk) 19:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Cavie78 (talk) 19:13, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This seems to me to be in fairly good shape, but I have one serious reservation and some smaller ones.

• The article depends too heavily on short, embedded quotes in the text. I'd recommend that you make the article less dependent on direct quotes by restating the claims in your own words. That's tricky, I know, because whatever you say must be supported by the sources. Still, I count 11 or 12 of these snippet quotes, things like "new wave of confidence in the Welsh nation", "pop strike", and "token Welsh songs" in the lead alone. The overall effect is to make the article read too much like a compilation of the words of others. An example of an easy change from quote snippet to paraphrase occurs in the sentence, "Rhys has stated that many of the Mwng 's songs are highly personal reflections on what were a 'pretty heavy' few years for him." You might replace this with "Rhys has stated that many of Mwng 's songs are personal reflections on what were difficult years for him." The source supports both ways of saying this, and neither paraphrases the source too closely. So why use the quote snippet?

Origins and recording

• "Rhys has also stated that Mwng was inspired by him simply "getting bored" of writing songs in English... " - The construction "by him getting" is a bit awkward. Maybe "inspired by his boredom with writing songs in English"? Or "Rhys has also stated that his boredom with writing songs in English inspired him to write Mwng"?  Done Have changed - I prefer the latter suggestion.

• "rather than being a celebration of Welsh culture" - Tighten by one word by deleting "being"?  Done

• ""Sarn Helen" was recorded and engineered by keyboardist Cian Ciaran in his living room." - Change to active voice to avoid a string of passives; i.e., "Keyboardist Cian Ciaran recorded and engineered "Sarn Helen" in his living room"?

• "Overdubs for all songs were added at Ofn with Owen, who also mixed the album at the studio along with the Super Furry Animals." - Active voice? Maybe "Working with the Super Furry Animals, Owen mixed the album at Ofn, and he added the overdubs for the songs"? My rule of thumb with the passive voice is to change to active when it's relatively easy to do so; e.g., "The cat scratched the dog" rather than "The dog was scratched by the cat".

• Citation 25 lacks the publisher info, which seems to be cokemachineglow (CMG), and the date of most recent access.

The date of most recent access is there. I've chosen to add publication details only for print media per WP:CITEHOW

I've changed some of the web cites, changing work to publisher so  Done

• In citation 29, "SUPER FURRY ANIMALS" should be changed to Wikipedia house style, "Super Furry Animals", even though the source uses all caps.  Done

• The image of Rhys would probably be better placed on the left so that he looks into the page.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:25, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

• doing... Happy Thanksgiving Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 19:50, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Done Happy Thanksgiving Tbhotch^{Talk C.} 07:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)
• General

WP:ALT would be added.

Has excessive quotes.

• Lead

References in the lead should be avoided because the information is the body, see WP:LEAD.

The refs are for direct quotes and the chart position only. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Singer Gruff Rhys stated that -> Change "singer" for "vocalist of the band" ore something similar.

The "lo-fi" -> link it to low fidelity.

 Done Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

• Origins and recording

Top 10 -> WP:NUMBERS

Top 10 is the commonly used spelling. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

Welsh language album was not "an explicitly political statement", the group did want to make a "stand against globalisation", railing -> Lead states that Ryhs felt it, not the group.

 Done Changed in body of text. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

The "lo-fi" Mwng -> as above

 Done Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

in contrast with the "excessive expense" of Guerilla—cost just GB£6,000 to make -> and how much cost the "expense" Guerrilla?

I don't think it matters - the point is simply the album was recorded cheaply, for much less than its predecessor. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

were recorded at Famous Studios in Cardiff and were engineered by Greg Haver, while "Y Teimlad" was recorded at Real World Studios, Box, Wiltshire and was engineered by Michael Brennan, Jr. -> commas -> were recorded at Famous Studios in Cardiff, and were engineered by Greg Haver, while "Y Teimlad" was recorded at Real World Studios, Box, Wiltshire, and was engineered by Michael Brennan, Jr.

 Done Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

• Music syle

(the writers of "Y Teimlad") -> already noted.

It think it makes sense to state this again here. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

even though "Anglo-American pop culture of the 60s, 70s and 80s" is a quote by someone on the group, it can be re-written for not make it a quote.

Rhys has said that, although keyboardist Cian Ciaran -> already mentioned -> Rhys has said that, although Ciaran

My rule of thumb is to give complete names the first time people are mentioned in a different section. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

and "psychedelic-era" Rolling Stones. -> Maybe and "psychedelic-era" of The Rolling Stones.?

I think this is fine as it is. Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

cruising down the A5 to Rome in a two-door chariot -> Link Rome.

 Done Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

being chased by bees after he disturbed a beehive -> -> Link both bee-related words.

 Done Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

• Release

The Super Furry Animals had originally intended to issue Mwng in ... that Creation originally intended to issue Mwng -> synonyms needed.

 Done Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

in the UK as B-sides -> B-sides already linked.

 Done Removed link Cavie78 (talk) 00:37, 3 January 2011 (UTC)

---

Octavia Hill

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have listed this article for peer review because I have expanded it and got it to as high a standard as I can without the input of WP colleagues. The sources are all online: I confess that I have not opened a book in the course of researching the subject, and I have no ambitions to take it to FA, but it might, perhaps, make a respectable GA. Most grateful for any suggestions other editors may wish to make.

Thank you, Tim riley (talk) 10:30, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: An important and interesting article. One thing that puzzles me is why it is aligned with WP's Christianity project. Here are some suggestions for enhancing the text:-

• Lead
  • First sentence: "particularly" and "especially" don't sit too well together in the same sentence. Perhaps the phrase "particularly concerned with" could be replaced with "whose main concern was".
    • Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Small point, but the three lead paragraphs begin, repectively, "Octavia Hill", "Hill" and "Hill". Some variation in style would be preferable.
    • Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Also, I wonder if the lead truly summarises the whole article? It seems to end in mid-air; there is a lot of legacy stuff at the end of the article that does not seem to be covered in the lead.
    • Done - I think. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Early years
  • For the sake of clear chronology, could we have an indication of when the Hill family's financial problems started. It would also be helpful if we had a one-line indication of the source of these troubles: business failure? bad investments? gambling, etc?
    • Done, as to date. No source that I can lay hands on says why Hill senior went bust. It may simply be that he was off his onion, but I cannot say. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Why were the family "moving around the country"?
    • Not sure, and having failed to find a source that says why I have deleted. Peripheral at best. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I would also like to know how, and at what stage in her childhood/youth, Octavia came into contact with the works of Mayhew and Maurice.
    • She read Mayhew (no doubt her mother's or grandfather's copy) when young. Maurice was a family friend - now added. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • The section is a little confused as to chronology. How old was she when she began glass-painting, or when she started working for Ruskin? Also, the last paragraph, describing her appearance and character, and her encounter with Frederick Temple, clearly relate the mature Octavia (Temple became Bishop of London in 1885, when Octavia was 46).
    • Done as to her jobs. Bishop Temple's hard time was tricky to fit in. I originally had a "character and reputation" section, but it didn't really work. It seemed to fit here better than anywhere else. I have now made it clear that her duffing up of the Rt. Rev came later. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Housing for the poor
  • "...the first of many tranches of legislation had been passed aimed at improving working class housing." I suggest "...the first of many tranches of legislation aimed at improving working class housing had been passed".
    • Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • "needful" reads as rather old-fashioned. I'd prefer "necessary"
  • Not "Mr" Ruskin
    • Both above are in a quote (from The Times) and shouldn't be altered. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • "Rent arrears were not acceptable, and bad debts minimal". I think "tolerated", rather than "acceptable", and "bad debts were minimal".
    • Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Octavia Hill system
  • I think this heading breaches the WP rule re section headings: "Headings should not explicitly refer to the subject of the article." See WP:HEAD
    • "The Octavia Hill system" or "The Octavia Hill method" is a sort of technical term, used in housing circles, but point taken. I've changed to "Housing management" Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • "...its first independent unit, giving training..." The use of "giving" raises a familiar prose bugbear. Probably better as "which gave..."
    • Done. Tim riley (talk)
  • The style of the article has been to write all out number values. This works with numbers such as "fifteen", or even "three thousand", but "one hundred and sixty" looks laboured and wrong. Personally, I think it would be better to use the WP convention of representing values of 10 or more numerically.
    • Having been immersed in old documents I find "one hundred and sixty" looks quite natural, but I'll examine my conscience. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Open spaces
  • "Octavia Hill" should be just "Hill"
    • This was to distinguish her from her (just mentioned) elder sister, but on reflection it is clear without. Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • What does "above Buttermere" mean? North of?
    • Clarified. (Literally above - in the fells overlooking it). Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Later years
  • Could there be a brief explanation of the Gladstone veto?
    • Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Legacy
  • First sentence: "she made a speech" → "Hill made a speech"
    • Done. Tim riley (talk)
  • Describing Toynbee Hall as "university-based" might mislead readers into thinking that TH was a seat of learning. Possibly "sponsored" rather than based?
    • Done. Tim riley (talk)
  • Can you simplify/split this unwieldly sentence: "This later changed its name to the Society of Housing Managers in 1948, and, after merging with the Institute of Housing Managers in 1965, became the present day Chartered Institute of Housing in 1994."
    • Done. Tim riley (talk)
  • Single sentence paragraphs should be avoided if possible.
    • I agree, but this sentence is needed and doesn't, I think, sit with any nearby para. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Again, the subject of the article should be consistently referred to as "Hill".
    • Done. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
• Bibliography: Some of the entries are incompletely formatted.
  • Will revisit. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

I hope you find this review helpful. I wish the article all success. Brianboulton (talk) 00:47, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you so much for this very thorough review. It is immensely helpful, and I'm grateful. Tim riley (talk) 17:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Winged scapula

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

Thanks, Jaimeem (talk) 23:07, 8 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: You haven't said why you want a review, but I'll give it a try. My main concern is that the article relies too heavily on a few sources and, at least in places, imitates them too closely.

• The one sentence that is sourced in the lead says, "Scapular winging has been observed to disrupt scapulohumeral rhythm, contributing to decreased flexion and abduction of the upper extremity, as well as a loss in power and the source of considerable pain." The source supports the claim. The problem is that the supporting sentence in the source says, "Disrupting scapulohumeral rhythm, scapular winging contributes to loss of power and limited flexion and abduction of the upper extremity and can be a source of considerable pain." Changing a few words in the original isn't good enough to avoid plagiarism. Please see WP:PARAPHRASE for a full explanation.

• The first parts of the article (lead, causes, epidemiology) are too dependent on a single source. If you read multiple sources and absorb the information, you will be less likely to parrot any particular source.

• Wikipedia articles do not use "one" as a pronoun, although sources sometimes do. The article says, "In some serious cases, the ability to perform activities of daily living such as changing one’s clothes and washing one’s hair may be hindered." The source says, "Scapular winging is a rare, but potentially debilitating condition that can affect the ability to lift, pull, and push heavy objects, as well as to perform daily activities of living, such as brushing one’s hair and teeth and carrying grocery bags." Wikipedia might say, "Scapular winging may interfere with dressing, grooming, lifting, and other daily activities."

• Similarly, the "Epidemiology" section too closely imitates the source. The article's list has the same content and form as the original.

• Writing about a highly technical medical topic is difficult. Part of the difficulty lies in using language that is accurate yet understandable by an audience of ordinary people. Links can help, but linking "scapulohumeral rhythm" to rotator cuff, for example, may not be enough. What does "scapulohumeral rhythm" mean in plain English?

• Five of the six citations in the "Reference" section are incomplete. You may find it helpful to look at other health-related articles to see various methods of handling citations. The one complete citation in the article uses the "cite journal" template; you can find the other members of the "cite" family of templates at WP:CIT.

• WP:FA#Health and medicine has a list of featured articles that you might find interesting. They can serve as useful models.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:06, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Formatting citations would be a good and easy idea to improve the article. If you find an article, such as those you use, in pubmed you can use the pmid number and paste it here to obtain a nicely formatted citation. Searching in pubmed for more sources on the issue as proposed above would also be a good idea.--Garrondo (talk) 16:07, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Shawn Ahmed

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I must figure out what I need to add to this article and spruce it up in order to keep the Wiki-vultures from trying to pick it up and throw it into the throat of deletion.

Thanks, --Let Us Update Wikipedia: Dusty Articles 07:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Article deleted per A7; archiving review. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 22:11, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Endgame (album)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because my ultimate goal is for it to become a GA, but need a little help verifying if it meets the standards to do so, and if not, what needs to be fixed. Any assistance would be appreciated.

Thanks, Bruce Campbell (talk) 19:40, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

No formalities here, but one comment. The first paragraph in the intro strikes me as "mixed up". One sentence mentions the label and guitarist together, for reasons that escape me. Then there's something about producers and chart ratings. Then the bassist. Might I take a stab at cleaning it up? Maury Markowitz (talk) 13:15, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

I fixed the coherence issue in the opening paragraph, I believe. If you had something better in mind feel free to over-ride my changes to your own. Bruce Campbell (talk) 19:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Yes, that's exactly what I was going to do! I did move one whitespace though, to group the description of the songs in the second para. Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:24, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Ok I've read over the rest and like it a lot. Some more minor touchups you might consider:

• • Separate the critical review comments in the intro to a third para.
  • Move the first sentence of the following section about the producer. Again, this just seems like it would be better placed lower down?

That's about all I can think of given the current content. It's in-depth, well written, and reads well, definitely GA quality IMHO

I do wonder though... There's a couple of good bits on the basis of the individual songs, that the inspiration was. But is there something similar for the album as a whole? Is the album just a collection of songs, or was there an overarching theme? Maury Markowitz (talk) 22:31, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Made the review portion of the intro into a third paragraph, and lowered the part about the producer to a more fitting part I think. As for the album as a whole, there are overlapping concepts and most of the songs share similiar ideas, but the album itself doesn't really have a core theme or anything, no. It's no 2112, anyway.

Thank you for your help, and I'll be nominating it for GA after some final reflections. Bruce Campbell (talk) 19:40, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

---

The Care Bears' Big Wish Movie

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Three down, two to go in the PR drive for Nelvana's Care Bears feature film series. For the record: 2004's Journey to Joke-a-lot may have been released throughout half the world (via Universal Studios), but this 2005 follow-up initially received no more than a French dub and a Spanish version (which is on the Region 1 DVD, but whose title I haven't been able to successfully locate). Since then, it's slowly rolled out in Greece as Τα Αρκουδάκια Της Αγάπης: Ενα Αστερι Στην Αγαπουπολη and in Germany (possibly) as Die Glücksbärchis – Der Große Wunsch. Like I said on this film's IMDb board when it came out, "Not much buzz around Big Wish, is there?" (And it even shows in the citation count—22 herein, compared to 180+ for the 1985 movie; little more than 100 for A New Generation; and [at this edit] a projected 80 or so for Wonderland. No wonder I couldn't fulfill that very request for another four years!)

Let's hope a long-belated GAC does justice. After all, this is the better of Nelvana's computer-animated efforts with those huggable characters from Cleveland (no pun intended—and that's coming from a fan).

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 12:36, 9 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This looks good. I have a short list of comments and suggestions that should cause you little trouble.

Lead

• "she feels worried that the other Bears have overlooked her abilities, and wishes for a few new friends who care more than her" - That should be "care more than she" or "care more than she does".

Corrected. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Plot

• "This causes three new Bears to arrive... " - Should this be "Bears" or "bears"? In the lead, you use "other Bears", but later in the plot section, you write "Once the new bears finally realise their problem... ". Lowercase looks right to me.

Converted to lowercase. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

• "Wish Bear accidentally wishes Twinkers away to the new Bears, who soon abuse his power... " - Since Wish Bear is a "she", who does "he" refer to?

Clarified as "the star's power". --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

• "As they return home, Wish Bear tells everyone that they the problem cannot be easily wished away... ". - Doesn't make sense as written. Missing word or words, perhaps? What problem is Wish Bear referring to?

Corrected and clarified; I had to watch that very part of the film again to see about that. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Release

• "The day after the U.S. premiere,[3] it became one of Lions Gate Home Entertainment's five direct-to-DVD "marquee" offerings for young viewers during late 2005." - Tighten by deleting "during late 2005" since you've already said "the day after the U.S. premiere

"During late 2005" moved to footnote. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

• "earning US$40,000 during the timeframe" - What was the time frame? From when to when? How did it do after that? Is $40,000 a little or a lot compared to other films?

Information removed; sentence in question reworded. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Music

• Would it be helpful to use more punctuation in the table? For example: "Conducted by Zimfira Poloz; choir recorded by Bob Doidge assisted by Amy King at Grant Avenue Studio, Hamilton, Ontario" might be more clear. Without punctuation, it's not possible to tell if "Creighton Doane Daniel Gerrard Leblanc" refers to two people or three.

Done and clarified. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

• The ampersands should probably be replaced with "and".

Done. --Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 02:26, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 04:27, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Bad Romance

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm planning to nominate the article for FAC in the next month. The previous PR did not yield satisfactory results according to my concerns, hence this time, I request opinions as to what can cause it to fail at FAC, what improvements in terms of language and everything can be done, so that the article passes FAC without much concern.

Thanks, — Legolas ^(talk2me) 09:41, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I'll give it a try. Mainly I've focused on the prose and on Manual of Style issues. I made some minor edits, and here are further suggestions:

Lead

• "After the demo version of the song leaked, Gaga premiered the song at Alexander McQueen's Spring/Summer 2010 show in the Paris Fashion Week, on October 6, 2009, followed by the release of the cover art." - Maybe this would be better: "After the demo version of the song was leaked, Gaga premiered the finished version at Alexander McQueen's Spring/Summer 2010 show in the Paris Fashion Week, on October 6, 2009. The cover art was released on October 19."

• Why was something that was called a Spring/Summer show held in October?

• Is the front slash in Alexander McQueen's Spring/Summer 2010 show part of a formal name, or is this a general description? If it's a general description, it might be more clear to just say Alexander McQueen's 2010 show.

• "It has elements of the music from the 80's and the 90's... " - For clarity, I would use "... from the 1980s and 1990s" since all centuries have '80s and '90s.

• "Critics gave positive reviews of the song, with the majority of them comparing it to Gaga's second single, "Poker Face" (2008)." - "With" is a weak connector when used in this way. Suggestion: "The majority of critics praised the song, comparing it to Gaga's second single, "Poker Face" (2008)."

Background

• "Before its official release, a demo version of the song leaked on the internet... " - Maybe "was leaked"? Or, since "leaked" is slang, maybe "... a demo version of the song was published illegally on the internet"? It would be even better if you could say who published the demo on the internet. Maybe it wasn't illegal. Maybe it was a bit of purposeful marketing. I know little about how the music business works, so I'm just guessing.

• ""Bad Romance" premiered during the finale of fashion designer Alexander McQueen's Spring/Summer 2010 Paris Fashion Week show, followed by the official album version being released on October 19, 2009." - Too many modifiers precede "show", and there seems to be a disjuncture between spring, summer, and October 19.

Composition

• "At About.com, Bill Lamb writes that the music is best suited for viewing fashion designs and on the runway." - It's not clear what this means. For one thing, "runway" should be linked or briefly explained. For another, it might be more accurate to say that the music, according to Lamb, is best suited for playing at fashion designs and on the runway.

• "The lyrics in general address exploring the different aspects of being in a bad relationship, but this idea changes during the intermediate verse, when the lyrics talk about fashion." - Tighten to "The lyrics address aspects of a bad relationship but also discuss fashion"?

• Would it be good to include a line or two of lyrics that discuss fashion?

Critical reception

• "If you had any fears that Gaga would be one album flash in the pan... " - Missing word, "a one album flash in the pan" maybe?

Concept

• "and then sell her off to the Russian Mafia for 1 000 000 Russian rubles" - Maybe "one million" rather than "1 000 000"?

• This section is only lightly sourced. Can you supply a source or sources for the rest of the information?

• Citation 59 should include information about the language since it is not English.

• The caption for the image in this section says, "Gaga lying on a bed beside the burnt skeleton of her customer. She wears a pyrotechnic bra and smokes a cigarette." It's important to maintain a clear distinction between reality and fiction. Maybe something like this would be better: "Gaga lies in bed beside the burnt skeleton of her fictitious customer. She wears a pyrotechnic bra and smokes a cigarette."

• The image description page for File:GagaBadRomancevideo.jpg says, "Gaga lying beside the burnt skeleton of the man she killed, wearing a pyrotechninc bra." To keep readers from taking this literally, I think you need to revise this to say something like "Gaga, playing herself in a video, lies beside the burnt skeleton of a fictitious man she killed while wearing a pyrotechnic bra." Or something like that.

Live performances

• "The performance had her singing inside a four meter long bath tub... " - Convert to imperial units here too; i.e. "... singing inside a bathtub 4 metres (13 ft) long"?

• "She performed the song in an '80s-inspired... " - Maybe "1980s-inspired" would be more clear. Not repeating "performance" again in this sentence would be good. In fact, it would be good to find other words for performance to give more variety to this section. "Performance" or some variation on it occurs 10 times in this paragraph.

• "The performance was done while standing in a human sized gyroscope." - The performance didn't stand on the gyroscope. Suggestion: "During the performance, she stood inside a large gyroscope."

• When glee club New Directions member Rachel Berry discovers that rival glee club Vocal Adrenaline are planning on performing a Lady Gaga number at Regionals, the character Will (Matthew Morrison) sets the club a Gaga assignment. The girls and Kurt then create costumes inspired by Gaga and perform "Bad Romance". - I think you are referring here to another fiction. If so, would this be more clear? "When Rachel Berry, a member of a fictitious glee club called New Directions, discovers that rival glee club Vocal Adrenaline plans to perform a Lady Gaga number at Regionals, a character named Will (played by Matthew Morrison) sets the club a Gaga assignment. New Directions and a character named Kurt then create costumes inspired by Gaga and perform "Bad Romance".

References

• Citation 55 includes a date with one too many numbers (111).
• Citation 56 has a date with en dashes that should be hyphens.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 06:35, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Backstreet Boys discography

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because i think it meets the FL criteria

Thanks, Skaterboy2012 (talk) 17:34, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This looks pretty good but it not quite ready for FLC yet. Here are a few suggestions for further improvement.

• I would unlink "Backstreet Boys" in the infobox to avoid double bolding. WP:MOSBOLD includes a relevant guideline under "Contraindications".  Done

• The image license for File:Backstreet Boys Concert 2.jpg is incorrect. If you click through to the Flickr source and click on the "Some rights reserved" line under "License", you will see that the original was licensed with a "no commercial use" (NC) restriction. That means it should not have been uploaded to the Commons and can't be used by Wikipedia. The license problem is not your fault; still, you can't use the image. Perhaps you can find another that has no NC restriction, or perhaps you can convince the photographer to change the license to CC-by-SA without the NC clause.

• Should the music-video total be added to the infobox?  Done

• The dab tool at the top of this review page finds one link (Aria) that goes to a disambiguation page instead of the intended target.  Done

• The lead might be improved by moderate expansion. For example, it could say more about singles, compilation albums, and music videos.

• Would the singles certifications be more effectively presented as part of the "Singles" table? Jamelia discography, a featured list, combines them and might provide a model to imitate.  Done

• Would "Videos" look better in a table? Alice in Chains discography, a featured list, might provide a model. Maybe more data about these videos could be added? Publisher? Running time? Subject matter? Awards, if any?

• Citation 35 is missing the author date (Fulton, Rick), and Daily Record should be in italics. Similar problems occur in Citation 29, where Billboard needs italics, and the missing author is Dominic Pride. Citation 47 and 48 have date formats that differ from most of the rest of the citations. In the reference section, the date formatting needs to be consistent throughout. Citation 107 seems malformed and incomplete.  Done

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 18:57, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Montevideo

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Who would have thought an article on a national capital (in this case, Uruguay's) would make the rounds at WP:Did you know? It was on said section of the Main Page (an impressive 130+ KB, last I checked) when I tagged it for review. Quick-failed twice through WP:GAC, but hey—third time's the charm. It's come a long, long way since those trials, and I've started to make a good opportunity happen. (Some editors have been engaging in an active copyedit; see the talk page.)

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 17:15, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

"Uruguay began to stagnate economically in the mid-1950s; Montevideo began a decline, later exacerbated widespread social and political violence beginning in 1968 (including the emergence of the guerrilla Movimiento de Liberación Nacional-Tupamaros[25]) and by the Civic-military dictatorship of Uruguay (1973-1985). There were major problems with supply; the immigration cycle was reversed."

Rather unexplained. Supply of what? What immigration cycle? Why was it stagnating?

"In 2002, Uruguay suffered one of the worst banking crises in its history, which affected all sectors of Montevideo. Recently, economic improvement and stronger commercial links with neighbouring countries has contributed to economic development."

The worst financial crisis in its history merits a single sentence? Must not have been much of a crisis.

"One such hotel is Belmont House (established 1995), located on the Avenida Rivera in Carrasco.[74] It is set amidst gardens and has 24 rooms and suites and is served by the Restaurant Allegro.[75]"

Are hotel sections standard in city article? It smells like advertisement, but no one seems to have objected before...

"Main article: Port of Montevideo"

If there is no main article...

File:JardinJaponesMVD001 640x480.jpg is pretty terrible. Perhaps you could get a better photo, or at least have someone process it to not be so bright?

The Healthcare section is a mess - red links, needs copyediting, etc. The Media section would make more sense up by Culture. --Gwern (contribs) 01:29 27 November 2010 (GMT)

---

Evelyn Waugh

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I am presenting this for review, although I'm still working on aspects of it. The images need attention; Jappalang advises that the "old man Waugh" in the Decline section will probably have to go, which is a pity. There is a great dearth of relevant free pictures and I have struggled to find appropriate images. Maybe others will have ideas. The "List of works" subarticle is very much "under construction" at present, but I'll be working on this as the review proceeds. Meanwhile I'd be grateful for any comments on this attempt at a fair portrayal of a remarkable, though difficult man. Brianboulton (talk) 18:59, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Tim riley comments – This is good stuff! First batch of comments:

• Lead
  • "Catholic " tout court in first para – you'll get the Anglicans agitated unless you add "Roman". And oughtn't the blue link, at present later in the lead, be from this first mention?
• Family background
  • "...The Rev" or "the Rev" – does one put a capital T in the definite article here? (Question expecting the answer No.)
• Golders Green and Heath Mount
  • "usually written by himself" – is the reflexive really wanted here?
• Lancing
  • "editor of the College magazine, president of the Debating Society" – are these caps needed?
• Oxford
  • "a poor third class degree" – is this a poor degree (viz, a third) or a poor grading within the thirds, and if the latter, who told him?
    • I have redrafted this part and added a footnote to cover possible confusion of the award/non-award of Oxford degrrees. Brianboulton (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • "Heatherley's" with apostrophe or "Heatheleys" (as in next section) without?
• Early career
  • "his homosexual phase now behind him" – I'm terribly sorry about this – exposure to Round the Horne and Carry On films in my youth, no doubt – but I can't help seeing a double meaning in the conjunction of "homosexual" and "behind him". Perhaps better to head off other ageing fourth-formers among your readers by redrawing. Yes, yes, I know, sorry!
• "He-Evelyn" and "She-Evelyn"
  • I was so tickled by the "Miss Waugh" clanger that I looked out the original TLS review, which you are welcome to as a footnote or some such if you think it of interest: "Miss Waugh approaches the 'squalid' Rossetti like some dainty Miss of the sixties bringing the Italian organ-grinder a penny, merciless in spite of the best intentions." "Dante Gabriel Rossetti", TLS, 10 May 1928, p 342. Written, so the archive reveals, by one Thomas Sturge Moore.
    • Yes, I've seen the review, and Waugh's magisterial reply: "My Christian name, I know, is occasionally regarded by people of limited social experience as belonging exclusively to one or other sex..." etc. Great fun, but with Waugh one has to learn to ration the wit.

That's my lot for tonight. More tomorrow. (I am enjoying this!) – Tim riley (talk) 21:39, 26 November 2010 (UTC)
Second and final consignment of comments:

• Writer and traveller
  • "a parody of Deedes" – can one parody a person? Not sure, but it looks a bit strange.
    • I think you can; my Collins English Dictionary gives the second definition of "parody" as: "mimicry of someone's individual manner in a humorous or satirical way". Brianboulton (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• Second marriage
  • "Laura Herbert was a cousin of Evelyn Gardner's" – possessive necessary?
• Fame and fortune
  • "Waugh was, however, prepared to exploit his celebrity" – not sure what the "however" is referring back to.
    • Sentence emoved, unneceeary. Brianboulton (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • ""... selectively deaf"" – does this need the elliptical dots?
• Breakdown
  • "His was increasingly dependent on drugs," – Either there's a word missing or "his" should be "he". Medicinal or recreational drugs? (I see you say later that it was the former, but a word of explanation at this first mention might be helpful)
  • Noel Buxton and Nancy Spain – this incident inspired P G Wodehouse to write a piece of light verse, of which, if you are interested, I'll send you a copy. (Waugh revered PGW, and broadcast a famous "Act of Reparation and Homage" on the BBC)
    • I's like to see what PG said, it might make an interesting footnote. Brianboulton (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
      • I've temporarily uploaded a scan to my webspace - here. I'll remove when you've downloaded it.
• Decline and Death
  • Basil Seal Rides Again –" a nasty little book" – If you care to cite the original, the TLS review (headed "A Rake Raked Up") was by John Willett, and was published on 14 Nov 1963, p. 921.
• Reception
  • The ending of Vile Bodies – I had an idea that Waugh tagged the (to me chilling) ending on after the book was supposedly finished (perhaps even after the first edition was published) but memory may be playing tricks. I just mention it.
    • The book undoubtedly changed course in mid-writing; Stannard has much to say about this, though he doesn't mention a "tagged-on" ending. Waugh revised most of his books for later editions, so maybe he did add something then. Brianboulton (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Chapman and Hall need a word of explanation - I know they were his publishers, but that isn't obvious in the present context
  • " fixed image of Waugh–"stout, splenetic" – ought this en dash to be an em dash?
• Reputation
  • "Some of this picture, it was claimed by Waugh's supporters…" It was drilled into me as a youth that one uses "claim" only when some actual claim (e.g. to a right or title) is being referred to, not as a mere synonym for "assert" or "allege".

That's all I can contribute (though point taken about the images, and I'll give that matter some further thought). I haven't enjoyed an article so much for quite some time. It's a very fine piece of work and should breeze through FAC. Tim riley (talk) 13:16, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for these comments, and I'm glad you enjoyed the article. Except where I have commented above, you can take it that I have adopted your suggestions, for which I am truly grateful. Brianboulton (talk) 12:58, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Image review concerns:

• File:24 lancing college.jpg: There is no assertion that this photograph was created by Samwaters nor that he owns the copyright to the work.

  The following two photographs can be uploaded and used instead if Samwaters is unable to help/respond. Jappalang (talk) 02:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

  • http://www.geograph.org.uk/photo/1012415
  • http://www.flickr.com/photos/elsie/2938195630/
  • File:Shoreham-Tollbridge.JPG

• File:CropSelassie.jpg: How does this 1934 photograph published in Switzerland qualify to be in the US public domain?

  Found a little peculiarity with Swiss copyright law. This photograph is public domain in Switzerland and in the US (because it was PD in Switzerland before 1 Jan 1996 and never published in the US). Jappalang (talk) 06:37, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• File:General Spears and General de Gaulle.jpg: Neither Reference Number or Collection Number is supplied. This could be a non-compliance with WP:CITE#IMAGE because it would not help re-users to verify details of the photograph with the IWM (especially since this image is not in the digital collections of the museum). This also means one would be unable to verify authorship (Royal navy photographer Lt L C Priest) and copyrights with the lack of information.
• File:EvelynWaughatSixty.jpg: I think the commentary on Waugh's late age appearance should be in the main text rather than a caption to justify significance on using this photograph (WP:NFCC #8). Furthermore, the significance could be substantiated further if there are more reactions (from others) to his aging.
• File:Castle Howard from Jones' Views (1819) - north west view.JPG: Not a concern but why are File:CastleHoward01.jpg (although we would need a local administrator to verify which license it was uploaded initially) and File:Castle Howard, Yorkshire.jpg not considered?

Of the above, the Lancing College photograph is the most concerning. The Spears-de Gaulle image would be next since it seems the photograph was not obtained through online means. Waugh's old age photograph is a subjective affair (per most NFCC items on this project) but I think if the text has critical commentary on his appearance (and the fair use rationale written to specifically point this out), that could suffice. Jappalang (talk) 02:57, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• I have replaced the Lancing photograph with http://www.flickr.com/photos/elsie/2938195630/, but I'd still be glad if you checked the licence
  • I think you meant Simon Carey's photograph at geograph (here at File:LancingCollegeChapel.jpg). I tweaked it so it is fine. Jappalang (talk) 03:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
• I've removed Spears/De Gaulle. It is marginal to the article, and frankly, not worth the time and trouble involved in chasing the IWM for further details.
• I have replaced the ancient Castle Howard image with a bright modern photo which I didn't spot on my earlier trawl.
• On the elderly Waugh, I will add a little more critical commentary to the text and will strengthen the rationale. My worry is that if I add too much textual description on Waugh's decrepit appearance, reviewers might say that there is no need for the image. But let us see how that pans out.
  • I left the elderly Waugh image unstruck as it is a subjective matter and more opinions could help to establish a consensus that this is fine. Jappalang (talk) 03:12, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you very much indeed for this help with image issues. Brianboulton (talk) 16:30, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• Comments. This is very good, hard to fault. A few minor things:

• Rather than saying in the lead that he was educated at Oxford University, the usual thing is to say which college, as you do with Arthur Waugh in the next section. But if you're going to mention the university only, it would be the University of Oxford.
• You have to wade through the first section a little to find his father's name. I would have both parent's names in the first sentence of Family background.
• ... the couple's second son was born, "in great haste before Dr Andrews could arrive". Who is being quoted?
• "In 1907 the family left Hillfield Road for a house, "Underhill", which Arthur had had built in nearby Golders Green ..." Suggestion: "In 1907 the family left Hillfield Road for "Underhill", a house Arthur had had built in nearby Golders Green ..."
• "attached to his elder son Alec by an 'unbreakable bond'" again, who is being quoted?

• Hastings, but the quote is not exact ("the bond forged between them was unbreakable") so I have reparaphrased.

• "in a house lit by oil lamps that Waugh recalled with delight, many years later": no need for the comma after delight
• "after being caught in homosexual activities": I wonder if there's another way to say that. It sounds as though we have clothes pegs on our noses. :)
• Why did Alec's book mean Evelyn couldn't go to Sherbourne?

• The school took offence - now noted

• The Oxford Union motion would be "This House would welcome prohibition," minus "that".
• " ... an onerous but not honorific post": is that Waugh being quoted?

• Yes, now clarified. Brianboulton (talk) 12:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• "provoked a "haughty" response": again, who is being quoted?

• Waugh, now made clear and cited to "A Little Learning"

• I'm confused about the nine terms, and can't see it mentioned in the source. Why would he be sitting his finals without having completed nine terms? I take it things were different then. I wonder it if could be clarified without going into unnecessary detail.

• I have, I hope, clarified this in the text and a rewritten footnote which includes the correct citation.

Will stop for now. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 07:03, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for these comments. I have generally adopted your suggestions, and have made clarifying adjustments where necessary. Brianboulton (talk) 12:32, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

My pleasure. They're all just niggles, because the article is excellent. A few more:

• "As a best-selling author Waugh could now command larger fees for his journalism, but there was no shortage of offers." Would "and there was no shortage" be better? That he could command larger fees implies there was no shortage of offers.
• I wonder whether you repeat "Waugh" a little too often. For example:

"Waugh had known Hugh Patrick Lygon at Oxford; now he was introduced to the girls and their country house, Madresfield Court, which became the closest that Waugh had to a home during his years of wandering. In 1933, on a Greek islands cruise, Waugh was introduced by Father D'Arcy to Gabriel Herbert, eldest daughter of ... When the cruise ended Waugh was invited to stay ..." And quite a few more. It's usually clear enough that it's Waugh you mean.

• Thank you for pointing this out. I have reduced the number of "Waughs" in this paragraph, and have attended to a few other name repetitions. In my final editing pass I will check for other cases of this problem. Brianboulton (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• "his unmilitary and insubordinate character": I would say insubordinate is enough there.

• Well, they are quite different things. It is possible to be, say, awkward, untidy and not very good at reading maps, without being insubordinate. Waugh was unmiltary and insubordinate. Brianboulton (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• Shortage of cash led him to agree, in November 1953 to be interviewed on BBC radio, where "[t]hey tried to make a fool of me, and I don't think they entirely succeeded" ... Peter Fleming in The Spectator likened the interview to "the goading of a bull by matadors". Could you say why the interview was problematic?
• The article doesn't say what he died of. Is it known?

SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 08:46, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Other matters dealt with per your suggestions. Brianboulton (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• Images

• File:Evelynwaugh.jpeg: Although this is on the Commons, it hasn't been explicitly released. It's listed here on the Library of Congress site—taken in 1940 by Carl van Vechten, who died in 1964. His estate has asked that the image not be changed (e.g. cropped), which is an unacceptable restriction in WP's terms; the estate apparently disputes the Library of Congress's view that the collection is PD. So this arguably shouldn't be on the Commons. It might be better to download it to WP, claim fair use, and add a "keeplocal" tag, because it might suddenly disappear from the Commons.

• The issue is about the validity of Mauriber's right to give the photographs away (copyright ownership of the photographs). The LoC believes he does and that per the instrument of gift, the 20 years of restriction has ended (gifted in 1966). Kellner disputes the decision but so far the LoC is satisfied that legal documentation points to the validity of Mauriber's rights. I believe Kellner's concern is a moral right rather than a legal right (Right to Integrity) granted to "works of visual art" since this work is not a "still photographic image produced for exhibition purposes only, existing in a single copy that is signed by the author, or in a limited edition of 200 copies or fewer that are signed and consecutively numbered by the author." Moral rights are not a usual part of Commons policies (see the implementation of commons:Template:Insignia and commons:Template:Personality rights). Note that the Van Vechten collection was discussed in commons:Template talk:PD-Van Vechten and commons:Commons:Deletion requests/Template:PD-Van Vechten. Jappalang (talk) 06:59, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• Hi Jappalang, I personally wouldn't oppose an FA over this image, but others might. It fails all the usual criteria: not published before 1923; not created by an author who died over 100 years ago, and not even 70 years ago as required by the European Union; not created by a USG employee; not unambiguously released by the copyright holder; and the free use of it contested by the photographer's estate. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 15:03, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• I would not say it "fails all the usual criteria": Mauriber gifted the image to the LoC on the a restrictive condition that elapses after 20 years, upon which the image is available to all for whatever use. The issue is the dispute over the copyright ownership, which the LoC has decided with whatever legal advice it had is with Mauriber. I agree with you that others might oppose over this dispute, although my personal belief is in line with the LoC (unless Kellner provides evidence of or the court decides that copyright is in his hand instead of Mauriber).
• That said, if we go with submitting this image under the non-free content policy, then this article either would have to use this or the image of Waugh in his sixties. If we go with that, the sixty-year old Waugh would be better. However, those who see Vechten's image as "free" could then oppose on the ground that there is a free image available. I liken this to the "devil and the deep blue sea" (either case could face opposition)... Jappalang (talk) 13:33, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• People might argue that the fair-use image can't be used regardless, because it's not hugely different from the first one (no matter the status of the first). Waugh may have thought he looked old and awful, but I think he looked almost the same. It will depend on how tough the reviewers are on the day, and how much Brian is willing to pay. :) SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 18:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:EvelynWaughatSixty.jpg. Strictly speaking, we shouldn't use a fair-use image if another image is available. I realize you want to show him as an older man, but I wonder if this is sufficiently different. It'll depend on how strict the FAC reviewers are about images.

• As you will see, I have had discussion on this image with Jappalang. I know for certain that at least one reviewer will oppose it at FAC; I think there is a case for its use, though perhaps not an overwhelming one. FACs are stressful enough without inviting trouble, but I'll decide later whether to risk it. Brianboulton (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• The other images are fine. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 12:30, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Again, many thanks for your attention and advice. Brianboulton (talk) 23:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• Continuing comments (and this is the last bunch):

• I wonder whether enough is made, particularly in the Oxford section, of his belonging to the middle class, feeling he went to an inferior school, then hanging around with Etonians at Oxford—the class difference that was the basis of Brideshead. Being a scholarship boy at Oxford would have been a major issue in those days.

• I think the class difference thing may be exaggerated. Waugh belonged to the professional upper-middle classes. His father had been to Oxford, he and his brother were public schoolboys (Evelyn's view about Lancing being "inferior" was not rational, it was fed by Arthur's besotted regard for Sherborne). In other words, Evelyn was far from being a "poor scholarship boy"; he was received without difficulty into the social circles to which he aspired, and his snobbery was largely a self-inflicted wound. Brianboulton (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• I think if I were writing this I would weave the character issues throughout the article, rather than in a separate section, given how central they are to his work and the perception of it.

• While I agree that would have been a reasonable approach—and to some extent character issues do occur through the article—I decided that a short section summarising Waugh's character would have more impact. Rather in the same way that "reception" issues are incorporated into a separate section instead of being dealt with as we go along. Your suggestion may work as well, I agree, but this is the approach I have taken. Brianboulton (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• Book of the Month: I think you need to say which book of the month.

• American B of the M now clarified (there is a link, too). Brianboulton (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• "During his lawsuit in 1956 against the Daily Express, which had misrepresented the levels of his sales": this is the first time this is mentioned outside a footnote. Can you say more about it? Did he win it? It should be linked back to the interview that made him sell Piers Court to make clear it's the same piece.

• I've absorbed the footnote into the text, so that the details of the lawsuit appear in the right chronological place. Brianboulton (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• I would not link newspapers, the BBC, and Granada Television.

• I have always believed that these links should be made. Any reason why they shouldn't? Brianboulton (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• It's just a preference issue. I'm not keen on the blue, and I'm not sure anyone would click on the BBC because they find it in this article. But it's a minor issue. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• One final point: the last sentence of the article, the quote from Nancy Mitford, seems to sum up best, for me, what Waugh was all about. "What nobody remembers about Evelyn is that everything with him was jokes. Everything. That's what none of the people who wrote about him seem to have taken into account at all." I wonder whether this article expresses that sense of the absurd. Would it be possible, or too difficult, to add examples of it throughout? Maybe too much to do at this late stage. But I think examples might help to bring out his personality more.

• Nancy's view of Evelyn is a personal rather than an accurate one. "Everything" wasn't a joke to him - his Catholic faith wasn't, for a start. I think her exaggeration was pardonable and that the point she makes is valuable - that not everything about him was serious and that he should not be judged as though he was. I think the article already acknowledges this point to some extent – his "war correspondent" role in Ethiopia, his "crusty colonel" assumed persona, his mock belligerence to strangers, etc. I would rather not, at his stage, look for further examples to illustrate Nancy's particular viewpoint. Waugh was a complex character; he should not be thought of merely as a joker who took nothing seriously. Brianboulton (talk) 00:17, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• Okay, that's reasonable. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 00:31, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Having said all this, it's a wonderful article, which I enjoyed reading a lot. The above are just suggestions, which I hope you'll ignore if you disagree with them. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 15:49, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

These are in the main excellent suggestions, that I will work on over the next few days. I may ask you for a final check-over before sending it to FAC (which won't be before late next week). Brianboulton (talk) 01:10, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Yes, of course, I'd be glad to look at it again. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 18:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

---

2010 Sylvania 300

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it is my goal to pass FA criteria. The article just passed GA, and now I am heading toward FA. While doing so, I would like others comments. I am aware that there are few comma misplacements, though.

Thanks, Nascar1996 06:08, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Itl ooks like this has all of the information needed to meet the WP:WIAFA comprehensiveness criterion, but I think the language needs a fair amount of work before it would meet criterion 1a (professional level of English). In addition, there are some other issues, so here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC.

• I will go through section by section, but a few general points first. One is to avoid WP:OVERLINKing. For example Clint Bowyer is linked 12 times in the article. The rule of thumb is to link the first time in the lead, and most editors will also link the first time in the body of the article (This has 4 or 5 links to him in the body). Links in the infobox, tables, and captions are also generally OK, but even there does he need to be linked twice in the infobox?
• Another is that according to the WP:MOS, once a person has been introduced they are generally referred to by just their last name - so use "Clint Bowyer" the first time and then just Bowyer after that. If two people have the same last name, then use their full names to avoid confusion.
• A third is that the article seems to rely a lot on direct quotations, often of fairly mundane statements. I would try to paraphrase most of these and just leave the direct quotes for really important or memorable statements. One example Greg Biffle said, "I think that I'm capable of winning it. I think Jeff Burton's capable of winning it. I think Tony Stewart is capable of winning it."[11] Other drivers, such as Jimmie Johnson stated, "What I keep telling myself is that those 10 races in the Chase is its own world. The people act and react differently under pressure, and for the last four years we have done a great job in that environment."[11] could be something like Greg Biffle said he thought he or Jeff Burton or Tony Stewart were "capable of winning it".[11] Jimmie Johnson observed "that those 10 races in the Chase is its own world. The people act and react differently under pressure...".[11]
• A fourth item is to watch tenses - all of this happened in the past, so I think unless it is a direct quote, the article should use past tense. So things like Mark Martin is the race's defending champion.[10] in Background read oddly and are now untrue (since Bowyer is the defending champion tight now).
  •  Done
• Infobox WP:UNITS says to provide conversions from all English units to metric units, so fix Mostly sunny with high around 79; wind out of the NW at 3 mph. Since the race is in the past, I would also either say "No rain." or just leave the chance of precipitation out of the infobox all together
  •  Done
• Lead This sentence is really unclear and confusing, how can it be both the 27th and the 1st race? Contested over 300 laps, it was the 27th, as well as the first race in the Chase for the Sprint Cup during the 2010 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series season. suggest changing it to something like The 300 lap race was the 27th in the 2010 NASCAR Sprint Cup Series, as well as the first race in the ten-race Chase for the Sprint Cup, which ends the season. Not sure if you want to give the distance here or not.
  •  Done
• Wherever possible, avoid passive voice. So this The race was won by Clint Bowyer, of the Richard Childress Racing team. could be something like Clint Bowyer, of the Richard Childress Racing team, won the race. This is also tighter (more concise)
  •  Done
• Does the lead really need to note that McMurray started in fourth? If this is important, why not give the start postions for 1st and 2nd too? Since the first sentence of the next paragraph tells us Bowyer started 2nd, why not say that here? If anything, isn't the second place finish starting in 11th place more notable?
  •  Done (removed)
• Second paragraph has a lot of room for improvement. The first sentence could be tightened a lot Pole position driver Brad Keselowski maintained his lead on the first lap to begin the race, as Clint Bowyer, who started in the second position on the grid, remained behind him. Aside from telling us Bowyer started second (which seems like a better fit in the first paragraph), does the lead really need to tell us he stayed behind the leader in the first lap? Also, since the first lap is specified, "to begin the race" is redundant.
  •  Done
• Second sentence: One lap later, Tony Stewart became the leader of the race. "of the race" seems like it could be cut here - what else would he be the leader of? I would combine the first and second sentences to something like Pole position driver Brad Keselowski maintained his lead in the first lap, but in the second lap Tony Stewart became the leader.
  •  Done
• More tightening possible here Some of the Chase for the Sprint Cup participants, such as Jimmie Johnson, Kurt Busch, and Denny Hamlin were in the top ten for most of the race, but in the closing laps all of them had problems, like spins. I think "such as spins" reads better
  •  Done
• Rough Hamlin was the only one to recover back into the top five. could be something like Hamlin was the only one to recover and finish in the top five.
  •  Done
• I do not understand these two sentences together. With two laps remaining, Tony Stewart was leading the race when he ran out of fuel, giving the lead to Clint Bowyer. Bowyer maintained the lead to win the race, after leading 176 laps. First we are told Stewart was leading with 2 laps to go, then we are told Bowyer won "after leading 176 laps". To me this sounds like Bowyer was leading the last 176 laps of the race, but then how was Stewart in the lead with 2 laps left? If it means that Bowyer lead for a total of 176 of the 300 laps, then say that.
  •  Done
• Third paragraph - this sentence seems out of place here (and could be tightened): There were eight cautions and twenty-three lead changes among eight different drivers throughout the course of the race. I would move it to the second paragraph right after Stewart takes over the lead in the second lap. The following material is already at least partly about the end of the race (Hamlin's finish).
  •  Done
• Clarify this by adding the time frame: Bowyer's first win in the 2010 season, and the third of his career. The result moved Bowyer up to second in the Drivers' Championship, thirty-five points behind Hamlin and ten ahead of Kevin Harvick, but because of a penalty [three days after the race], he fell to twelfth in the standings.
  •  Done
• I would add the word "points" here: Chevrolet maintained its lead in the Manufacturers' Championship, thirty-two [points] ahead of Toyota...
  •  Done
• OK, so having pointed out all of the rough language in the lead, I think it is clear this needs a copyedit, preferably from a fresh pair of eyes, before it would have a chance at FAC. A few more comments follow.
• Why do all the nine other intermediate tracks need to be listed here? How does that help the reader better understand this race?
• When people are tied, they are usually tied at the same place. So A and B were tied for 4th and C was in 6th place. This does not follow that (is there some tie-breaker in NASCAR?)
• Just over half the refs are to NASCAR itself. Are there other sources that could be used?
• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for more details

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:28, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

---

History of viruses

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I would be appreciate any comments on this article, which I have written relatively quickly. Because this could be perceived as a dull subject, I have made an extra effort towards a more engaging style of prose than in my more technical contributions on viruses. Also, because I am a virologist and not a historian, any comments from reviewers who are interested in history would be particularly welcome. Thanks. Graham Colm (talk) 19:08, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Culture of Malaysia

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've about reached the end of my independent thought process on the improvement of this article. I'm not sure where to go from here, what information people would want to see in such an article, how it should be organised etc. Any suggestions about anything at all would be most welcome, from copyediting to sourcing to the creation of whole new sections.

Thanks, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 16:12, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This article has a lot of interesting content, but the prose needs more work. I did quite a bit of proofing and made many small changes to punctuation and spelling. I'm sure I didn't catch and fix everything. I'd suggest a further close copyediting. You might be able to find a willing editor through WP:GOCE or WP:PRV. Here are other comments and suggestions.

Lead

• The lead is to be an inviting summary of the whole article. The existing lead is a bit skimpy on details and focuses a bit too heavily on the idea that the culture is a mix. I don't think the final sentence is necessary; it draws a conclusion rather than adding to the summary. I generally rewrite the lead of an article after I'm pretty much done with the main text sections. When I do this, I try to imagine a reader who can only read the lead and none of the text sections. I think it's important to work a little more of the specific detail into leads than I see in this one.

• The lead repeats the word "culture" 15 times. More variety would improve the prose.

Background

• "Cultural differences between Peninsular and East Malaysia until today." - Missing word or words?

• For foreign readers who live in distant parts of the world, it might be helpful to include a map showing where these places are. In lieu of a map, a general description in the text might help identify the hemisphere, the bordering bodies of water, and the bordering countries. It might help to give the name of the capital city and its location and perhaps the names of other major cities.

Ethnic groups

• "Malaysia is a multi–ethnic, multicultural and multilingual society, and the many ethnic groups in Malaysia construct different cultural identities based on this." - Is "construct" the right word? Suggestion: Malaysia's multi-ethnic, multicultural and multilingual society is a blend of various cultural identities."

• "Substantial influence exists from Chinese and Indian culture" - Shouldn't this be "cultures" since they are not identical?

• "Other cultures that heavily influenced the culture of Malaysia include Persian, Arabic, and British culture." - Suggestion to avoid repeating "culture" three times: "Other cultures that heavily influenced that of Malaysia include the Persian, Arabic, and British."

• "Due to the political structure of the government coupled with the social contract theory, there has been minimal cultural assimilation of ethnic minorities in Malaya and Malaysia." - This isn't logical. The theory is a set of ideas that can't be "coupled" with something else. I'm not sure how to fix the sentence because I don't know what the social contract theory might say about political structures.

• The government has historically made little difference between "Malay Culture" and "Malaysian Culture". - I think you mean "distinction" rather than "difference".

• "Hindu tradition remains strong until today in the Indian community of Malaysia." - Tighten by deleting "until today"? Words like "today" are inherently vague, and I don't think you need to specify a time in this sentence.

Policies and controversies

• "The Malaysian government has taken the step of defining Malaysian Culture, issuing the "1971 National Culture Policy". " - Tighten to "The Malaysian government defined Malaysian Culture when it issued its "1971 National Culture Policy"?

• WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists suggests using straight prose when feasible instead of lists. The numbered list in this section would be easy to render in prose.

• "Some cultural disputes exist between Malaysia and neighbouring countries, notably Indonesia." - Link Indonesia?

• "Strong feelings exist in Indonesia about protecting their national heritage." - Maybe "that nation's" rather than "their"?

• "One dispute, known as the Pendet controversy, was raised due to the claim of the use of the Pendet Dance in a Malaysian tourism ad campaign, causing official protests." - "Claim" doesn't seem to fit, since the ad actually used the dance images.

• "This Balinese dance was however used only in a Discovery Channel ad, not an official Malaysian ad." - It might help to explain that Bali is part of Indonesia and that the protests came from Indonesia. Also, should Discovery Channel be linked?

Arts

• "In recent years, dikir barat has grown in popularity, and it actively promoted by state governments... " - Missing word?

Music

• "Drums and other traditional percussion instruments and are often made from natural materials." - Missing words or too many words"?

Literature

• "This orals were heavily influenced by early Indian epics." - Suggestion: "These works... ".

Holidays

• The word "celebrate" occurs in one form or another more than 20 times in this section. A little more variety would make this section stronger.

• "This practice is commonly known as balik kampung and this would usually cause vehicle crawls on most highways in the country." - Should "vehicle crawl" be briefly explained or linked to something?

Cuisine

• "This means that although much of Malaysian food can be traced back to a certain culture, they have their own identity." - "Much" is singular, but "they" is plural. Suggestion: "This means that although many Malaysian foods can be traced to certain cultures, the foods have their own identities."

Sports

• "Wau is a traditional form of kite-flying, where kites are created with intricate designs." - Since the kites aren't created during the kite-flying, this sentence should be revised. Suggestion: "Wau is a traditional form of kite-flying involving kites with intricate designs."

• "Kite-fighting sometimes occurs, where each tries to cut the opponents kite strings." - "Each" doesn't seem to refer to anything in particular. Perhaps "Competitors sometimes engage in kite fights in which the object is to cut the opponent's kite strings."

• "Many international sports have a great deal of popularity in Malaysia." - Tighten to "Many international sports are highly popular in Malaysia"?

• Link "lawn bowls" to bowls?

• "It runs for 310.408 km" - Convert to 310.408 kilometres (192.879 mi) to show imperial as well as metric distances? Would it be more readable as "about 310 kilometres (190 mi)"?

• "received recognition by the IOC in 1954" - Spell out and link International Olympic Committee (IOC) on first use?

Media

• "Peninsular based media gives low priority to news from East Malaysia, and often treats them as colonies of the Peninsula." - "Peninsular-based" needs a hyphen. East Malaysia is an "it", not a "them"; perhaps "often treats it as a colony of the peninsula"?

• "The Malaysian government has previously tried to crack down on opposition papers before elections when they were unsure of their political situation." - "Government" is singular; it's not clear who "they" and "their" refer to.

Other

• Citation 70 has a dead url.

• The dab tool at the top of this review page finds one link (Wau) that goes to a disambiguation page instead of the intended target.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 01:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Coat of arms of Albany, New York

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is a recently-passed GA that could still use another review. What it really needs is a review by somebody that has some expertise in heraldry, as the terminology in the Description section may not be completely appropriate from a heraldic point of view (and I am not an expert). As noted in the FAC (which was closed because of the fact that I had another FAC open; it wasn't a speedy close), a technical type of review could be very useful, as I'd like to bring this to FA level. Thanks in advance for any help. upstateNYer 01:25, 15 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I'm not the expert on heraldry you were hoping for. Nonetheless, here are some comments and suggestions.

Lead

• The direct quote in the lead needs a citation right after its terminal period.
  •  Done
• Link sloop in the lead? Link beaver? Add (Indian) after Native American? Consider using Native American (Indian) in the infobox as well?
  •  Done I've replaced each use of "Native American" with "American Indian"; I forgot to follow my own rules. As far as I'm concerned, the naming choice for the National Museum of the American Indian is enough to know what that group wants itself to be known by. upstateNYer 00:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

History of the city seal

• Fancy quotes are deprecated by the Manual of Style, which suggests using blockquotes instead. WP:MOSQUOTE has details.
  •  Fixed
• I'd suggest moving the seals down in this section to avoid making a text sandwich between the seals and the infobox. If space is too short for that to look good, you might try making a double image of the seals. The template for a double image lives at Template:Double image.
  • How do you suggest I use the double image template? What would this do that the current set up does not? upstateNYer 00:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• "In 1755 the original seal (Figure 1) was reinstated for use by the mayor in licensing business." - "Businesses" might be slightly more clear than "business". I had to read the sentence twice to make sure it did not mean "in his licensing business".
  •  Fixed

Description

• Several sentences in this section have modifying clauses that don't modify the noun they're attached to. Here's an example: "The upper half depicts a beaver on a silver background gnawing at the stump of a fallen tree, representing Beverwyck's former fur trade, which was vital to the development of Albany." One problem here is that the tree doesn't represent the former fur trade, although this is suggested by the juxtaposition of "tree" and the modifying clause. The sentence also suggests that the background was gnawing at the stump. I'd suggest recasting these sentences for clarity. This one could become "The upper half, which has a silver background, depicts a beaver gnawing at the stump of a fallen tree. This scene represents Beverwyck's former fur trade, which was vital to the development of Albany."
  • Check the updates out; did some wording changes and added some appropriate wikilinks that I think I meant to add in the past. Feel free to make you own edits if mine didn't get at what you were aiming. upstateNYer 00:13, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
• Would it be useful in this section to remind readers that Native American (Indian) mean the same thing in this context?
  • See above.

Uses

• It would be best to avoid the text sandwich in this section. Perhaps the EIC flag could be moved down to share space with the flag of Albany?
  • Moved to multiple image template at bottom of article. Does that work for you? upstateNYer 00:04, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 21:05, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Spinal cord injury

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article is a high priority article for the medicine wikiproject and high neurology task force and needs lots of work for it to improve. I can tell by just giving it a quick look over that it will require loads of work and I am looking for recommendations on specific things that I should change about the article. All feedback is welcome!

Thanks, Peter.C • talk 03:43, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Cryptic C62:

• The first thing I noticed is how heavily dependent the article is on lists. Lists should be used sparingly. "An encyclopedia should seek primarily to teach, and only secondarily to inform."
• There are huge chunks of text (such as the Classification and Location of the injury sections) that do not have footnotes. Yikes!
• The tone of the article is, in some places, unencyclopedic. Here's an example: "One can have spine injury without spinal cord injury."
• The How Occupational Therapy Can Help Address Occupational Performance Issues seems to be written like an advertisement.
• More images would be nice.
• It is not made clear in the intro or the first few sections whether the scope of this article is intended to cover only spinal cord injuries in humans or in all animals. I would consider it fairly plausible for someone to be searching for information on spinal cord injuries in, for example, horses.
• As with any science article, there should be a History section to discuss how our understanding of the topic has evolved over time. In particular, I would be curious to know when the link between spinal cord injury and paralysis was first established. Once this has been created, I suppose Research directions could become a subsection of it, though I also wouldn't mind leaving it as a separate section.
• The complete/incomplete injury information should, assuming it can be verified with a reliable source, be moved to the Classification section.

I suspect you may have wanted advice on how to improve the prose itself, but I think it is best to wait until after the article has been sourced and restructured, otherwise we may end up rewriting the same material multiple times. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 00:54, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from garrondo: Following sections proposed at the manual of style for medical articles would be a great improvement.

• In this sense treatment and the two sections on occupational therapy should be combined, most probably into a section named management (recommended title for chronic problems).
• Everything still under research in the treatment section should be moved into a "research directions" section.
• Similarly there is wayyyy toooo much info on occupational therapy: some parts could be summarized, others moved to other articles, and others simply eliminated.

Bests.--Garrondo (talk) 16:21, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Spain national football team

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I would to know what else can be done to make this article the best it possibly can be, and I would be incredibly greatful if someone could just give a couple of pointers on how to expand content etc. and any strong example articles/sections. Thanks in advance! // Finns 15:39, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: The article appears to be complete or nearly so, but it's not possible to verify the information because so many of the claims lack in-line citations to reliable sources as defined by WP:V and WP:RS. The first thing to do would be to fix the sourcing problems. Here are a few more details about sourcing as well as some other suggestions.

• Although parts of the article meet the requirements of WP:V, many other parts do not because they lack sources. For example, the first five subsections of the "History" section are completely without sources. My rule of thumb is to include at least one source for every paragraph as well as sources for statistics, direct quotations, and unusual claims. If one source supports an entire paragraph, it should be placed right after the terminal period of the last sentence of the paragraph. Claims in tables as well as the main text need sources.

• Except for proper nouns and the first word, Wikipedia heads and subheads don't use capital letters for the words. Thus, "Early Years and the Effect of War" should be changed to "Early years and the effect of war". Ditto for the other heads and subheads.

• Most of the citations are incomplete. Citations to Internet sources should include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and date of most recent access, if all of those are known or can be found. It may be helpful to use the "cite" family of templates found at WP:CIT. If you use the templates (which you can practice with in your sandbox), don't mix the "cite" family with the "citation" family, which is also found at WP:CIT.

• In the "2010 FIFA World Cup winner" section, the images should be rearranged to avoid creating a text sandwich between images on opposite sides of the page. Since the section is not long enough to accommodate three images, you might have to delete one to avoid the text sandwich.

• It's often helpful to look at featured articles to see how other editors have handled similar topics. You will find featured articles about football at WP:FA#Sport and recreation.

Lead

• "Between November 2006 and June 2009 Spain went undefeated for a record-tying 35 consecutive matches before their loss to the United States, a record shared with Brazil, including a record 15-game winning streak and thus earning third place in the FIFA Confederations Cup." - Too complex. Suggestion: Between November 2006 and June 2009 Spain went undefeated for a record-tying 35 consecutive matches before losing to the United States. The record, shared with Brazil, included a 15-game winning streak and earned them third place in the FIFA Confederations Cup."

Other

• The tools at the top of this review page find two dead links in citations and one link in the text that goes to a disambiguation page rather than the intended target.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 00:36, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Sugar Ray Robinson

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get it to FA status eventually and think a peer review would be appropriate. I will be buying some more books when finances allow so I can add more secondary sources, but would like comments on what is there now.

Thanks, AaronY (talk) 22:26, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

• There are several dead links used by the article as sources; these should be fixed.

Sources

• Why is boxrec.com used, especially when below it states "BoxRec : this data may be incomplete and/or inaccurate"? Case in point: "Total fights" is claimed to be 200 because of boxrecs; however, numerous books including the biographies used in this article has pointed to 202 as the number. Why is a fansite used? Use the books that have been written about this boxing legend.[3]

• What is this "Gene Fullmer" link (http://www.ibhof.com/fullmer.htm), which is now a homestead front page? What makes it a reliable source?

• Why is the TV.com page, a page that seemingly can be edited by any one, used to reference Sugar Ray's guest appearance when more reliable sources are available?[4]

• The www.cmgworldwide.com links are dead; what makes them reliable?

• I believe boxing.about.com/od/history/a/ring_punchers.htm should not be linked per WP:LINKVIO; several AFDs have determined that complete reproductions of Top X lists are copyright violations unless the host was given permission to do so. Find the magazine and provide details of its article for the citation.

• www.secondsout.com/Legends/inthiscornercfm.cfm?ccs=402&cs=9896 does not point to an article by Patrick Kehoe.

• Use Google books to have an idea of which books would be best, and consult the associated Wikiprojects on which would be best used. Look for biographies (it seems some of which are used in this article) written by acknowledged experts in the field. Several magazines also have articles on the man and his relatives; these can be used to expand his personal life section (provided they do not contradict more reliable accounts).

• Check out the university published books; these tend to have the better "quality" so as to speak (since the higher-education centres have vetted their accuracy and topical insight). They offer a look at the man through a different set of eyes than sports biographies; these books can help in expanding sections beyond Sugar Ray's impact on the sports.

Early life

• "... first obtain an AAU membership card."

  Abbreviations should be stated in full on first mention, accompanied by the abbreviated name. See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Abbreviations.

• "... by borrowing a card from his friend Ray Robinson."

  The source did not state Ray Robinson as his friend. Other sources (deadtree ones) have pointed out that they were just from the same gym (although Sugar Ray knew of Ray Robinson). Sugar Ray was not said to have initiated the "borrowing". It seems George gave him the card to use. Whatever the case, it might invite less controversy to say "... by using a card from an older gym mate, Ray Robinson, who had unexpectedly stopped boxing." or such (and cite the sources).

• "Subsequently told that his style was "sweet as sugar" by future manager George Gainford, Smith Jr. became known as "Sugar" Ray Robinson."

  Was it the manager or the reporter who said "sweet as sugar" (sources differ)? It might be better to find the most reliable sources and look into this (or specifically spell out who said it was George).

• "..., and actually lived on the same block as Louis in Detroit when Robinson was 11 and Louis was 17."

  The sentence is overly dramatic (as if it was such a big deal). It might be more appropriate to cast it as "...; coincidentally, in 1932 Robinson and Louis lived in the same block in Detroit"

Early career

• "Robinson then defeated his childhood idol former champion Henry Armstrong. Robinson only fought Armstrong because Armstrong was in need of finances. By now Armstrong was an old fighter, and Robinson later stated that he carried Armstrong."

  Uncited, and what does "carried Armstrong" mean? The project's main audience may not be familiar with boxing.

• "... the only other mark on Robinson's record ..."

  Beware. There were only two entries on Robinson's record, or is "mark" here used as a boxing jargon? Be explicit; i.e. "negative mark".

Welterweight Champion

• "Before that fight, Robinson had a dream that he was going to accidentally kill Doyle in the ring. As a result, he decided to pull out of the fight. However, a priest and a minister convinced him to go ahead with the bout. His foe, however, died from the injuries he sustained."

  The source attributed this to "Some people said". It is not proven fact and should not be stated as such. Furthermore, the source makes no mention of "a priest and a minister".

Stopping review of the boxing history content here; I think content would best be reviewed when more reliable sources (books) have been integrated, and the uncited information are referenced.

Decline

• TKO: abbreviation as before

After retiring as a boxer

• Were there any studies that investigated his Alzheimer's disease? Note that this requires high-quality reliable sources per WP:MEDRS.

• What other business ventures/career did he attempt? There seem to be something missing (see the restaurant concern below).

Personal life

• How was his relationship with his family members? Does he have any other hobbies?

Legacy

• Three quotes is too many. This is not a quote farm. One could be fine; although it can be argued that all can be integrated into the prose.

• Instead of listing year by year the accolades given to him by each publication, would it be better to collate and present them by theme? This may not be a big deal; the number of accolades is not so long yet as to make it a repetitive "listy" read.

• "His glamorous restaurant, Sugar Ray's, ..."

  What/where is this restaurant? Why is it suddenly mentioned here? What happened to it?

• "... such as Sugar Ray Leonard, Sugar Shane Mosley, and UFC fighter "Sugar" Rashad Evans."

  I would rather the homage list be restricted to established notable fighters. Leonard and Mosley are world title holders, same as the original Sugar Ray; it seems mighty undue to list Evans along them.

See also

• Why is "List of male boxers" here? This is such a general link that it serves no point at all.

• "Ring Magazine pound for pound" could have been linked in the sentence that mentions the magazine's ranking of Sugar Ray as the best pound for pound, so it is redundant here.

Images

• File:Sugar Ray Robinson 1966.jpg

  I think from reading the article, this photograph should not be taken in 1966 if the text is correct. His last ring appearance was Madison Square Garden on December 10, 1965, right?

Of great concern is that there are several uncited sentences in the article. Please cite them to the sources used for these sentences. Grammar-wise, there is quite a heavy use of noun plus -ing constructs; please refer to User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing on the issues with these constructs and how to resolve/improve them. Jappalang (talk) 08:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Steven Caulker

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel it is a fairly well written article but would like to know how I could improve it to be applicable to Featured Article status.

Thanks, Ytfc23 (talk) 16:15, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

• I do not think this is likely to reach FA class. The requirements for an FA (WP:WIAFA) demands a comprehensive article on the subject. As a biography, an article should supply personal information on the subject, shedding light on his character and background. There is nothing here that tells us what Caulker is like as a person. Even so, this article is basically a list of appearances this footballer has achieved. There is no analysis of his playing style, no secondary sources that praise or criticise the subject, basically nothing. The sources used are the Spurs website (which should be treated as a biased primary source—their own player) and simply match reports to substantiate the subject's appearance. Where are the secondary sources on the person? This is the biggest failing of the article. Jappalang (talk) 03:00, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

The Care Bears Movie

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
"Who's up for round two?"

This passed the GA mark back in mid-2006, but further deteriorated down the line as standards toughened up and I went on to other pages. Compared to what you now see, it became a nightmare from the time our old friend, AnmaFinotera (talk · contribs) (or Collectonian), saw what went wrong.

In response, I have undertaken a long-term revamp that has spanned well around six months, so much so that I've had to delay pre-FAC work on the 1986 prequel. By now, it's become better and better over time, as I've managed to cull source after source from all manner of school/library databases.

What's it all about? Well, look no further than a film that went against the odds: one that was funded by a greeting card company, a rising television syndicator and a cereal manufacturer; was turned down by the Hollywood majors; brought prestige to its eventual U.S. distributor; survived a spate of mixed reviews; saved its Toronto studio from shutdown (forever); broke box-office records for non-Disney and Canadian animation; beat out an ambitious Disney sword-and-sorcery epic; led to a series that has managed nine instalments (despite a 17-year hiatus); and was so popular that (for the record) even John Waters—yes, John Waters—attended a screening!

There. See how much effort I've put into that improvement? Tell me if Wikipedia has any longer and more cite-worthy article on an animated feature, for kids or otherwise. (At this edit, it is 127 KB long with 200+ citations and 15 notes—on par with the article on American Beauty, which served as my model.) As for the lead section? Let me tell you: it couldn't be any finer.

One more film in the Nelvana series is up for review soon; eventually, all that hard work will be good enough for a book on the topic. To borrow a bit from Susanne2009NYC (talk · contribs): "Bears in their little clouds agree."

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 05:02, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This seems comprehensive, well-organized, well-written, and properly sourced. I'm not bothered by the long lead, and the too-long tag appears to be a drive-by with no helpful suggestions or follow-up on the talk page. I think the tag could be removed, and the edit summary could say something like, "Please discuss on the talk page if the length is still of concern" or something like that. On the other hand, if other editors object to the length, I don't think it would be hard to compress the lead by leaving out a few details and moving more toward a skeleton. I have doubts that four fair-use images can be justified, but I will leave that for others to decide. I made a few minor proofing changes, adding commas after triple dates. Here are a few other suggestions.

Plot

• "As the story starts, two of the Care Bears (Friend Bear and Secret Bear) travel around the Earth for people to cheer up." - Would it be more clear to add "looking" to this sentence since the bears are not traveling "for" unhappy people? Suggestion: As the story starts, two of the Care Bears (Friend Bear and Secret Bear) travel around the Earth looking for people to cheer up.

• "They soon meet Kim and Jason, two lonely children whose parents have long died." - Maybe "long since died" rather than "long died"?

• "Nicholas finds an old book with a diary-style lock on it" - Tighten by deleting "on it"?

Production

• "and a feature-length film began development at American Greetings' offices" - This sounds a bit odd, since it's not possible that the film began to develop itself. Maybe "and American Greetings began to develop a feature-length Care Bears film"?

• "The original characters were created by Elena Kucharik and Linda Denham, along with Linda Edwards, Muriel Fahrion, Dave Polter, Tom Schneider, Ralph Shaffer and Clark Wiley." - Delete "Elena" and recast in active voice" thus: "Kucharik and Linda Denham, along with Linda Edwards, Muriel Fahrion, Dave Polter, Tom Schneider, Ralph Shaffer and Clark Wiley, created the original characters"?

• "Nelvana had just come out from the production of its first feature... ". - "Finished" rather than "come out from"?

• "Nelvana was the first company to propose a feature film based on the Care Bears, out of several other studios; thanks to the Strawberry Shortcake specials" - Tighten by deleting "out of several other studios" since "first" implies this already?

Release

• "In 1984, some time before the film's completion, Carole MacGillvray offered... " - Tighten by deleting "some time"?

• The quote box and the image make a text sandwich, which is a Manual of Style no-no. In any case, I think the McGillvray quote is too short to put in a box. I'd suggest working it into the main text.

North America

• "The Care Bears Movie ranked fourth place at the North American box office... " - Maybe "ranked fourth" rather than "ranked fourth place"?

• "After three months, it grossed US$22,934,622 in the United States" - Would this be easier to read if rounded to "about US$23 million"? Rounding might be helpful here and there with other similar numbers; this one seemed extreme in its exactness.

• "As a result, The Care Bears Movie's performance disparaged animators at the Disney studios;" - I think you must mean that the animators at Disney disparaged the Care Bears movie or that the Care Bears movie concerned or alarmed the Disney animators.

Images

• Four fair-use images in one article may be hard to justify. Do readers really need to see Swift Heart Rabbit and the Spirit to understand the topic? Isn't the text sufficient?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 00:27, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

---

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have been editing the article for around a month and so I would like to know how well I have been doing my job. I'd like to know what other information I should add to the article to further improve it; it might be those on maintenance, financial standing, fleet, destinations, history, etc. I hope that many people will pay attention to this message, and, maybe, spend a few minutes reviewing the article. I would like to thank those who will be reviewing this page, I appreciate it. Thanks, Sp33dyphil 05:39, 8 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Benny the mascot  Doing... Benny the mascot (talk) 19:48, 13 March 2010 (UTC) Apologies for the delay. It seems that you have a lot of referencing issues to take care of. Several sections are marked with referencing banners, and the maintenance section has a copyvio banner. I would take care of those first, but remember that you must use reliable sources. Websites like facebook are simply unreliable. Also, it might be helpful to use some citation templates.

Furthermore, you have a few sections that need expanding. I admit that I haven't taken a detailed look at the sections you mentioned, but I'm going to post some additional comments soon. I just wanted to make sure you have some feedback to respond to at this moment. Benny the mascot (talk) 23:48, 15 March 2010 (UTC)

Excellent work so far! I'm glad to see that so much effort has been put into this article. A few comments:

• YYour discussion of the company history has a huge gap between 1996 and 2007. Did anything significant happen within that time period?
•  Doing...While your citations certainly have improved, large chunks of text still go unsourced. Benny the mascot (talk) 22:58, 16 April 2010 (UTC)

more coming...

Comments by H1nkles

• Y In the lead there is the comment that during the months of October and November it will be the carrier for the Miss World pageant. What year is that?
• Please check through the article for tense agreement. Sometimes it's past tense, other times it's in present tense. Here's an example:

"During that year, the airline was known as General Department of Civil Aviation in Vietnam,[15] and began full operations, carrying around 21,000 passengers, of which one-third are on international flights and 3,000 tonnes of cargo"

The context is a history of the airline so past tense is appropriate. Then comes, "...of which one-third are on international flights...." Are should be "were". This is one of several examples.

• Watch one and two sentence paragraphs. These should be expanded or combined.
• Y "code-share agreements"? What are code share agreements? This should be explained in the article.
• The first two sentences in the Passengers section are a repeat of earlier information, should be removed.
• Y Some things to consider when wikilinking (see WP:LINK for more information):

• Y Don't link terms used in common English like, crash, destination, airport, aviation, and maintenance to name a few. I fixed some but others need to be addressed. If there is a specific crash that you want to refer to then it is fine to link the article for that crash to the word "crash" but linking generic articles about these words is unnecessary.
• Y It is ok to link the word in the lead and then once, or perhaps twice in the body of the article, depending on the article. The word Boeing is linked at least 6 times in the article. That's not necessary. Also there are links to several different types of planes, each one can be linked once or twice, more than that isn't necessary.
• The first mention of the linked word should be linked, don't skip it but link the same word later in the article.

• Y Make sure your numbers are right, "The airline ordered four Boeing 777-200ERs, to be delivered in 2003, under a list price of US$680 (2003)." I'm sure it's more than $680.
• Sections for expansion: In-flight services (there's more than just movies right?), Incidents and accidents (give some specifics, in a summary style, of each fatal accident). What about terrorism? Has the airline experienced that at all?
• I agree with Benny the mascot about the sourcing. Here are my recommendations regarding the sourcing:

• Use a {{cite web}} template.
• Read WP:CITE for information on how to properly cite an article.
• Y Per Benny the mascot, Facebook and most blogs are usually not considered credible, please replace these.
• Read Biman Bangladesh Airlines. This article is a Featured Article, an example of some of our best content. It conforms with all MOS requirements and is considered comprehensive. This article will give you a guide on how to cite your article and what format to use. More on this article later.
• Y Usually in-line citations come at the end of a sentence or a paragraph. Sometimes after a comma and very rarely are they dropped right in the middle of a sentence. This is for flow and readability, please consider moving in-line citations like in this sentence, "In September 2005, Vietnam Airlines ordered eight Boeing 787-8 aircraft[22] to be delivered from 2009,[23] and 10 Airbus A321-200 for deliveries starting from the same year; however, due to the delays of the Boeing 787, Vietnam Airlines will acquire its state-of-the art Boeing 787-8's soon after Boeing completes its test." to the end of the sentence.

Overarching comments:

•  Doing... As I stated earlier, please read the Biman Bangladesh Airlines article. It is an article about an airline that will be an excellent guide for you. It covers all the important topics that should be covered in this article. It also gives you a format for references, tables, and tells you what kind of images you need to have. Keep in mind that this is a featured article and don't feel like you have to get it to this level (unless of course you have visions of getting this article to FA standing).
• The article will need a thorough copy-edit. There are several grammatical errors that crop up in the writing.
• The images are a bit uninspiring. Five photos of airplanes is ok but not great. Consider searching through Commons for free-use images. If you want to upload some of your own be sure they conform with WP:IMAGE guidelines.
•  Doing... One of the biggest issues is the citations, which is why there are all the tags all over the article. Getting the citations cleaned up will be a huge step in improving this article.

That's it for me, if you want to discuss specifics from this review please give me a poke on my talk page and I'll be happy to talk about it. Happy editing. H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 18:06, 19 March 2010 (UTC)

Messages from Sp33dyphil

Is it OK if H1nkles tidy up all the references found on the page, while Benny the mascot fact-checks? thank you.

 Doing...If anyone would like to see what I am up to relating to the improvement of the article Vietnam Airlines, please visit User:Sp33dyphil/My sandbox‎.

You already have suggestions on how you can improve the article. I think you should work on those issues first, then I'd be willing to take another look. Benny the mascot (talk) 11:27, 24 March 2010 (UTC)

Second review by H1nkles

Sp33dyphil asked for a second look at the article. This review will look at some of the issues brought up in my first review to determine progress.
Lead

• "The maintenance and overhauling of aircraft is handled by Vietnam Air Service Company (VAECO), while Noibai Catering Services Join-Stock Company caters other airlines using the airport for Vietnam Airlines."

This sentence in the lead is poorly worded and a bit confusing. First off you use the term "maintenance and overhauling" in the previous sentence, could another term be used in this one to vary the writing a bit? Second what is the airport for Vietnam airlines? It appears from the first paragraph in the lead that there are two hubs for the airline, is that correct? If so you'll need to specify which one houses this subsidiary.

• I removed the ref improved tag from the top of the article as I can clearly see that a lot of work has been done on the references. There are a couple of sections that need work in this area but overall I feel that the article has significantly improved to the point that the ref tag is no longer needed.
• Y I made some prose improvements in the lead. Check them out and see if they still jive with the information in the article. More to come. H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 15:27, 29 March 2010 (UTC)
• There are still one sentence paragraphs, these need to be expanded or combined with other paras.
• Y You need to use templates for your in-line citations. See WP:CITE for information on this. A good template for website citations is {{cite web}}. Please use templates to format all of your in-line citations, because right now the article does not have a real coherent citation format.
•  Doing... Can the Destinations section get expanded? Does VA fly to North America at all? The section just seems a bit sparse.
• I would remove the lists in the Cargo and Retired section. See WP:LIST for more information on using lists. Usually one or two lists at the end of the article are fine, more than that is frowned upon. Fold them into prose instead.
• I like the images, adding interior and food images is a great idea. Keep it up.
• Y There are ref tags on Training and Maintenance sections. The Training section has one in-line citation and the Maintenance section has none, this needs to be improved.

References

• Y You still have at least one reference to a facebook page, Facebook is not an acceptable reference in WP.
• YFormatting of the references needs to be consistent, see above.

Overall

• You're making great progress. Keep working on the issues I've raised above and you should probably get a copy edit done.

Keep up the good work you're on your way! H1nkles _{citius altius fortius} 23:51, 29 March 2010 (UTC)

Comments by SynergyStar

Greetings, and good job on improving the article! I also received the request for input. Looking at the history, it has improved considerably in the past months. I read the article and made a few small edits for spacing and capitalization, and added a picture. A few more suggestions (and I realize this is hard work):

• More copy-editing would help, suggestions:
  • YLead: "....is the national flag carrier of Vietnam, and was established as a state enterprise in April 1989. It has its headquarters..." => ...is the national flag carrier of Vietnam. It was established as a state enterprise in April 1989, and has its headquarters..." (sentence length)
  • History: "It’s first international destination" => Its first...(apostrophe)
  • Y Fleet: "In December, 2001, Vietnam Airlines signed a historic agreement between them and Boeing" => "Vietnam Airlines signed a historic agreement with Boeing" (simplify)

• YHistory section ends after 1996; there are references for later dates in the fleet section, maybe some context and what has happened since then could be added.
• Cargo fleet...based on the source and lead VN does not have 777Fs or A330Fs (especially since the A330F is in design/test phase); it actually uses its passenger 777s, A330s etc for belly cargo space.

Some editors came along and added ss to the name

• Miss World pageant, relevant info, but maybe it fits better in History rather than lead.

Keep up the good work! Regards, SynergyStar (talk) 02:26, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your quality input. Happy Easter - maybe that's a bit too late :) Sp33dyphil 03:01, 5 April 2010 (UTC)

---

Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitors

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's on a topic that is constantly evolving. Furthermore I'd like some second opinions regarding the renaming of the page from Discovery and development... to just Bcr-Abl tyrosine kinase inhibitors, as there is a lot of development history which might seem out of place with the current article title.

Thanks, Hinemash6 (talk) 00:26, 16 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article, here are some suggestions for improvement.

• I do not think the lead currently meets WP:LEAD. The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article, and can be up to 4 paragraphs long.
• 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. However most of the lead seems to be material that is only in the lead. For example the Janet Rowley discovery in 1972 and the Src-family kinases seem to only be in the lead.
• To make it more of a summary of the whole article, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but this lead seems to be mostly a unique introduction.
• The article may need fewer sections / header too - try to avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections.
• Things should not be both bold face and wikilinked, so fix the lead sentence, for example.
• A lot of the current lead seems like it could be in the History section.
• The disambig links finder tool finds three dabs that need to be fixed.
• The refs are mostly nicely formatted, but a few are just bare URLs. Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
• Article is generally well-cited, but some things need refs, especially towards the end of the article. For example the section 1,3,4 thiadiazole derivatives: Some interest has been with thiazol and thiadiazole derivatives and their ability to inhibit Bcr-Abl TKs. needs a ref, as does Whilst the similar binding properties to those of dasatinib, suggests the possibility of producing Bcr-Abl TKI’s from thiazole cores is real, the question remains open whether this research will just lead to a dasatinib analog or a novel way to inhibit TKs.
• The figures are good; there should be one in the lead.
• Make sure the figures indicate what they are based on - for example File:Bafetinib in binding site.PNG gives no source for the information it is based on.
• The article needs to follow WP:HEAD better - typically the title of the article is not repeated in the headers.
• Given the recent concerns with palgiarism, please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:07, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

---

David Irving

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I haven't yet contributed to this article but I noticed it is really excellent and unbiased. It deserves to be FA, it's just too long. Please help me identify which parts should be shortened and if there are any other changes that should be made.

Thanks, Shii (tock) 02:42, 4 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I'll try to help with a few things, but I don't have time to go through the article closely to see exactly how to trim.

• At 151 kilobytes, the article is much too long. The upper limit for reading comfort is about 100 kilobytes. If I were thinking of preparing the article for FA, I would aim to cut it by one-third.

• Reading quickly through the article, I see many long quotes that would be candidates for reduction. Some of these appear in the "Notes" section. Is all that detail really necessary in an encyclopedia article?

• The "External links" section seems excessively long. I would eliminate any entries that are already cited in the main text.

• I would look carefully at all of the parts of the article that are unsourced or incompletely sourced. For example, the first paragraph of the "Author" section includes only one inline citation, and it supports only a single claim occupying half of a sentence. The rest of the paragraph contains many claims that are not common knowledge and that might be questioned. Something like the claim of 40,000 pounds in damages, for example, needs a source. Another example would be the short "Göring" section, which lacks a source or sources.

• The article is well-written. However, if I were thinking of working this up to FA, I would have to be sure that the existing text included no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. This would be an enormous job because it would involve tracking down the cited sources, reading them, and checking the existing text against them. Unless you can track down the main contributors and enlist their help, you will essentially be starting from scratch.

• The link checker at the top of this review page finds quite a few dead urls in citations.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 00:52, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments

• I noticed when I reopened the PR after the bot closed it that the headers do not always follow WP:HEAD - some repeat his name, for example.
• The image File:Did_six_million_really_die.jpg‎ of the book cover is fair use but does not have a fair use rationale for this page. I am frankly not sure how it meets WP:NFCC in this article - how is the reader's understanding of Irving increased by seeing the cover of a book Irving did not write?
• The Persona non grata and Arrest and imprisonment in Austria sections need more references, and Post-release has zero refs.
• Avoid direct external links in the text - Time in Prison has an EL to his book written in Prison
• Avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections - does Arrest and imprisonment in Austria really need three subsections?
• The article uses {{cquote}} but according the documentation at Template:Cquote this is for pull quotes only, and this should probably use {{blockquote}} instead.
• The article reads like a quote farm in places

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 14:42, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

These are great comments. I will see what I can do to improve this important article to FA. Shii (tock) 06:04, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

• Hi Shii, the article is not hugely long at the moment; 8747 words readable prose, which is within the norm for FA, though personally I would try to get it below 7,000 if possible. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 09:52, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Discovery and development of dual serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's always good to be criticized. For improvement of my contribution and my future contributions, I have to know what I need to do better. Also, to distribute more knowledge for other people the site must be as good as possible. Thanks, Yrsukrutt (talk)

• The article name is not easily found, I recommend changing it to "History of ~". However, it seems like the article could be merged into the main SNRI article. It covers a wide variety of SNRI-related topics, most of which shouldn't be shunted aside into an independent article.
• The introduction should not start with the incomplete sentence "Discovery and development of dual serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors". You might change it to "This article describes the history of serotonin–norepinephrine reuptake inhibitors (SNRIs) ..."
• The timeline is difficult to read.
• The "Overview of SNRIs" is a list of one-sentence paragraphs which do not explain why SNRIs are good for all these different things. It has no relation to either discoveries or developments, although either could concievably be added to supply useful context. Perhaps merge it with the "Products of SNRIs" section.
• "Mechanism of action" is neither a discovery nor a development, but belongs in the main SNRI article. The other sections are similarly questionable. Please consider how to balance the SNRI article with this article if both are too long.
• However, "Clinical trials" does have historical relevance, so it might belong in a shortened history article.
• It's not clear what the "Current status" section is related to. Current status of what?
• Otherwise, the article is generally informative and supplies important information.

I found this in Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog, feel free to help out with the others there. Shii (tock) 06:10, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Much of the content is way over my head, but I can offer a few suggestions about Manual of Style issues.

• The tag at the top of the article should be addressed in some way. It will be hard to decide on the most appropriate layout, infobox, images, and lede until the merger debate reaches a conclusion.

• The inline citations should be placed immediately after the punctuation (if any) rather than before it. For example, "by treating a wider range of symptoms[1]." should be "by treating a wider range of symptoms.[1]" All of the inline citations in the existing article are positioned incorrectly but should be easy to fix.

• The point size of the typeface in Table 1 is so small that some readers may not be able to see it clearly.

• Since the abbreviations are already explained in the main text, the separate "Abbreviations" section seems unnecessary.

• I would not include anything in a "See also" section that is already linked in the main text.

• The tools in the toolbox at the top of this review page find two links (acute and desensitization) that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 18:55, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

---

List of Interstate Highways in Washington

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am looking for a non roadgeek's opinion of the two table styles. I am torn on what I want to include / use in the tables, and was wondering what would make this table usable for someone who isn't familiar with the topic.

Thanks, Admrboltz (talk) 00:48, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I'm more of a river geek than a road geek, so I think I qualify.

• I can't exactly choose one table over the other because I would prefer a third kind, similar but not identical to either of the existing two. The following comments (I hope) explain what I mean.

• As a driver, I don't need to know the county names, but I like to know what cities the auxiliary highways are meant to serve or, in some cases, bypass. For example, one purpose of I-205 is to avoid downtown Portland and traffic jams between Portland and Vancouver, Washington, that occur on I-5 during the daily commuting hours.

• I also like to know about daily traffic-density variations. When and where is I-5 so jammed up that it's best to stay away from it?

• I like to know the names, locations, and elevations of any mountain passes a particular highway crosses. You mention Snoqualmie, which is probably the highest, but others may be high enough to require traction devices sometimes. Or maybe not.

• You mention the Columbia River crossing for the Washington half of I-205. Would it be worth mentioning other major river crossings? For example, I suppose I-5 in Washington begins in the middle of the Interstate Bridge over the Columbia, and I-90 and I-82 cross the Columbia as well.

Infobox

• PSH and SR should probably be spelled out here (or maybe in the lead) as well as abbreviated for the many readers who may not know what they mean.

Lead

• "One route, I-605, has been proposed over the years to form another bypass around I-5 and I-405... " - Would it be helpful to say more specifically in the lead and in the auxiliary table where in the state I-605 would go? I mean from what town to what town? What Interstates would it intersect?

Primary Interstate Highways

• "I-405 is intersected, which serves the Eastside, as I-5 enters Seattle." - I'd make this active rather than passive; i.e., "As I-5 enters Seattle, it intersects I-405, which serves the Eastside." Is "Eastside" a proper noun, or should this say "the eastern part of the city" or something similar?

Links in tables

• I see a few redundant links here and there. For example, I think you need to link "Canada – United States border" and "I-90"only once each in the primary table and "Oregon", "Lynnwood", "Tukwila", "Pasco", "US 12", and "US 395" only once each in the auxiliary table.

• Shouldn't places like "Mercer Island" and "Ellensburg" be linked?

Icons

• Once per row is enough for the highway icons in the tables, I think.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Protactinium

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

This article has the potential to become a Featured Article. It has a great amount of information, and I think this would be extremely informative to everyone.

Thanks, AmericanXplorer13 (talk) 02:30, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

I think you got the wrong article. This one is rated start-class. Nergaal (talk) 04:46, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

The rating was updated to a B-class yesterday.—RJH (talk) 16:48, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Comment—unfortunately, after a read through I have to say that this article appears replete with jargon and may be unhelpful to many lay readers. It could do with clearer explanations, which would add somewhat to the article length but make it more approachable. Here's a few specifics:

• To me, the first paragraph of the text reads as though it would be completely obtuse to a lay reader. For example, it does not explain what it means to be "between" two other elements, or be positioned below. It needs to explain "actinide element group" and how is it relevant. The term "periodic table" is only mentioned in sentence three. Please re-write the paragraph so that the meaning would be clear to somebody relatively unfamiliar with chemistry.
• The following are vague: "intensely radioactive"; "For a long time..."; "...that is preserved for some time in air". More specific data or comparisons would be useful.
• The last 3-4 sentences of the paragraph that begins "In 1900, William Crookes" are commendable but completely off topic.
• "...is currently providing..." needs a specific year.
• "...occurring in two different energy states." What does this even mean?
• The context of "...even the water present in the same sample of soil" is somewhat unclear.
• "...via (n,2n) reactions..." is unclear.
• "It is chosen..." is ambiguous. Is "it" Bismuth or Lithium?
• The nuclear reaction in the Preparation section could use some clarification with words to explain the neutron and negative beta symbols to the reader.
• Much of the last paragraph of "Physical and chemical properties" is pure jargon.
• Jargon needing links or clarification: "lattice constants", "space group number", "non-stoichiometric", "orthorhombic symmetry", "poor metals", "monoclinic", "mixed binary oxides", "octahedrally coordinated", "monoclinic symmetry", "hydrolyze" and "kinetics".
• "...most remarkable is..." Why is this remarkable?
• The references are inconsistently formatted. Some are "last name, first name", others are "first name last name". Several book references lack page numbers (Hammond; Myasoedov et al.; Nukleare Sprengkörper; Palshin et al.).
• A few more illustrations of Proactinium and its compounds wouldn't hurt.

I hope this helps a little. Thanks.—RJH (talk) 17:54, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

---

Eye-gouging (rugby union)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel the article is well written and has fair references and I would like other editor's input on it as I'm considering nominating the page for Good Article Status under sports and recreation as Wikipedia's 1st Rugby Union specific good article so can anyone give us some tips on how to improve it or even if it is currently suitable for Good article status.

Thanks, The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 19:00, 22 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Casliber

Eeww. gross topic..

• Unabbreviate IRB and link it.

• Needs a history section. I am sure it didn't start in 1992 (I remember the Loe case well though).

• Any reason why it is worse in union than league? Needs rationale and explanation. I'd maybe combine with league, or with baseline concept at Eye-gouging- both pages are short and the definitions are the same.

Wow, I was hoping it was some weird rugby slang but, holy...ResMar 14:52, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

Brianbouton comments: I've had a quick look. I tend to agree with what Casliber has said; here are a few more points:-

• With only 436 words of text the article is very short. Unless you are intending to expand, it might be better to consider this as a list.
• Single short-sentence paragraphs, and bullet-point presentation, should be avoided.
• Definition section: the first para of this section provides a wording which is cited to [2]. I caanot find this wording on the cited page.
• "Scales of the offence": In the first sentence, wikilink "test match". Were Schalk Burger and Sergio Parisse both concerned in the two incidents mentioned (which is how the sentence presently reads)?
• "Examples": Add a year to 24 November
• Table: "High-profile cases" is not an adequate heading. Who has classified them as "high profile"? Are there other cases in first-class rugby union that have not been listed? If so, why were they omitted. It should also be clarified that the table is limited to proven cases of misconduct.
• Ref 6 lacks a publisher
• In the references, non-print sources (e.g. BBC News, BBC Sport) should not be italicised.

Brianboulton (talk) 19:23, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Georgetown, Texas

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has an advert tag placed on it which I don't think is justified. Or if it is, it would be helpful to know what specifically needs editing. Also anxious to begin to move this article up from from a "start" sttaus.

Thanks, Austex • Talk 01:52, 17 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: In response to your question about the "advert" tag, that's not the problem. The main problems at the moment are copyright violations, inaccurate sourcing, and lack of sourcing. I've read the discussions on the article's talk page, and I see that you've inherited many, perhaps all, of these problems. Still, they need to be fixed. Here are some specifics:

• Here's a copyright violation. "Historic neighborhoods" begins this way: "In the 1970s, Georgetown's downtown was bleak and featureless. In an effort to modernize and compete with suburban retail development, building owners in the ‘50s and ‘60s obscured one of their most priceless resources – their retail buildings. The Texas-Victorian streetscape was plastered with stucco, aluminum covers, brick, and multiple layers of white paint. But community leaders had already begun taking interest and putting new stock back into their architectural heritage." And here's what the source says, "In the 1970s, Georgetown's downtown was bleak and featureless. In an effort to modernize and compete with suburban retail development, building owners in the ‘50s and ‘60s obscured one of their most priceless resources – their retail buildings. The Texas-Victorian streetscape was plastered with stucco, aluminum covers, brick, and multiple layers of white paint. But community leaders had already begun taking interest and putting new stock back into their architectural heritage." As you can see, they are identical. Whoever copied the source material simply stole it from The National Trust for Historic Preservation. Before doing anything else with the article, please remove this copyvio and all others that you can identify in the article. That means checking the existing text against the sources. WP:COPYVIO has details.

• Here's an example of a source that does not support the claim it's attached to. The claim is: "There also appear to have been small numbers of Kiowa, Yojuane, Tawakoni, and Mayeye Indians living in the county at the time of the earliest Anglo settlements." The source, citation 12, says nothing about Indians. You need to check all of the sources to make sure they they support the claims they purport to support. "That" they support, not "they they"

• Many parts of the article lack sourcing and are therefore in violation of WP:V. For example, the "Weather" section is completely unsourced as is "Government and politics". My rule of thumb is to include at least one source for every paragraph except, usually, the paragraphs of the lead. Also, every set of statistics, every unusual claim, and every direct quotation needs a source. If one source supports an entire paragraph, it should go at the end of the paragraph, right after the terminal period of the last sentence.

• Until the sourcing problems are fixed, there's little point in reviewing the article for other problems. I'd be glad to take a further look later if you clean up these serious problems.

• Two other thoughts: WP:USCITY has helpful guidelines for articles about cities. WP:FA#Geography and places includes the names of featured articles about cities, and these can be useful models.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:09, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

---

New Testament Christian Churches of America

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article recently underwent a review for GA status, but failed. I corrected all the points which the GA reviewer brought up. I'd like a peer review to correct any faults which still remain so we can get this article to GA status. Please note that the reliable sources upon which the article is based turned up largely negative information on this church and if the article reflected the tone and majority content of the reliable sources, it would sound much more critical, and have much more critical information. It is already toned down the the bare facts to make it encyclopedic.

Thanks, BE——Critical_{__Talk} 21:38, 20 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: The neutrality dispute must be resolved for the article to have any chance for promotion. I don't think it can be resolved by debating individual sentences. The basic problem is that the piece, which includes many claims that are apt to be questioned, relies almost completely on a single source. I see two ways to improve the article. One would be to find other reliable sources of information about the church. If that is not possible, the existing article could be greatly reduced to a "who, what, when, where" stub or start-class piece providing basic information that is not apt to be questioned. I elaborate a little on these ideas below.

Lead

• I need go no further than the lede to see why WP:NPOV might come to mind. The first two sentences are neutral. The third sentence appears neutral. The last two sentences of the lead say negative things about the church, and the cited sources appear to support the claims. The problem is that while negative claims are included, no positive ones are included. Yet Bruce Smith, the oft-cited Dispatch reporter, referring to "the Born Again Experience", says here, "Most church members describe this event as the most profound and beautiful moment of their lives. They feel that they have been touched or spoken to by God directly, even while coming at times of absolute despair." It seems to me that a neutral article about the church would not ignore the members of the congregation who have something positive to say about it.

History

• This section seems to me to meet the neutrality guidelines.

Proselytizing

• Bruce Smith and the church web site are the only two sources for this section. Smith works for a very small newspaper in a very small town. Although the newspaper meets the guidelines at WP:RS, it is still only a single source. If I were writing the article, I would try to find other reliable sources in addition to the Smith series. If I couldn't find any, I would conclude that at least parts of the article were not notable per WP:NOTABLE.

• "The NTCC is an evangelical church which believes the Bible... " - A church doesn't believe anything; the members believe. Suggestion: "The NTCC is an evangelical church, the members of which believe the Bible... ".

Constituency and facilities

• Again, Smith and the church are the only two sources cited. If Smith's story is important, why haven't other newspapers picked it up?

Criticism

• Smith is the only source for a series of extraordinary claims. What if he is wrong?

Beliefs and practices

• Ditto. All of these claims depend only on Smith for support.

Financial distribution

• Ditto. Essentially all dependent on Smith.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 22:15, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

---

List of unreleased Britney Spears songs

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've worked on this article for a few days and based it on List of unreleased Michael Jackson material. However, since it's relatively short in comparison to Jackson's, I wanted an opinion about the prose and the possibilities of it being nominated for FL.

Thanks, Xwomanizerx (talk) 05:02, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This looks good. The prose looks generally fine. I see what you mean about the brevity of the list. I don't think that alone would prevent it from becoming FL, but I'd suggest doing everything possible to make the article comprehensive.

• You mention using List of unreleased Michael Jackson material as a model, and I see that the Jackson list has an interesting "Key" that includes color coding as well as special symbols for readers who can't see the colors. I can imagine a similar key for this list, although it would not include the two categories related to Jackson's deposition. It might, however, include categories for EMI, BMI, and so on. If you can track the data down, adding it would move the article closer to comprehensive and would make the table more visually appealing.

• Can you find and add more data to the "Notes" column? An awful lot of the boxes are completely empty.

• If you keep this image, I'd set the size to |thumb|300px| rather than just |thumb|". I'd look around for the best image I could find that fits the subject. This one may be the best available, but it looks like movement plus low-light conditions made everybody come out a little blurry but Britney.

• "Examples include "Today", which Spears recorded in 1997 and was originally meant for Toni Braxton, and also snippets of "Rebellion" and "For My Sister", released on Spears's official website in 2006." - Possibly too complex. Suggestion: "In 1997, Spears recorded "Today", originally meant for Toni Braxton. Snippets of "Rebellion" and "For My Sister" were released on Spears's official website in 2006."

• The ref numbers for "When I Say So" should be arranged in ascending order. [4] should come first, not last.

• The books in the "Reference" section should include place of publication. If you don't have this information in your notes, you can usually find it via WorldCat.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:25, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Kesha

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it is currently listed as a B scale article. I can easily see that it can become a A scale article, I just need some constructive criticism to make it so.

Thanks, Ziggyseventh (talk) 02:43, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Belovedfreak

I have to say to start with that I don't really have any experience with A-class reviews, either reviewing them or writing the articles, but I can give some general advice to improve the article. An A-class review is one option, but there is also good article nomination, which can be another "stepping-stone" on the way to WP:FAC. I think you've picked up the fact that Featured Article nominations are supposed to be undertaken by editors who have contributed significantly to the article, or at least with the main contributers' knowledge. This isn't a requirement for WP:GAN, but if you do nominate this article, I would strongly recommend you do so only if you are very familiar with the article and the sources used, and that you contact the main editors first. It works out better that way for everyone, and you will need to know what you're talking about with regards to the sources in a review. You can see the main editors (by number of edits, and over time) to the article here. You can also often pick up who's heavily involved in an article by checking the talkpage. I also notice that the article had a peer review a few months ago, so it would be worth checking that everything that came up there has been addressed. Having said all that, I'll go through the article and make comments on any issues I find, including things that would concern me at a GA review.

Infobox

• I'm not quite sure why there are two citations for her "origin". This should be cited in the article, and not need to be cited in the infobox.

Lead

• The lead could be expanded a bit, it doesn't adequately summarise the rest of the article at the moment.

1987–2004: Childhood and youth

• I'm not sure that the years are needed in this heading, just personal choice though
• I'm a bit confused about her mother's publishing deal. Was that to do with her songwriting?
• Th emention of Louis is a bit sudden. Presumably he was a younger brother?
• It's unclear to the unknowing who Dr. Luke and Max Martin are. Did she know them? Why did they convince her to leave school and move to LA? Ok, reading the next sentence it becomes clearer, but it's a little disjointed as it is, and it's still not really clear who they are.
• Please spell out BMI

2005–09: Career beginnings

• "At age eighteen" - be careful of redundancy; this could just be "At eighteen". Also, per MOS:NUM, numbers above nine should be written in digits, so "At 18".
• Is Dr. Luke known as just "Luke". Usually we refer to people by their surnames, but Luke is not his surname, and "Dr. Luke" appears to be a stagename or nickname
• "Six months after hosting Paris Hilton at her house, Luke gave Kesha the opportunity..." - this is not quite right, grammatically. The first part of the sentence is referring to Kesha as the subject, but after the comma, the subject is Luke.
• It seems a little strange that this sentence about singing backing vocals for Paris Hilton has three citations. It doesn't seem particularly contentious. If the sources are reliable, one cite should be enough.
• There's a mix of referring to her age ("at age eighteen"), and referring to the year ("In 2006...") - this sort of assumes that the reader remembers when she was born and how old she was at each point. Off the top of my head, I don't know how much time has elapsed between when she was eighteen (and six months later), and 2006. This could be clearer.
• Do we know why she and Luke "hardly interacted" later? Did they fall out?
• "She worked with several top writers and producers while at the company..." - do we know who these "top writers and producers" were? If not, it sounds like a bit of hyperbole
• Is there any more information of the session that developed her "beat driven sound"? It sounds like that was quite a formative part of her career so far
• "moonlighted as a waitress to make ends meet" - this is slightly informal. Maybe "earned her living as a waitress"?
• "The deal fell through due to conflicts with her existing contract with Dr. Luke's label." - this is a bit confusing, was she signed to two labels at once? It was pretty much implied that she had parted ways with Luke. I don't pretend to know much about the music industry, but it is a little confusing.

Image and artistry

• "Kesha has been noted for her party girl image" - noted by whom? This is kind of a sweeping statement that is just cited to one journalist for a gossip website.
• I think you need to make it clear that Kesha said her look is derived from "being poor". "Poor" is a relative term, and I think it needs to be clear that the word is hers. Having said that:
• "The look developed from her being poor and trying to brand herself as best she could on a budget." is a very close paraphrase of the source material. It needs to be reworded enough to avoid plagiarism, or directly quoted.

Sources

• What makes 21-7 magazine reliable?
• Ditto We Are Pop Slags?
• Ditto Hitz Only?
• There is a bare URL that needs more citation information
• There is a dead link that I've marked

• While it's important to avoid overlinking, there are some words (eg. people's names, album titles) that could do with being linked in the main article, after the lead.
• In general, the prose is probably good enough for WP:GAN. There are parts where it doesn't flow very well and I think it would benefit from being copyedited from someone as yet uninvolved in the article. It also sounds a little less than neutral in places, lots of mentions of "opportunities" and her being "sought after". I don't think it wildly violates WP:NPOV, just that the tone seems a little off at times. I'm not saying you need to introduce negative opinions that aren't there, but at the moment it reads as it written by someone who is a fan, and you shouldn't be able to tell.

I think the article's in pretty good shape and could be ready for WP:GAN soon. I think the main thing is to tighten up the prose a bit. If you have any questions, please let me know as I don't usually watch peer reviews. --BelovedFreak 21:18, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Further comment from Belovedfreak

Regarding the recent changes by Fixer23, they look good. One concern I have is this sentence: "Kesha and her music have been dismissed early on as lightweight, calculating and crude..." Firstly, purely a grammatical thing, "have been dismissed early on" doesn't sound quite right. I'd go with either "were dismissed early on as lightweight..." or "have been dismissed as lightweight..." Secondly, it's not clear who dismissed her as such. It seems to need some kind of attribution. I checked the reference that comes at the end of the sentence and see that it's from that article, but I don't know if maybe this should be reworded somehow to make that clear. I'm not sure how exactly. I see also that the party girl thing comes from that source. It's ok to mention it, it's just a matter of how it's worded. Perhaps you could frame it in a way that makes it clear it's from one interview. "In an interview for The Times, Kesha discussed comments from critics that..." blah blah etc, and then carry on into the quote that's currently used. Or whatever wording you like, but that would be my suggested structure.--BelovedFreak 11:49, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Remaining work to be done

I think I adressed most of the things listed above. I'm listing the things that have not been done so it's easier for someone else to step in and do what they have to do.

Lead

• The lead could be expanded a bit, it doesn't adequately summarise the rest of the article at the moment.

Sources

• What makes 21-7 magazine reliable?
• Ditto We Are Pop Slags?
• Ditto Hitz Only?
• There is a bare URL that needs more citation information
• In general, the prose is probably good enough for WP:GAN. There are parts where it doesn't flow very well and I think it would benefit from being copyedited from someone as yet uninvolved in the article. It also sounds a little less than neutral in places, lots of mentions of "opportunities" and her being "sought after". I don't think it wildly violates WP:NPOV, just that the tone seems a little off at times. I'm not saying you need to introduce negative opinions that aren't there, but at the moment it reads as it written by someone who is a fan, and you shouldn't be able to tell. Fixer23 (talk) 01:23, 4 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Bernard Bosanquet (cricketer)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it recently became a good article and I hope to take it to FAC. I'm particularly interested in how readable it is and if all the stuff about the googly is intelligible to non-cricketers.

Thanks, Sarastro1 (talk) 22:59, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I will review this piecemeal, as opportunities present themselves. I will also make small alterations in the text when these are obvious. Here are some comments on the lead and early life sections:-

Lead

• Your definition of a googly ("a delivery which looks like a leg break but is an off break") is a bit flat. The essence of the googly is that it deceives the batsman - could this be worked into the definition?

I've tried to do this, but it may be too convoluted now. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• Some broad indication of dates should be given to cover his Eton, Oxford and early Middlesex matches
• To say he "discovered a method of bowling a googly" suggests that the googly already existed and he found a way of bowling it. I would say "developed", and perhaps say "developed a method of bowling the ball later christened the 'googly'"
• "Bosanquet was now selected..." Give the dates for the Australian tour.
• "...when he bowled out Australia in the first Test of 1905, taking eight wickets in an innings". Language might confuse non-cricket people (who may read this because they remember Reggie). I'd neutralise it to, say "when his bowling led England to victory in the first Test against Australia in 1905".
• "From this point..." - not sure when "this" is.

All done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Early life

• "Many of Bosanquet's relations..." It's not clear if you mean Bernard Snr or Jun.

Not entirely sure it matters as they would all be related anyway! But made it Junior so that the next paragraph follows on without specifying which one it is. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• Subject should not be "he" in a new paragraph.

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 09:57, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Nice images, by the way Brianboulton (talk) 00:30, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

A bit more

Oxford University

• General point: this section has considerably more detail than is necessary. Half this length could adequately describe this stage of Bosanquet's career.

I've trimmed a little, but not quite sure which parts should come out, as I'd like a little about each of his seasons there and I think it is worth having his University Match scores as it was such a big occasion. But willing to change this. Suggestions would be appreciated! --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "In that match, he made his highest score of the season, an unbeaten 54. He had more success with the ball..." THe second sentence needs to separate itself from "that match", since his bowling success relates to the whole season

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Genesis

• I think "soft ball" used as an adjective requires a hyphen

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "By 1899, he regularly bowled in the nets during Oxford matches, bowling to the best opposing batsmen in the lunch break where he would bowl several leg breaks followed by an off break without changing his bowling action; this would often hit the unsuspecting batsman on the knee and was considered to be amusing for spectators". Somewhat odd; why did his captain allow this? For clarity I'd alter it slightly: "By 1899, during the lunch breaks in Oxford matches, he often practiced in the nets by bowling to the best opposing batsmen. He would deliver several leg breaks followed by an off break, without changing his bowling action; the ball would sometimes hit the unsuspecting batsman on the knee, which was considered to be amusing for spectators".

This is what Bosanquet says happened. It is a story told against himself as he finishes the anecdote with words to the effect of "and then they took me away and locked me up for the day." I read it as a bit of a gimmick, like a conjouring trick, that no-one thought much of, presumably no "star" batsmen encountered him here, and it was to entertain either themselves or spectators. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• Would it be appropriate here to mention that Australians call the googly a "bosie"? (Maybe you do later)

Mentioned later. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Regular use in County Cricket

• "He maintained his faster style of bowling but now began to bowl slow leg breaks" Needs an "also" or an "as well" somewhere.
• "in his thirteenth match and 23rd innings" This is somewhat irrelevant overdetailing
• "with a flourish" - POVish.
• Last sentence far too long. Suggest full stop after Wisden, then "It was the first time...", and "attracted" rather than "began to attract" ("first time that his new bowling style began to attract..." is very awkward phrasing).

All these done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• Last sentence: it's odd that he was afraid of alerting opponents to his new bowling when he was serving it up to them in the nets!

As I said, I imagine there were no important batsmen who faced him in the nets, but certainly Warner and MacGregor encountered him at some point before he became "famous". And possibly he stopped showing off once he realised he was on to something big. However, this is speculation completely unsupported by any source! If it looks too odd, I could simply take out the story about the nets, but I think it shows the development quite well. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Will keep at it. Brianboulton (talk) 23:40, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments so far. As ever, much appreciated. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Still more:-

Controversy in NZ

• Redlinking Whatman is overlinking. He was not a first-class cricketer.

Actually, he was. This tour was first-class, and he also took part in other first-class tours. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Hmmm. Good club cricketers often went along on these private tours. Who did Whatman play for, apart from private touring teams?

• I like the story. It would be good to know why Sims thought there was doubt about the dismissal - clean bowled is normally pretty unequivocal.

He was unsighted, like the umpires, which I've now added. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:02, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Recognition of the googly

• The "Gentlemen of Philadelphia" were a touring side, presumably
• "In the match at Scarborough..." What match was this? Also "made nine" won't be clear to non-cricketers
• The "However" in the second paragraph is unnecessary
  • All done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:07, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

M.C.C. tour of Australia

• General point: per my remarks on the Oxford section, I find this match-by-match approach to reporting the tour rather ponderous. Within a neutral encyclopedia article there are obvious limits to the language that can be employed to describe a player's performances, and so it all reads rather tediously. Do the minor matches have to be mentioned? Here are a few examples of what I would say was unnecessary overdetailing:-
  • "After the Test, Bosanquet took six wickets for 27 in a minor game against a team of Melbourne Juniors, going on to eight wickets in the match,[5] but remained in Melbourne with three other members of the side while the team travelled to Bendigo and played another minor match".
  • "...and he was still unfit to play in a minor game against Ballarat".
  • "Bosanquet then played in a minor match without achieving much with bat or ball".
• On a different point, "..., one wicket coming from a ball which bounced three times and was very wide". How was the dismissal effected - caught? bowled? other?
  • All the points above addressed and I've attempted to tighten the whole section a little more. Any other comments on it would be appreciated. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Sorry for the snail's pace review but it's all I can do at this time. Brianboulton (talk) 00:22, 10 December 2010 (UTC)

No problem. A slow, thorough review is much better than a quick, unhelpful one! --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:23, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

The last part

1904 season

• It reads a bit oddly when you say that 1904 was his best season with bat and ball, following with a string of batting failures. Perhaps some rephrasing in the inttroduction?
• "Yorkshire, who were second in the table..." Should this be "Yorkshire, who finished second in the table"?
• Is it worth drawing attention to the 1000 runs/100 wickets season's "double"
• Some numerics, e.g. ten, fourteen, should be numerics.

All done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:45, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

1905 season

• "He became the first player to score two centuries and take ten wickets in the same match; only two further players have since achieved the feat, as of October 2010." It should be clarified that this relates to first-cless cricket. A footnote identifying the other two players would be interesting.

Done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:55, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

• Do we know why he wasn't given a bowl in the Lord's Test? One would have imagined that in view of his success at Nottingham he would have been England's fourth bowling choice before E.G. Arnold. Any clues from Wisden?

Wisden doesn't even mention him in the Lord's report. It mentions his loss of form in the first Test report, so that is the only explanation I can think of. The other possibility (and Arnold was quite highly rated at this time and not a negligible bowler) is that the pitch was rain affected and maybe Bosanquet was not considered worth risking on a sticky wicket. But that is speculation and the soources say nothing. --Sarastro1 (talk) 22:55, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Later career

• "...scoring 1,081 runs and averaging 54.05, topping the first-class batting averages" Four "...ing" endings in quick succession. Try to rephrase

Style and technique

• The Wisden quote about him sending down more bad balls than any other front rank bowler has already been used, in the 1905 section
• Will the less-aware know what "driving" means in the cricket context? Is there a related link?

All the above done. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Personal life and legacy

• The Daily Mail was co-founded by the Harmsworth brothers, Alfred and Harold, later Lords Northcliffe and Rothermere respectively. I'm sure that Mary Janet Kennedy-Jones wasn't the daughter of either of these, so who was this mystery MP? We need a little more precision and clarity here.

ODNB is vague so I've taken it out and just left in about the MP. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

• We don't say "He left behind £2,276". We might say "He left "£2,276" or, better, "He left an estate valued at £2,276". I also think you are asking for trouble by converting this to a present-day value using the RPI. These conversions frequently cause arguments. You are not obliged to include them; if you do, my own view now is that you should be circumspect. Put the information in a footnote, along the lines of: "According to Masuringworth.com..." etc.

Took out conversion as the amount is not especially noteworthy. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

• Bosie or Bosey? (One of them was Oscar Wilde's boyfriend, I'm not sure which)

Times gives Bosey, but Bosie seems more common, so changed. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

Which concludes my review. Interesting article about a genuinly interesting cricketer, which with a little more work could easily be a featured article candidate. Brianboulton (talk) 13:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks again for the excellent review. --Sarastro1 (talk) 23:03, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Famine in India

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I would like to get feedback on what needs to be done before I nominate the article as a GA.

Thanks, Zuggernaut (talk) 19:08, 18 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

• Dablinks (tool in the box on the right of this peer review page) shows 2 disambiguation links; please fix them.  Fixed Whig link

• Checklinks show 1 dead link; please fix it. The link that requires subscription for access should also be noted to be one (e.g. format=subscription needed).

Lede

• Define what level of famines is this article on: nation-, state-wide, or both?  Fixed by Wikilinking South Asia

Ancient India

• "... who recommended that the good king ..."

  Who is this "good king"?  Changed article

• "Yet other measures included construction of public works, canals and embankments, sinking wells and even migration was encouraged."

  Grammatical issue: "The X included A, B, C, and D was encouraged." "D was encouraged" does not fit in with the overall sentence structure.  Broke sentence in to two

• "The stone and metal inscriptions provide information on several famines before the 16th century"

  This is a complete sentence and should be ended with a period. Since it is an item in a list of supposedly incomplete sentences, it should be rephrased into an incomplete sentence.

• "... in order to ..." is wordy compared to "... to ...". Done

• "In the Famine in the Deccan and Gujarat, ..."

  Why is famine capitalised here? Done

• "... caused equal ruin both in ..."

  At least one of these words is redundant. Done

• "While studying Indian Famine Codes, ..."

  What are Indian Famine Codes? Done

• "... bear a cultural bias regarding the causes of the famine because they "reflect the view of a handful of Englishmen.""

  Putting aside the issue of the long "snake" of a sentence that this clause is part of, I am curious why Florence Nightingale's efforts in trying to educate her countrymen about India's famines are disregarded here.[5][6] From the source provided (a university publication no less), her thinking was aligned with what is later presented. Why was her part glossed over here? Certainly, as a notable figure, her views would not be unheard; this does not fit in with the meaning (that the Englishmen were ignorant over the causes) I read behind the clause pointed out here. Note that the source (which should be stated as an essay by Brian Murton, and not a book by the editors Currey and Hugo) points the cultural bias to the government resources he was researching. In regards to the meteorological data, this university source pointed out that politics had some part to play in the data presented by the British government (and the policies implemented).[7]  Added Nightangle content, mentioned that Murton's comments are in an essay

British rule

• "... £60,000–1M."

  "M" is an informal abbreviation, more suited to newspapers than an encyclopaedia.[8]  Now using million

• "The 1901 Famine Commission found that twelve famines and four "severe scarcities" took place between 1765 and 1858."

  Unsourced. Provided source - Desai, Raychaudhuri, Kumar, 1983, page 477

• Please split up the super-huge paragraph; it makes reading tedious. In fact, there are several other passages of equal or greater length. Splitting them into smaller paragraphs would help ease the experience of the article's readers (I am not reviewing content in detail from this point on partly because of this). Large paragraphs have now been split in to smaller ones

• Why is File:Indian Rupee symbol.svg used in place (inline) of Indian rupees? How is it avoiding all the issues presented in Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Avoid entering textual information as images?  Now using INR

• "According to Cormac Ó Gráda, ..."

  Who is Cormac? What credentials does he have to vouch for him as an expert for what he is to say? The same goes for the other quoted names without credentials.  Added credentials for O Grada and Murton

• Why is "1800 - 1825" using spaced hyphen?  No longer uses a spaced hyphen

British response

• "Policies of laissez faire were ..."

  Why is laissez faire not in italics here whereas they were in the previous section?  It's in italics now

• There is a [dubious – discuss] tag. Removed dubious claim as the discussion on the talk page hasn't yielded results

Infrastructure development

• Why is there an Infobox for the National Bank for Agriculture and Rural Development when it has its own article and infobox?

• "... total credit of <graphic symbol for rupee>33,994 crore ..."

  Rupee or crore (what is a crore?), which is it?  "Crore" is an Indian unit and it's coming from the {{INRConvert|33994|c}} template.

Maharashtra famine

• "'famine'"

  Why single quote marks?  Removed quotes

• "‘The Maharashtra Deletion Of The Term “Famine” Act, 1963”"

  What is with the mismatched curly quote marks? Fixed per Wikipedia:Mos#Quotation_marks.5BR.5D

Other issues

• "... if further action wasn't taken ..."

  What is with the contraction?  Changed to "was not" in two places

Sources

• Why are the BiblioBazaar-published sources listed twice?  Duplicate sources were already removed in an earlier edit

• BiblioBazaar is a reprinter of public domain sources.[9][10] Listing their publications without showing their original publication dates can be misleading and brings up the question of why are more modern sources not used (especially in light that these BibilioBazaar sources are used for figures, and that Google Books show 487,000 hits for "famine India"[11])?

• The Cambridge world history of food has volumes.[12] Where is "VI.4: Famine" located?  Volume and page numbers have now been provided

Images  Contacted original up-loaders of the image

• File:Kalinga.GIF

  What is the base map? Is it a public domain map or created from pure geographical data? See commons:Commons:Image casebook#Maps and satellite images.

• File:India-famine-family-crop-420.jpg

  Fails WP:CITE#IMAGE: where is this "chinadaily"? Where did it state "british royal photography services"?

• File:Madras famine 1877.jpg

  Fails WP:CITE#IMAGE: is it scanned from a personal copy or taken from a website? Furthermore, Illustrated London News does not feature a Famine in India piece on May 26, 1877,[13] so of what origin is this image?

• File:India-rail-1870.png

  Fails WP:CITE#IMAGE: Where was this published? When was it published? When did Brereton died?

• File:Famine in India Natives Waiting for Relief in Bangalore.jpg

  It is not indicated why this is in the US and UK public domain (for this image to be on Commons). While one can satisfy the US requirement with {{PD-1923}}, the UK copyright status is less clear. If it was a young engraver, say 18-20 years old in 1877 and he lived to 90, that would mean the 70-year-pma commence from 1950 and ends in 2020s. PD-UK-unknown requires "reasonable enquiry", which means one has to ask the current owner of Illustrated London News if they have records of who the engraver is and check the issue for signs of whether the artist was indicated elsewhere. This would have been better uploaded to Wikipedia instead...

I also believe getting a copy-editor could help tighten and smooth the prose of the article. Jappalang (talk) 02:58, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Marion Carpenter

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have added material and think it is now ready for B class.

Thanks, Jrcrin001 (talk) 00:05, 19 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Gbern3

Thank you for listing this article for peer review. In general, this article isn't written poorly it just needs more citations. There are several statements/quotes that have no source given. I have listed examples below. Also, most of the references are either dead or have been moved so they no longer support the statements in the article. The only references that work are 1, 3, 6, and 7. Note: In the review below I use the words source, citation, and reference interchangeably.

Lead  Done

• Please expand the WP:LEAD. The first sentence is fine since it explains why Carpenter is important. However, the purpose of the lead is to summarize the article so it should be longer. The article isn't too big so the lead doesn't need to be any longer than two paragraphs.

Infobox  Done

• In the caption, there needs to be a comma in between Carpenter's name and the year. Also, it would be nice to expand the caption under the photo to state where the picture was taken (if known).
• "natural causes" and "cremated" are lowercase but "Photographer" and "Nurse" are uppercase. Use the same case for all entries so that the infobox is uniform
• "Ground breaking" is WP:PEACOCK (bias). Change it to something factual but less flashy such as "Presidential", something to that effect. It's a fact and it still sounds important.
• "Press Photographer" doesn't need to be capitalized in the infobox because it is not a title, it's a job position.

Family  Done

• This sentence --> Carpenter was the daughter of Harry Carpenter who was born in Avery County, North Carolina, and Lillian B. Marion. needs a source
• Ref 2 needs to be replaced. It has been moved or deleted so the text that was there to back up the statement you cited is now gone.
• Is anything else know about her family? This section is pretty small. It would probably be better to merge it with "Early career".

Early career  Done

• Per WP:EL, external links such as St Paul Camera Club should be used in the external links section and only if they are "relevant to an encyclopedic understanding of the subject."
• The following three statements need references --> She also was a nurse... She went to Washington D.C. when she was about 24, and landed a job with the Times-Herald before switching to the International News Photos syndicate. Carpenter was 5 foot 5 inches tall..."
• I think it would be best if you took these sentences out Carpenter was 5 foot 5 inches tall with long curly hair and a big warming smile. This had an impact on males in Washington who did not yet know her.[1][2] primarily because your second ref is dead and your first ref does not back up this claim. Also because these sentences do not tell the reader why this was important in her early career or why she was notable for being pretty. If she slept her way to success then this would be relevant but since she actually worked and because your references don't support those sentences, I think the article would be better without them.  moved

Press photo career  Done

• Per WP:HEAD only the first word of a section heading should be capitalized. The other words should be lowercase.
• While with the International News Photos syndicate she lobbied for the and won the White House job. This sentence is missing a reference. Also, ref 1 does not say she lobbied for the job --> "She won the White House job as a photographer for the International News Photos syndicate."
• Over the next five or six years she became a favorite of U.S. President Harry S Truman and made her mark in Washington as a photographer of talent and temperament.[1][2] Your refs don't say that she was Truman's favorite or that she had talent and temperament. Those adjectives are also WP:PEACOCK.
• You have a plagiarism issue in your article --> Article statement: As the first female member of the White House News Photographers' Association, she was the only woman among a handful of "official" presidential photographers who traveled with President Harry Truman and covered him daily.[4] Source (from ref 1): Carpenter was one of the first women in the White House News Photographers Association. She was the only woman among a handful of photographers who traveled with Truman. Click here to understand why this is plagiarism.  Fixed
• The link for ref 4 was moved/deleted and is now gone
• This needs a reference --> Carpenter became known as the "Camera Girl" and the "Photographer Girl" in Washington circles. And she didn't take being condescended to by the "old men's club" in Washington. When Tris Coffin, a columnist for the then 'Washington Times-Herald' claimed in print that she was using her "feminine charms to persuade politicians to pose for her camera" in March 1949, Carpenter got even. She drenched him with a big bowl of navy bean soup as another photographer was on hand to get the picture.
• Needs a reference --> Whether it was from love or a desire to further her career, Carpenter had a love affair with a married man who promised to elevate her career. When this affair was exposed, her career ended prematurely in Washington, D.C.
• The link that ref 5 points to has also been moved/deleted, doesn't support the sentence it serves as a citation for.

Later career  Done

• The following needs a source --> She returned to St. Paul where she worked as a nurse and later opened a wedding photography business. She raced homing pigeons and showed German shepherds. She supported her mother until her death in the 1970s, and her son John. In 1968, her son John received a diploma from Harding High School, then became involved in criminal activities. He left home at age 19 and Carpenter never saw him again. John R. Anderson (4 Apr 1950 – 14 Oct 1997), her son, died in Minnesota. Nothing is known about his life.

Death  Done

• These sentences need source(s) --> Carpenter died of natural causes in a small, crowded and older St. Paul, Minnesota house on Margaret Street. She was nearly destitute, and alone at the age of 82, except for her Rottweiler, Karl. Karl's mourning alerted a friend to check on her welfare. Carpenter was found on her couch "bundled up tightly" because of a lowered thermostat. <--This sentence really needs one because of the quotes. She had no family contacts listed, and most of her friends were only acquaintances she had made in local thrift shops and garage sales which she frequented.

Legacy  Done

• You have a copyright issue because you're missing a citation on this statement from ref 1 --> One of those photos, which showed Truman striding uphill toward the Washington Monument, bears the message: "It's good exercise if you keep it up, but not for high-heeled shoes, Miss Carpenter." Also, all quoted statements should always have a source.  Fixed
• Needs a citation, has a quote -->Even when she climbed a ladder to the top of the Capitol dome to take a picture almost 300 feet above ground in a skirt, newsmen found it hard to just be nice. A front-page photo of her, high on the ladder, was captioned: "This picture ought to prove you never can tell what a woman photographer will do next."
• External links such as "Seneca Competitor View" and "Rollei-Werke Franke and Heidecke" should be put in the external links section per WP:EL.
• Most histories of pioneering female journalists don't mention Marion Carpenter. This is a WP:WEASEL statement so it needs a source.

1946 pictures  Done

• Please spell out "WHNPA". What does this mean?
• Photographer and last need to be capitalized in "The photographers Friend" and "The last Mile" since it's a title.
• The president, gracious, as usual, poses for the “Just one more.” He added, “Photographers have to make a living too.” Quotes need a source. Gracious is bias so it's WP:PEACOCK.

References  Done

• Please use citation templates when citing sources so that your references look the same and are formatted correctly.
• The biography portal box should be moved to the external links section since it's an external link and not a reference.

External links  Done

• The section heading is spelled incorrectly.
• You do not have to format external links the same way you format references. The link itself is fine. See the Nick Ut article for an example.

I hope these suggestions are helpful. If you have any comments/questions leave a message on my talk page. //Gbern3 (talk) 14:14, 29 November 2010 (UTC)

Thank You! Thank You! I have incorporated most of the above already in the article on Marion Carpenter. As time permits, I will fix an item or two. Her son reportedly died and I had listed him as: John R. Anderson (4 Apr 1950 – 14 Oct 1997) - but some one claiming to be her son came forward to claim her estate. Until that is figured out, I am not mentioning him other than what can be properly documented. Jrcrin001 (talk) 05:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Christina Aguilera

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that it needs a lot of improvements. I have been working on it, but I need some specifics needed changing and such. Thanks you so much! ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 03:01, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

CrowzRSA comments

• "Biography" should be changed to "Music career" or "Career" N It does not only contain information about her career, it has has information about her marriage, relationships, and the birth of her child.
• The fact you use headings beginning with "1980–1997:" and stuff, may fail WP:HEAD. To be safe, I would use the style of something like "(1980–1997)" at the end of the section words. (i.e. "Early life and career beginnings (1980–1997)". Not sure what you mean about it failing WP:HEAD.
• Aguilera has often cited that she prefers working with producers that other artists haven't approached haven't is a contradiction. Y Reworded.
• There is inconsistency between the use of "program" and "programme" (this is mainly in the "Philanthropy" section).  Done
• often nicknamed Xtina I've never seen "nicknamed" in an article really. "Alias" would be a little more uhh professional I guess kinda. Y Removed.
• Aguilera was born in Staten Island, New York Since Staten Island is a Borough of New York City, it should be noted as so (and NYC should be linked)  Done
• Aguilera lived with her father and mother until she was seven years old. Aguilera grew up hearing Spanish and thus understands the language.[24] When Aguilera's parents divorced, her mother took her, and her younger sister Rachel, to her grandmother's home in Rochester, Pennsylvania, a town outside of Pittsburgh. "Aguilera grew up hearing Spanish and thus understands the language" kinda came out of nowhere, since the sentences surrounding it are about her parents. This should be moved. Also, In the first sentence, tell that her parents were divorced.  Done
• Why isn't "Stripped" linked in songs I'm OK" on Stripped, and "Oh Mother" on Back to Basics. Same goes for "Back to Basics"  Done
• and changed her name. insert "has" between "and" and "changed"  Done
• Periods should be inside quotations (i.e. "hey man, shut up". to "hey man, shut up.") This is not the same for song names. Both "Fuck Tha Police." "Fuck Tha Police". are fine.
• Link gym class  Done
• Wake Up with Larry Richert With should be capitalized.  Done

• I'll do some more reviewing tomorrow. CrowzRSA 03:46, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you so much. ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT (talk · contribs) 04:20, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• Disney should be linked
• Recording "Reflection" led to Aguilera earning a contract with RCA Records the same week reword.
• I don't think "Best Original Song" needs quotes.
• There is inconsistency between the use of US and U.S.
• Released during the teen pop era of 1999 the album comma after 1999
• She ended the year on MTV's New Year's Special, as she performed and was MTV's first artist of the millennium. reword
• Single should be linked single (music)
• There is inconsistency between the use of spelling out numbers and typing them
• [14] (ref 59) got screwed up
• Kelly Clarkson's second single "Miss Independent" was co-written by Aguilera, having been half-finished for Stripped. reference?
• In late summer 2004, Aguilera released two singles. The first, "Car Wash", was a remake of the Rose Royce disco song recorded as a collaboration with rapper Missy Elliott for the soundtrack to the film Shark Tale. She voiced a small singing part in the film playing a Rastafarian jellyfish in the film's closing musical number. The second song was also a collaboration, but this time as a second single from one of Nelly's double-release albums, Sweat, titled "Tilt Ya Head Back". Both singles failed commercially in the U.S., but did considerably better in other parts of the world. There's nothing verifying this.
• TAKE NOTE if there are any deadlinks (there are now 14 according to [15]) it will fail the second decree of the GA criteria

• That's about half the article. CrowzRSA 02:48, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Novice7 comments

• Link check — 14 dead links Link

I'll review more after reading through the article. Novice7 Talk 04:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Alright. But I'm not sure how to go about getting rid/fixing dead links. Do I just remove the content the link was from all together, or...? I re-cached it, and the links were either removed or fixed. Link ΣПDiПG–STΛЯT 04:26, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

• Still... See this. There are two dab links too.
• In the section 1998—2001, if you could mention how she was chosen for recording "Reflection", it'd be good.
• " It reached the top of the Billboard 200" – United States or US Billboard 200.
• "within the teen-oriented dance-pop genre, but done right." Concluding.. – is a period needed?

I'll write more later. Novice7 Talk 09:22, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Candyo32 comments

• I haven't the time to conduct a through review, but I from a quick look the only things I could tell would be

There could be an "Image" (similarly here or "Legacy" (similarly here section which could include things like the change from the teen idol to "Dirrty" phase, the 2009-2010 Gaga comparisons, and her status as a LGBT icon.

The Philanthropy section can get a bit redundant, limit as much as you could.Candyo32 05:24, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

---

The Autobiography of Malcolm X

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I need the insight of uninvolved editors to further improve the article in preparation for FAC.

Thanks, — GabeMc (talk) 23:00, 21 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments This is an important book that certainly deserves an FA article, but I don't think it's there yet. The comments below are not meant to be exhaustive, but I think I've identified a few structural problems that can be found throughout the article.

• Section title “Summary of material” should be shortened to “Summary”.
• Delete first sentence and begin with “The book …” of the book’s title.
• In the summary I think you should follow the book in calling him Malcolm Little until he changes his name.
• “which” is used after a comma; otherwise use “that” (as in the first sentence of graf two).
• The second sentence in that graph should swap with the first, because you’ve already told us it’s more than a simple narrative. In general, write from the general to the specific.
• It’s a good idea to avoid terms such as “According to ...” Begin the sentence with the speaker and then say what she said, as in, “Robin Kelley, professor of history, American studies, and ethnicity at the University of Southern California, calls the Autobiography a didactic essay…”
• Also avoid the passive voice.
• Scholars don’t “affirm” the opinions of other scholars; they “agree”. The entire Arthur Rampersad sentence needs to be reworked; don’t be afraid of breaking long sentences up when to do would make the idea clearer.
• And use direct verbs. Stone doesn’t “draw a comparison to the Icarus myth”; he “compares it to the Icarus myth.”
• In the next section, I would change the sentence, “Haley's contribution to the work is unique . . .” to something like “Haley's role in putting the book together is unprecedented in biography …”, that is, if you can find a source that states it as such. I’m sure there must be, because as it is written the diction is awkward and vague.
• And again, scholars don’t confirm opinions.
• “Haley exercised discretion” should be the beginning of a new graf.
• You’ve got some grammar problems in the next section. One that sticks out is the cock-eyed parallel construction in sentence 2: “to his subject, his publisher, to his "editor's agenda", and to himself.” Also some diction problems, such as “neither Haley's nor Malcolm X's voice is as strong as it could be in order to allow readers to insert themselves into the broader socio-psychological narrative.” I know what you’re trying to say, but you’re not there yet. Again, try to simplify and be precise in your diction.
• Mix up your sentence constructions. It is deadening to read a lot of “X says that Y” sentences over and over. A few “Y, says X” would relieve the monotony. That entire section seems disjointed with no clear theme. Also some of the material in that section would better go into the next section about Haley and Malcolm X’s collaboration.
• Actually, I think you should throw out about half the critical comments. It appears that you wanted to include every critic that said anything about the book, and reading critical jargon for so long makes for a dull experience, especially since a lot of what they say is repeating what another critic said, such as Haley’s unique role. A reader of the article is going to want to know more about the book than what academics said about it. What about its influence on the public and later political readers? Surely it influenced more people than academics.
• All the refs need periods, not just some of them.
• All in all, I enjoyed reading the article and I think you’re on the right track, but I don’t think it’s up to FA standards yet. (It had a tremendous impact on my life when I first read it in 1968 or so, about the same time I read Soul on Ice, but it was several years before I knew about Haley’s role, since I was so young when I read it. Richard Wright’s Black Boy also had a big impact, especially since I read it when I was 10.) Tom Reedy (talk) 04:14, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your time and effort Tom Reedy, I am doing my best to incorporate all your suggestions but to be frank, a few went over my head. I am sure you are busy, but if you have the time, the article could use a copy edit from someone with your eye for detail. — GabeMc (talk) 03:13, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

---

American Kestrel

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's passed a thorough GA review, and I'm hoping to take it to FA eventually but I want to see what can be improved first. Any comments or suggestions are greatly appreciated.

Thanks, —focus 04:08, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Casliber

I might try and hunt up some stuff tomorrow if I get time. Casliber (talk · contribs) 13:49, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• Comprehensiveness - how do the subspecies differ from one another? Need some notes on each.
• Closest relatives within the genus Falco, there are several kestrel species around the world...

Comments from Jimfbleak

I've added a ref for linnaeus and for vagrancy Jimfbleak - talk to me? 15:09, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

• lead is too short, nothing on habitat, status, falconry
• This was due to a mistaken connection with the Eurasian Sparrowhawk in the genus Accipiter. up to 1983? Really? Can we have a ref for this please? Presumably the Peregrine, or Duck Hawk was mistaken for a duck (;
• Since all raptors are protected in the United States, it is illegal to possess one there without a permit — parochial if you are not giving status elsewhere
• egg size needs US units conversion
• Any specific predators? Any parasites?
• The taxonomy doesn't really mention the relationships within Falco. The kestrel article, for example , casts doubt on whether it's really a kestrel at all
• I'm not happy about giving url links to abstracts. The doi does this, and to put the url gives the impression that you are going to get the full text, when it's just a commercial sales site. A bit spammy
• The southeastern U.S. subspecies (Falco sparverius paulus) has declined 82% since 1940 ...Despite this, the American Kestrel is classed as Least Concern on the IUCN Red List. — Parochial given its huge range
• In a study, humans accounted for — sigh another url-linked ref that goes to a registration page only unless you pay, please mark refs like these subscription only. Please give the area covered by the study, since it seems improbable for Central and South America
• Population: The North American population has been estimated at 1.2 million pairs, with the Central and South American populations being as large. I can't access the pretend url, but this says The North America population is estimated to exceed 4,000,000 birds and comprise 75% of the global population. Why the discrepancy?

Comments from MeegsC

• One of my bugbears is a photo caption that doesn't really give the reader any useful information — like "A young bird in the sun". Is there really nothing more enlightening that we could impart here? How about "Kestrels typically hunt from a perch, waiting for prey to come close before striking." (or something of that ilk) Draw potential readers in to the article by engaging their curiosity! MeegsC | Talk 15:13, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
• Needs non-breaking spaces between all numbers and units — including hours, weeks, days, etc.
• This is fairly North American centric; there's very little about the non-migratory populations in Central and South America. (e.g. how is mate selection done there? what are survival rates like? any population data? declining due to pesticide use, etc.? how do northern migrants interact with local southern residents?)
• A good number of the referenced journal articles that you've pointed to are available for free reading/download at SORA archive (Searchable Ornithological Research Archive). Condor, Auk, Wilson Bulletin, Journal of Field Ornithology, etc. are all available there. It would be a better option to use these urls rather than the ones you're currently using.

Comments from Jimmy Pitt

• In the opening sentence, Western Hemisphere is an imprecise geographical description for a bird whose normal range only extends across the Americas.
• There's what appears to be a contradiction in the "Reproduction" section -- pair bonds are strong, often permanent immediately follows the female selects a mate (with its implication that this takes place each year on arrival at the breeding ground). Jimmy Pitt talk 11:54, 3 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Henry J. Wood

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have listed this article for peer review because I've read widely and distilled what I have found and would now be glad of other editors' comments for refining the article to get it up to FAC level. Henry Wood was not one of music's glamour boys, but what he did for music in Britain was incomparable, and he deserves the best article possible.

Thank you, Tim riley (talk) 17:52, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Comment: It would certainly improve the article if the shortened footnotes would have been formatted with either the {{sfn}} or the {{harvnb}} template. That would make it much easier for the reader to find the cited work. --Eisfbnore (talk) 18:30, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

I must disagree with Eisfbnore's comments. I have the same problem with these templates that I have with others. To edit them, you have to have specialized knowledge, which would make it harder for many editors to edit the article. -- Ssilvers (talk) 04:21, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

And I must disagree with yours' Ssilvers, thus supporting Eisfbnore's comments. The {{harvnb}} template is indeed extremely useful while using book references and certainly improves upon the whole look and feel of an article. I strongly recommend using them. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:16, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

(More) With these two edits, I have shown how to incorporate the Harvard template. It is very easy and the effect is astounding. — Legolas ^(talk2me) 10:23, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

One does not need to be an expert to applicate the {{harv}} templates, it took five seconds for me (while being a newbie) to learn how to use them. They do—just as the {{cite}} templates—give a consistent style throughout this encyclopedia, where users don't have to "mirror" the major constributor's format of referencing. The syntax is quite simple, and is even explained at Template:Harvard citation#Usage. Eisfbnore (talk) 12:08, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Interesting. I'll certainly consider this for future articles. Tim riley (talk) 18:04, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

• Comments. This is a nice article on a subject that certainly deserves to be an FA. One of the toughest things at FAC I think is the level of detail to which articles are scrutinised. The citation issue has been addressed by others above, so I'll just add a few other things here that may need some attention:
  • "The series was successful, and Wood conducted further annual promenade series until his death in 1944, gradually changing the balance of classical and popular music until they became wholly classical in the 1920s." By the time we get to the "they" in "they became wholly clasical" the subject, "the series", is so far distant it might as well be given its own postcode. Also, "the series" is regarded as singular at the startof the sentence ("the series was"), but becomes plural later ("they became wholly classical").
    • Yes. (I'm still chuckling at the "postcode" gag.) Done. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • "Wood senior had been a member of his family's pawnbroking business ...". How can you be a member of a business?
    • Seems idiomatic to me, but I've redrawn. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • "... a member of his family's pawnbroking business, but by the time of his son's birth he had set up business as a jeweller". "Business ... business".
    • Done.
  • "Wood senior sang as principal tenor in the choir of St Sepulchre-without-Newgate, known as 'the musicians' church', and also played the cello". What is "also" telling us here that "and" isn't already telling us?
    • Good point. Done. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I'd suggest putting the two images in the Early years section side-by-side rather than one on top of the other.
    • Will do. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
      • And now done. Tim riley (talk) 20:43, 29 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I'd suggest switching the alignment of the two images in Early years of the Proms section so that each is looking into the page rather than out of it.
    • Problem about that is that the first image is, and should be, at the top of the section, and I believe we are not allowed to have pictures on the left at the start of sections. Fortunately, both faces are, though not quite full-on to the camera, at least looking at it, so are not actually staring away from the page. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
      • I think there used to be a MoS guideline that sub-sections ought not to start with a left-aligned image, but there no longer is. It's no big deal either way though. Malleus Fatuorum 13:09, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • There's a {{cquote}} in the Early twentieth century section and another in the Honours, memorials and reputation section, but cquotes should only be used for pullout quotes.
    • I didn't know that. Thank you. I've corrected. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
  • I'm not fond of splitting the Notes section into columns as I think it makes it harder to read, but that's just a personal preference.
    • I'll see what others (if any) say on this. I am wholly neutral in the matter.
• Overall I think this would stand a very good chance at FAC with just a little but of tidying up. Malleus Fatuorum 21:48, 27 November 2010 (UTC)
  • Thank you very much for these points. I agree with most of them and have addressed accordingly. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: First few sections. Many of these can be taken as suggestions which you may or may not wish to adopt.

Lead

• Not completely happy with the single-sentence first paragraph which I think doesn't say enough.
  • I've followed your suggestions as noted below. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• Perhaps, instead of "best known for his association with", say "who dedicated the greater part of his professional life to"
  • Wood's ghost would haunt me if I said that. He was wont to point out that the Proms were not the greater part of his professional life ("I often wonder what they think I do for the other ten months of the year")
• Rather than just "London's promenade concerts", say "London's annual season of promenade concerts".
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• I also recommend adding stuff from the third paragraph, along he lines: "He introduced hundreds of new works to British audiences; after his death the concerts were officially renamed in his honour as the "Henry Wood Promenade Concerts".
  • Done Tim riley (talk)
• In the third paragraph the word "further" is probably redundant. Also, the pronoun in "gradually changing the balance of classical and popular music until they became wholly classical in the 1920s" is inspecific, and should be replaced by "the concerts".
  • Redrawn Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Early years

• One minor grammar/style concern: it always reads awkwardly when a paragraph begins with a participle, as in "Attending services at St Sepulchre, Wood received little religious inspiration..." I suggest you turn the sentence round: "Wood received little religious inspiration from attending services at St Sepulchre,..."
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Opera

• When did Wood leave the RAM?
  • Done. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• In the listing of operas, why is La fille du régiment given in English translation, but not Il trovatore?
  • The company's own practice. The Carl Rosa gave all operas in English, but retained a few untranslated titles, such as Trovatore, Traviata, Der Rosenkavalier and Così fan Tutte. The ENO still does the same. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• "This was followed by a similar engagement for former Carl Rosa singers who had set up a company of their own.[23]" Unclear, a bit wordy. Does it mean: "This appointment was followed by a similar engagement with a company which former Carl Rosa singers had set up."?
  • It does. Done. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• "Lago disappeared" - a trifle melodramatic, even paranormal? Would it be more factual to say he "absconded"?
  • I wondered that when writing the para, but to me "absconded" suggests stealing the takings as well as doing a runner, and I have not seen any evidence of such criminal conduct by Lago - he simply legged it, it seems. I wasn't thrilled with "disappeared", but couldn't and can't think of a better word. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
    • Later - I find that the OED doesn't justify my earlier comment. "intr. To hide oneself; to flee into hiding, or to an inaccessible place; to leave hurriedly and secretly, typically to elude a creditor, escape from custody, or avoid arrest." I have redrawn accordingly. Tim riley (talk) 11:40, 2 December 2010 (UTC)
• "He conducted only one more operatic season during the rest of his career." Maybe indicate when/where.
  • Done. A rather stronger ending to the para now - thank you. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

Early years of the Proms

• The prose in the opening sentences doesn't quite flow. Passive voice - who appointed Wood as musical adviser? Who was giving the Wagner concerts? What aspects of Wagner's duties impressed Newman? And "was proposing to run" rather than "proposed to run"?
  • Rewritten to make all plain. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• The sentence beginning "Sullivan's concerts in the 1870s..." needs to be split - too long.
  • Decidedly! Done. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• Was it the first of Newman's proposed concerts that Cathcart proposed to sponsor?
  • The whole of the first season. I've added a sentence to make this clear. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• Suggest link ensemble?
  • Done. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)
• "remained common" or "become common" (the latter if the new layout became general).
  • Done. (I restrained myself from elaborating on this, but Sir Adrian Boult disapproved of the new layout, and like Toscanini, Monteux, Klemperer and others he insisted on dividing his violins left and right. The glamour boys like Beecham and Karajan went for Wood's layout. Nowadays the Authenticke lobby agree with Boult and Toscanini, and split the fiddles left and right.) Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

More to come later. Brianboulton (talk) 23:02, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

• Grateful for these most helpful comments - many thanks. Looking forward to more in due course. Tim riley (talk) 10:50, 28 November 2010 (UTC)

More

Early twentieth century

• Drop the "DR" from Cathcart
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• The image caption should be made more explicit, since this is a painting rather than a regular portrait.
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• Suggestion: "Later in the year, during the 1902 Proms season, Wood's health, taxed by his enormous workload, broke down." Shortish sentence subdivided into 5 tiny bites. It could be: "During the 1902 Proms season later in the year, Wood's health broke down, taxed by his enormous workload."
  • Redrawn Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• An awkward "they" in "but in the same year they passed up..."
  • It was really Newman's fault, so I've redrawn blaming him. Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• There is a link available for the hornpipe
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

World War I and post-war

• The Orga quote sould use "[Wood]" rather than "he"
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• "Thomas Beecham had since around 1910 been..." - a tortured arrangement. Try: "Since around 1910 Thomas Beecham had been..."
  • Redrawn Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• The sentence "The 1918 offer from Boston was not Wood's last opportunity to conduct in the U.S" is not really necessary. This quite long and comprehensive article doesn't need extra padding.
  • Done Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

BBC and the Proms

• What were the "collaborations" with Bartok and Hindemith?
  • Footnote added. Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
• Could "Mahler's vast Symphony of a Thousand" be identified as his 8th?
  • As I typed it I thought, "Brianboulton won't be having with that." Duly changed. Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Recordings

• "...the Gramophone and Typewriter Company, better known as His Master's Voice or HMV." Would it be more accurate to say "which became better known..."?
  • Not sure. Will check and amend if needed. Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Later: by a happy coincidence the company's releases were known as HMVs from the year of Wood's first recordings, viz 1908 (having been known as G&Ts hitherto - I don't mind if I do!) Tim riley (talk) 22:52, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

I hope these comments are helpful. Nothing from the remaining sessions. This is a most interesting biography of a man of whom I have always felt I ought to know more, and now I do. Brianboulton (talk) 00:23, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

• Most valuable comments, received with warm thanks. And very pleased you found it interesting. Tim riley (talk) 14:36, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

• Images Very interesting article and well-done. A good mix of images, but four of them are looking off the page. I would suggest you swap the sides of those four. Tom Reedy (talk) 13:28, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for this. Kind comments much appreciated. I've switched as suggested. Tim riley (talk) 18:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Ion Creangă

This peer review discussion has been closed.
At the lowest reaches of Special:Longpages (#998 ranking at this edit), I came across this profile of a Romanian children's writer. Should be GA-ready soon, and made the rounds at WP:Did you know last August.

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 23:36, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

I note here that you have never made an edit to this article. It's a huge article, more than 135 kilobytes long, with 256 citations, quite a few of which are in Romanian. It would better if the main contributor, User:Dahn, requested a review, because he or she would be in the best position to make changes based on a reviewer's recommendations. That said, the article seems quite impressive on a quick read. Here is a very short and incomplete list of superficial things that need attention:

• Nothing should be redlinked more than once in the article. Some are, Cartea Românească and The Story of the Pig, for example.

• The tools in the toolbox at the top of this review page find three dead links in the citations.

• Page ranges take en dashes rather than hyphens. I ran a script to fix these.

• I'd suggest trying to get the article down to 100 kilobytes by one method or another. Reader fatigue sets in when articles get as long as this one.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 00:23, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Killing Is My Business... and Business Is Good!

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because in the past PRing has been quite helpful, and I am trying to get the album to GA quality. I have made major revisions to it since I started working on it, from when it used to look like this this.

Thanks, Bruce Campbell (talk) 21:27, 27 November 2010 (UTC)(talk)

GreatOrangePumpkin comments

• RELEASE AND PROMOTION: and stayed with the band upto the recording should be "up to"

If I find something more, I'll tell you.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 21:21, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

Media

• File:Last Rites-Loved to Death demo sample.ogg

  What is the significance of this media? To qualify for fair use on Wikipedia, all ten criteria of WP:NFCC must be fulfilled. Specifically, what contextual significance of this sample is there? Where in the article is there critical commentary about the music sample and how does listening to this sample help readers understand the commentary? This purpose should be explained on the image page as part of the Fair use rationale.

• File:500px Killing(Remastered).jpg, File:Combat KIMB.jpg

  Choose one of the two to qualify as identifying art, but unless there is substantial critical commentary on the other that requires the image to help readers understand it, the other image should go. How it aids the critical commentary should be explained as part of the Fair use rationale on the image page.

• File:Combat KIMB.jpg

  Fails WP:CITE#IMAGE. Where was this image obtained? Furthermore, who is the copyright owner?

Sources

I am not going to comment on contents because frankly, there is a lot of problems with the sources used as follow (it would not help to comment on the content if they have to be removed):

• The lyrics page on megadeth.rockmetal.art.pl should not be linked per WP:LINKVIO; it is a copyright violation, reprinting the entire song lyrics without permission and not in fair use (with critical commentary).

• The same goes for the interview (which is not published by the site); it is a copyright violation, transcribed from a copyrighted publication. If the article is to be referred, find and cite the actual publication.

• http://www.bravewords.com/news/142370 does not back up "After unsuccessfully searching for a vocalist for nearly six months, Mustaine decided to handle lead vocal duties himself, while also serving as the band's primary lyricist, main songwriter, and co-lead and rhythm guitarist." More precisely, the page does not state that Mustaine made the decision, or that it was done after a 6-month unsuccessful search for a vocalist.

• How does sputnik.com, a "community-driven music site where our users write and submit album reviews and more" qualify as a reliable source?[16]

• Friedalive.com should not be linked to: it provides unauthorised rips of the records and thus falls foul of WP:LINKVIO. Furthermore, what makes it a reliable source?

• What makes vinylrecords.ch, avaxhome.ws, tartareandesire.com, metalstorm.net, Opendb.net reliable sources?

• How are Mveers, a user on a community site,[17] and blogger Demonicmatta of blogspot.com recognised experts on the subject?

• Why are deadtree sources ignored? Google books show 116 results. There should be a few gems among them that provide information such as "sales of 30,000 according to Relativity Entertainments' president Barry Kobrin, and SPIN's less than enamoured reception of the album. Look through the results. There should be more on Proquest and other news archive sites as well.

Please refer to Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-07-28/Dispatches and Wikipedia:Wikipedia Signpost/2008-06-26/Dispatches on how reliable sources can be determined. Jappalang (talk) 08:21, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

List of Manchester United F.C. players (25–99 appearances)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that it should almost be ready for Featured List standard. It is the second of three Manchester United player articles (which are split up due to size), the first of which is already a featured list. This follows a similar format.

Thanks, 03md 21:12, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: The list looks good to me, although I know virtually nothing about association football. I have a few suggestions about matters of prose, style, and layout.

Lead

• "when they entered the First Round" - Should this be "first round" without caps?

• "The club won its first significant trophy in 1908 - the First Division title." - Rather than using a hyphen here, I would suggest rewriting. Suggestion: "The club won its first significant trophy, for its First Division title, in 1908."
  • The division name was First Division and it is used until today to describe that division (in addition it was the 1st division in england)

• "They were also crowned Champions of European football on three occasions by winning the European Cup." - Maybe "when they won the European Cup" would be a bit smoother. I'm assuming that the cup is awarded automatically to the champion team; that is, winning the cup and being crowned champion amounts to the same thing.

• "Since playing their first competitive match, more than 800 players have made a competitive first-team appearance... " - Not all 800 played in the team's first competitive match. Would it be more clear to say, "Since the team's first competitive match, more than 800... "?

• "The striker joined the club... " - Link "striker" to Forward (association football)?
  • A Forward is the gerneral name for player who are the nearest to the opposing team's goal, Basicly the Striker is the point of the spearhead whos mission is to strike goals.

• "He was part of the Premier League winning side in the 2007–08 season... " - To make this more clear for foreigners and more tight, maybe "He was part of the side (team) that won the Premier League in 2007–08... "?

• "Tevez also won the UEFA Champions League in 2008 and the Football League Cup the following season." - Might it be more accurate to say that "Tevez also was part of the side that won the... " since he did not win the league or the cup by himself?

• "Billy Whelan, Arnold Muhren and Diego Forlan all played 98 matches in all competitions for Manchester United." - Tighten by deleting "in all competitions"?

• "Northern Irish defender Jonny Evans is the closest player still at the club to 100 appearances..." - A bit awkward. Recast as "Among active players, Northern Irish defender Jonny Evans is the closest to 100 appearances as of November 2010"?

• Does it matter that Jonny Evans is Northern Irish? If so, why?
  • It doesn't matter at all as it is plain team and not national team, so it could be removed if necessary.

• Is it necessary to say "in all competitions" in the caption? Would it change the meaning to delete it?
  • Yes it will, There are over 7 diff competitions that the team can play at, so it can clear its overall and not just plain league.

• The image and caption, at least on my computer screen, overlap a section boundary. Shortening the caption a bit would fix the problem.
  • Show good in this end, but iv'e reduced it to 130px.

List of players

• "wartime matches are regarded as unofficial and are excluded" - Would it be helpful to specify exactly what years "wartime" includes?
  • It could be, and the war times mean arround and in World Wars, both the first and the second.

• The Manual of Style suggests using straight prose rather than bulleted or numbered lists when feasible. The two-item list at the top of this section could easily become a two-sentence paragraph. That's what I recommend. WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists has details.

• I'm not sure you need to explain the table headers. If you eliminate this list, it will improve the layout. See List of FA Trophy winners, for example. "Sub" might be the exception, but I think you could handle this by changing "Positions key" to "Key" and adding "Sub" to that small table.

• I would recommend unbolding the items in the "Key". The Manual of Style suggests limiting bolding to a very few special cases. WP:MOSBOLD has details.

Notes

• "A utility player is one who is considered to play in more than one position." - Tighten to "A utility player can play more than one position"?
  • It basicly means that he can play in any position the manager need, Back or Middle field, but we can clear it more.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 23:42, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

I have responed to some of the above, will do the rest in a while
  – HonorTheKing (talk) 14:59, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

Cheers mate. I will make sure you are a joint nominator when it goes to FLC. 03md 17:10, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

The Brute Man

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I plan to submit it for FA, and would like a thorough review of the prose before doing so. I'm also seeking any other suggestions that might be helpful for the FAC process. Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 20:14, 24 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting account of a bad movie, and it seems comprehensive, well-organized, and generally quite good. Still, the article needs proofing to clean up small errors, typos, and lacunae. I fixed a few, and I note quite a few more in the list below. I read carefully through "Casting", then proceeded more quickly without line-by-line commentary. I likely missed some proofing errors in the lower sections.

Lead

• "the Creeper holds responsible for his deformities" - Maybe "blames" instead of "holds responsible" to avoid repetition of "holds responsible", which is used in the first sentence.

• "Jane Adams also starred as a blind pianist... " - "Stars" rather than "starred" to maintain present tense parallel to "holds" and "features"?

• "near the end of their horror film period" - Would it be good to include the date range here?

• "the back story" - One word instead of two? You use "backstory" in the "Writing" section. Also, link to Back-story?

• "whose facial features were the result of acromegaly" - Tighten slightly to "whose facial features resulted from acromegaly"?

Plot

• "The police investigate a string of murders committed by known as the Creeper... " - Word or words missing?

• "Joan screams hysterically at the sight... " - Bemis rather than Joan?

• "Unable to see the Creeper's deformed face, Helen... " - Paige rather than Helen?

• "The cantankerous store-owner Mr. Haskins (Oscar O'Shea) arrives with a hand-written letter... " - Unclear. Does he arrive with the letter, or does he find the letter upon arriving at the store? Or does "door" refer to a door at Mr. Haskins' house?

• "Jimmy brings the groceries to the dock" - Maybe "takes" rather than "brings". The flow seems more natural from store to dock than to jump to the dock and imagine Jimmy coming toward it.

• "Donnelly also finds a newspaper clipping with a man named Hal Moffet and two of his friends, Clifford Scott (Tom Neal) and Virginia Rogers (Jan Wiley), during their college days." - Unclear. Maybe "newspaper clipping with a photograph of"?

• "The police visit Clifford and Virginia" - Should this be Scott and Rogers? Last names rather than first? Ditto for other first names later in this section?

• "Clifford walks by the window" - "Walked" to maintain the past tense of the narrative? Ditto for "hurls" in the next sentence. It should be "hurled", I think. And "disfigured" rather than "disfigures". However, the next sentence correctly switches back to present tense ("Donnelly speculates... ") because it's the present tense of the narrative.

• "Reluctantly, she agrees to help them capture them." - Replace second "them" with "him"?

• "they were the result of exposure to mustard gas" - Tighten to "they resulted from exposure to mustard gas"?

• "share a similar premise and dialogue as the scenes" - "With the scenes" instead of "as the scenes"?

• "the protagonist is shunned by society based on their physical appearance" - "Protagonist" is singular, but "their" is plural. Maybe "his"? Ditto for several uses of "their" in subsequent sentences.

Casting

• "Hatton had abnormally enlarged and shaped bones on his head and hands" - "In" rather than "on"? Or maybe "Hatton's head and hand bones were abnormally large and oddly shaped"?

• "Neal began to became known... " - Began to "be" rather than began to "became"?

• I'll stop with the line-by-line comments at this point. You'll almost certainly want to ask someone to proof the rest for similar kinds of small errors.

• Distribution
• "The sale was also perpetuated... " - "Perpetuated" is the wrong word. Do you mean "motivated" or "prompted" or "influenced"?

• "The sale occurred so quickly and hastily on the copyright files stores at the Library of Congress... " - Is that where the sale occurred?

Images

• File:RondoHatton.JPG needs a fair-use rationale for its use in this particular article.

• File:The rocketeer lothar.jpg displaces an edit button on my computer screen and overlaps two sections by about two lines. Shortening the caption slightly would probably fix this. So might making the image slightly smaller.

"Other

• The dab tool at the top of this review page finds one link (Jane Adams) that goes to a disambiguation page instead of its intended target.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 21:04, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Triangulum Galaxy

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like suggestions for further improvements with the eventual goal of bringing it up to GA status.

Thank you, RJH (talk) 00:05, 30 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments by Cryptic C62:

• The lead should probably be expanded. My rule of thumb is that each section in the article should be represented by at least one sentence in the lead, which is not yet the case.
• "The Triangulum Galaxy is a spiral galaxy at approximately 3 million light years (ly) distance in the constellation Triangulum." Distance from what? Presumably from Earth, but another possibility is from the Milky Way.
• "It is the one of the most distant permanent objects that can be viewed without the aid of a telescope." Examples of the other distant naked-eye objects would be helpful here.
• Why is the information on visibility and nomenclature grouped into one section? If these topics are somehow relevant to each other, that is not being made clear in the article.
  • Because as separate sections they would be entirely too brief.—RJH (talk)
• "However, M33 was an exception and he catalogued this object on September 11, 1784 as H V-17" Any idea why Triangulum was an exception?
• "The results were consistent the concept of spiral nebulae being independent galactic systems of gas and dust, rather than just nebulae in the Milky Way." This sentence appears to be missing a word. Perhaps "with" after "consistent"?

  I added a 'with' here Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:43, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Herschel also catalogued the Triangulum Galaxy's brightest and largest H II region (diffuse emission nebula containing ionized hydrogen) as H III.150 separately from the galaxy itself" It's not clear if "separately" means that he erroneously considered the region to be a separate object, or that he recognized one was part of the other but simply gave them separate catalogue entries. I suspect the latter, in which case I think it may be clearer to simply drop the "separately from the galaxy itself" phrase altogether. The use of "also catalogued" is sufficient.
• "It was among the first "spiral nebulae" identified as such by Lord Rosse in 1850" Does "it" refer to the H II region or to the entire galaxy?

More to come if you feel this is helpful. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 03:53, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you for the feedback. If you have any more I'd appreciate hearing about it.—RJH (talk) 16:03, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Casliber

• I think noting how it differs from the Milky Way (eg WRT what proportion of mass is dark matter? star population, size of galaxy etc.)
• Lots of choppy paragraphs.

I'll keep an eye as you add stuff. Casliber (talk · contribs) 04:43, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Holy Wood (In the Shadow of the Valley of Death)

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…

I need some rewrite advice in how to trim the "concept" section of this page while still retaining all of the contents therein. I also need help in figuring out what other sections are missing/need expanding upon.

Thanks, Red marquis (talk) 08:09, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

Lede

• The lede is a summary of the main text, and should not contain material not found in the main body. Check the lede for any material not covered in the main body. The following is an example.

• "... Holy Wood was a commercial disappointment ..."

  Where is this stated in the main text, especially when it "was awarded gold status in March 2003 for selling more than 500,000 copies."

Concept

• The opening sentence is overly long and stuffed with too many ideas. It could have been broken into several simpler shorter sentences.

• "... despite later reports to the contrary; that the two actually considered them 'a joke'." and "... similar Sufic and Alevi philosophy, "Perfect or Complete Man""; the very archetype for humanity."

  I believe the semi-colons are wrongly used here.

• Why is "Guns, God and Government" in bold?

• "Perfect or Complete Man""

  What is with the double double-quotation mark at the end of this?

• What is with the single quotation marks that enclose certain names?

• "... consumed by Holy Wood's ideology ..."

  Why is Holy Wood not in italics here?

• "... another lesser character is found in "Coma Black"."

  Coma Black is a short piece of artistic work?

• "... in the wake of Columbine — anti-mimesis or life imitating art), ..."

  Where is the opening bracket?

Packaging

• First paragraph is unsourced.

Book and film

• "... the film never began production."

  Unsourced: was production never started, was it cancelled, or was it just an idea in the first place?

Guns, God and Government Tour

• Why is "Guns, God and Government" in italics in the Concept section and not here? Why is Tour capitalised here? Which is it?

• "It featured six legs spanning Europe, Japan and North America with a total of 125 shows."

  Reading this sentence, I have a funny image of the show as a creature with six legs that stretch across Europe, Japan, and North America... I know leg means a section or stage of journey but the phrasing of this sentence leads to a weird imagery...

• "The Christian organization Citizens for Peace and Respect ..."

  Why is an organization's name in italics?

• Last sentence is unsourced.

Critical reception

• External links should not be in the main text (or tables). The Professional ratings should be cited instead.

• The section is simply a collection of quotes. There is no analysis involved here, no separation of the reviewers' opinions into thematic paragraphs.

See also

• Why is there a need for this section when the links are already existent in the article or do not exist at all (WP:SEEALSO)?

Sources

• How does sputnik.com, a "community-driven music site where our users write and submit album reviews and more" qualify as a reliable source?[18]

• The youtube link is a copyright violation and should be removed (WP:LINKVIO). I do not think it is from Bowling from Columbine; even if it is, the film's copyright owners, Michael Moore nor the film's producers, certainly did not upload it to Youtube or given permission to. In fact, judging from the logo that is continually flashed, this is an OzTV segment recorded in about 2002 when Manson played at the festival. OzTV certainly are not the ones who uploaded their work to Youtube.

Images

• File:TheDeathSongKids.jpg

  How does this justify WP:NFCC? The article has no critical commentary on the art here. This image is quite simply the background of the original image and in my opinion adequately described with such words.

• File:Rating-Christgau-dud.png

  I have a feeling this might be a copyright violation and raised the issue at commons:Commons talk:Licensing#Copyright status of Wingdings?

I think there is a whole lot of mix-ups in the use of quotation marks (single, double, existent, or non-existent) here. The same goes for the use of italics and bold.

There are several instances of the noun plus -ing constructs. Please see User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing on why this construct is discouraged and how such instances can be improved.

Supposedly this album was part of a greater project, so why is there no mention of the gestation and early parts of the project? The article talks about the Columbine incident but makes no explanation of why or how this album is related to it. This two points are in response to the Origin and recording section because they should have been addressed there. Instead, the chronology is messed up by having relevant material (about the background) in the later Concept section.

I think Concept is too broad a section (and presented in words that are either too vague or complicated). "The record makes numerous references to events and figures in pop culture history to audit everyone's participating role in creating the culture that culminated in Columbine." comes across to me as a complicated phrasing (audit?). Go for simpler phrasings. It is difficult to suggest alternative phrasings or ponder if the structure of the article is sound if one is confused by the words used. The contents of "Origin and recording" and "Concept" (and I think the entire article) should be reorganized and rewritten. I suggest: "Background", "Production", "Book, film, and tour", "Themes", and "Reception". Jappalang (talk) 06:08, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Gianni Schicchi

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Gianni Schicci was the last opera that Puccini completed. He subsequently began work on Turandot but didn't finish it. Many people who have never heard of Gianni Schicchi (JANNI SKEE-KEE, if you're wondering) will know its famous aria O mio babbino caro - listen to it on the soundfile. The article is still being tweaked around, particular in relation to recent performance history and images , but User:Wehwalt and I would welcome comments and suggestions on all aspects. Thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 00:33, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Tim riley comments – I've amended a few typos, and will re-read the article and comment soon. Tim riley (talk) 10:14, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Most enjoyable. I love Gianni Schicchi, so it has been a particular pleasure to review this article. Not many comments. A few minor points about the prose and one reservation about balance, of which more below.

• General – spelling: English or American? The article is mostly in the former ("rumour", "realise", "equalled") but there is an "unfavorable" in the Background section.
• Conception and composition
  • "However, Puccini was less than enthusiastic…" The "however" might sit better at the beginning of the next sentence, possibly.
  • "The 1918 flu pandemic" – has "flu" graduated from colloquial to standard English? I'm not sure.
• Early performances
  • "was conductor and Puccini friend Arturo Toscanini" – I think this could be better phrased – it isn't really English as it stands.
  • "Puccini hoped that Sir Thomas Beecham would conduct the premiere" – are you quite sure? I am away from home and cannot check in the half-dozen books on my shelves about Beecham, but I don't remember any of them mentioning this. I have the firm impression that that although in his later years Beecham put it about that he had been an intimate of Puccini's, the composer actually rather patronised him. Later: Ignore all that. I have laid hands on a copy of John Lucas's 2008 biog of Beecham, which (p. 149) completely confirms what you have written. Puccini told his close English friend Sybil Seligman that he did not want "that pig of a Toscanini ('il pig de Toscanini')" to conduct, and he did indeed want Tommy to do it. Lucas does not speculate about why Beecham didn't want to.
  • "Gianni Schicchi proved to be the last opera to be completed by Puccini" – two points. First, what is this sentence doing at this point in the article? Secondly, two "to be's" in such close proximity – not appealing to the eye.
  • "Suor Angelica, which had proven the least popular of the three" – unexpected use of the Scottish form of the verb. The plain English "proved" might be better.
  • "incestuously mated with Puccini's own La Bohème" – a nice line, but a touch POV-ish unless it's a quotation. (And lower case bohème, too, surely?)
    • It is not in the source. "incestuous", when applied to inanimate objects incapable of sexual intercourse, is not usually POV. In this context, it merely calls attention to the fact both works are by the same composer. I'm open to deleting or changing the word, but I really think it is a stylistic matter. I'll switch the B to b.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)
• Later performances
  • "a feat she repeated later that season" – I have no serious quibble with the phrase, but nevertheless "feat" is a touch POV unless cited. We have recently touched, at another peer review, on Flagstad and Die Walküre – more soprano notes there than in the whole of the Trittico, I imagine.
  • My one serious concern about the article as it stands is the disproportionate attention given to Woody Allen's Met production. It is just one production among many, and should not get more than a couple of sentences, me judice.
• Music
  • "The theme is referenced again on her entrance" – A strange word to choose! – does it mean it is heard again?
  • "Charles Osborne cites in particular the trio for three female voices" – it might be helpful to give the title (or, I suppose I should say the opening line) of the trio here.

That's all I found. The structure, content, balance (with that one exception) and referencing are all excellent, and it's a most enjoyable read. – Tim riley (talk) 11:44, 18 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for these comments. I will address them in detail tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 00:43, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, I have dealt with the minor prose issues (the agreed spelling is English, by the way, so other infractions can be corrected on sight). I will ask conom Wehwalt to respond to your query on the Puccini-Beecham relationship, on the purple prose re La bohème, and on the excessive space given to Woody Allen's production. Thanks again for doing the review. Brianboulton (talk) 13:47, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I will have to do some research. I hope to respond sometime today.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:17, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

In re the Covent Garden production, Toscanini and Beecham, please see my additional remarks above. My apologies for doubting you! Tim riley (talk) 16:20, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

I've struck one sentence to take it down to the "couple of lines" on Woody. I think the readers are entitled to know the reaction to the production; Woody Allen is a subject of people's interest.--Wehwalt (talk) 17:48, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

That looks more balanced, I think. P.S.: I've just noticed "deviltries" in the text - should it be "devilries"? P.P.S.: I relished your comparison of GS with Falstaff. If anyone has a mind to bring the Falstaff article up to FA level I should be more than pleased to collaborate if invited. Tim riley (talk) 17:57, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

---

1983 Virginia Slims World Championship Series

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have worked hard since creating this list to turn it into a good standard. I would like to get some feedback on the list as it is one of many that are currently being worked on across the tennis project. The singles summary is in the process of being written so this PR should be about how the article is as it stands (discounting this section).

Thanks, 03md 04:58, 27 November 2010 (UTC)

Comments

• Are there any older Navratilova pictures on Commons? Like one from early in her career? That would fit better as the lead image in a 1983 article than a current picture of her.
• I'm not a big editor of lists but this article either should be renamed "List of 1983 Virginia Slims World Championship Series results", or, if you really want this to be about the entire 1983 WTA season, it should include a summary of the biggest stories. Things to discuss would be if certain top players were injured during the year, any significant controversies (by that I don't mean tabloid nonsense), and much more background information. There are a lot of available sources via googles news archives, and a print source (like these) on tennis history would be great. AaronY (talk) 00:15, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

List of Manchester United F.C. players (fewer than 25 appearances)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it is the third Manchester United players list I have nominated. I feel it should almost be ready for FL - any guidance is appreciated. I also need help finding a free image of Peter Beardsley to compliment the page.

Thanks, 03md 02:01, 26 November 2010 (UTC)

• These articles should be self-contained so that someone who isn't a fan of the sport (like me) can understand them. In that vein, can you explain somewhere what happened to Manchester when the Permier League was formed. Or at least how that affected the franchise, and its players. Its also redundant to have a section titled "List of players" when the whole article is supposed to be a list of players. I would almost rather not even have a section title. Maybe just have a lead, then maybe be a link to edit the list. Oh well, since that breaks about ten years of precedents, how about just titling the section "Players". I have to admit when I chuckled at first when I read that section title, and said to myself, "Really? You mean an article titled List of Manchester playeers" contains a "list of players"? AaronY (talk) 23:48, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• I've added a few lines on the Premier League and changed the section title. 03md 05:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the List of Presidential Medal of Freedom recipients has undergone some recent major work and I am looking for some feedback to be able to get the list to Featured List status. Any feedback or assistance with this page would be helpful.

Thanks, Flyguy33 (talk) 00:57, 23 November 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I have a few suggestions for improving this enormous and interesting list.

• The first thing that popped out at me was the layout. The featured lists that I'm familiar with tend to lay out groups of items in tables rather than bulleted lists flanked by lots of white space. You can find a list of featured lists about awards at WP:FL#Social sciences and society. See List of Nobel laureates in Chemistry for example, or Darwin Medal or List of Nobel laureates. I think you could improve this list by trying out varied organizational schemes that would present the information in tables; in some cases, it would probably help to make the columns sortable. Images could be sized in a uniform way to fit in an images column; Paul Harvey would be no bigger than Andy Griffith, for example. Arranging the material in tables would, as a side benefit, cut down on the table of contents, which is too long.

• The lead should include something about the history of the medal. How did it start? Who got the first medal? Who awarded the first medal?

• The tag at the top of the existing article should be addressed. Every set of statistics, every direct quotation, every claim that is apt to be questioned needs an inline citation to a source. In addition, every paragraph needs at least one source; if a single source supports an entire paragraph, the citation should go at the end of the paragraph, right after the terminal period of the last sentence.

• Many of the citations are malformed or incomplete. For example, citations to Internet sources should include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and date of most recent access, if all of these are known or can be found.

• The tools in the toolbox at the top of this review page find two dead links in citations and three links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 18:37, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Bencherlite

As someone with some FLC experience, I can tell you that any list beginning "This is an alphabetized, partial list of recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom" will be opposed on prose grounds straight away. Make it interesting! You do not need to have the words "list of recipients of the Presidential Medal of Freedom" in the text, let alone in bold, and in fact it's probably best not to. Look at recent featured lists to see how they begin. Bencherlite^Talk 22:51, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Led Zeppelin discography

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to know, if this is ready for FL or not? I am again not sure about the lead.

Thanks, ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 11:34, 19 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: No, it's not ready for FL. The charts look good, but the text has many prose and style problems, and the sourcing does not meet WP:V because many claims are not sourced.

• Copyediting
• The article needs a thorough copyediting. You might be able to find a copyeditor via WP:GOCE/REQ. Examples of problem sentences abound, but here's one: "A typical folk and blues album, it peaked alike their second record at number one in the UK and in the US." This sentence makes no sense as written. Looking through the lede, I would guess that many of the errors I am seeing are second-language problems such as the use of "elder" instead of "older" in "After their break-up, the band have released numerous compilation albums and live albums from elder concerts." These are just examples, but I see lots of similar problems in the article.
  • cleaned up, removed sentences, elder -> older, added to Guil of Copy Editors

• "The group were formed until their break-up by guitarist Jimmy Page, singer Robert Plant, bassist John Paul Jones and drummer John Bonham." - It would be more clear to say, "Until their break-up, the group were formed by... ".
  • reworded

• "On September 1968 - October 1968 they were formerly known as... " - Maybe "From September 1969 through October 1968 they were known as... "?
  • reworded

• "On September 1968 - October 1968 they were formerly known as the "New Yardbirds" and later "Led Zeppelin", after an annotation by the Who's bassist John Entwistle, which he reckoned the duo Jimmy Page and Jeff Beck, they would go down like a "lead zeppelin", a term Entwistle used to describe a bad gig." - This doesn't make sense as written, and it attempts to say too much in a single sentence.
  •  Doing...
    • done (possibly)

• "On 12 January, 1969," - No comma is needed in 12 January 1969 or any similar dates in this format.
  • removed

Sourcing

• The second paragraph, which is quite long, has an inline citation (3) above the halfway point. The rest of the paragraph is unsourced even though it includes a lot of information that is not common knowledge. My rule of thumb is to include a source for every set of statistics, every direct quotation, every unusual claim, and every paragraph. If one source supports an entire paragraph, the inline citation should go at the very end of the paragraph.
  • shortened, added refs to allmusic, all refs at the end of the sentences, except a few (after comma)

• The next four paragraphs are unsourced.
  • sources added

Notes

• Wikipedia articles should not address the reader directly. In the sentences in the notes that include statements like "See for example" the word "you" is implied. In other words, these sentences are telling the reader to do something, which is a no-no. Instead, these should be turned into declarative sentences saying something like "The liner notes ... and the label ... categorize Coda as... ".
  • reworded

• "charted on the singles chart listed 24.11.2007 (week 46)" - The date formatting in the notes should be the same as the date formatting in the main text; i.e., 24 November 2007.
  • reworded

References

• Can the double-nesting of parentheses in some of the citations, like citation 3, be eliminated?
  • I don't know exactly what you mean. But I think you meant the brackets in the allmusic refs should be deleted.

• The date formatting in the citations needs to be consistent.
  • cleaned up

• What makes Jimmy Page Online a reliable source?
  • deleted

Other

• The tools at the top of this review page find two dead urls in the citations and two dabs in the text.
  • forgot to do this before adding to the peer review. Done

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:12, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you for your comments. I knew that someone would mention the nasty lead :). Thereto I learned things I have never knew, for example that the articles should not address the reader directly. Regards.-- ♫Greatorangepumpkin♫ T 13:18, 24 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Hit 'Em Up

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like it to reach FA status. I believe it is an important cultural topic; I did very prematurely bring it to FAC on the day that I moved it from userspace. The points raised during that discussion I have addressed, excluding some minor prose issues.

Thank you, Theornamentalist (talk) 17:47, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

CrowzRSA comments

• 2Pac (real name Tupac Shakur) I'm not sure this is the best wording. Perhaps just remove "real name". I saw that was brought up in FAC, but I have never seen that before.

Removed "real name".

• Link "produced" (record producer)

Linked.

• "Hit 'Em Up" was written[2] and recorded in Can Am Studios in Los Angeles, California in May 1996.[3] Why is there a reference randomly placed after "was written"? This also goes against MOS because references should generally go after punctuation.

Addressed; one reference said written, the other recorded.

• Dramacydal and Outlawz are the same group, and should be noted as the same name to be consistent.

Fixed.

• Los Angeles, California should be linked.

Added.

• New Jersey should be linked.

Added.

• Is there no last name for 'Tiffany'?

The book I read made no mention of her last name, although I did not have full view of the text. Her inclusion in the article was brought up during FAC, I thought it relevant to his lifestyle, along with the information about his assistant getting involved with his other female associates.

• or at least had advance knowledge he would be robbed and shot insert "that" inbetween "knowledge" and "he".

Added.

• although it did not mention Shakur's name he felt it was mockingly directed towards him insert comma after "name".

Added.

• Lyrically, the song was aimed primarily at The Notorious B.I.G. since it was just talking about "Who Shot Ya?", specify it was "Hit 'Em Up", not just "the song".

Fixed.

• Ref 12 should go at the end of the sentence after ref 8

Moved.

• A reference is needed directly after quotes.

Do you mean that there should be a ref after the quote, instead of at the end of the sentence, making "Biggie, remember when I used to let you sleep on the couch?" and their subsequent fallout.[15] incorrect?

• Chino XL also came under fire "came under fire" is poor English

changed to "was also insulted.

• There is inconsistency between the uses of ". and ."

changed all occurrences to ."

• Link Slauson Avenue

Added.

• Link Fox Hills Mall (Westfield Culver City)

Added.

• Put ref 33 at the end of the sentence and remove the comma between "Mall" and "in"

Done.

• Shakur had already had enough, so he fired her "already had enough" is not professional wording

changed to "had grown wary of her"

• the release of "Hit 'Em Up" Evans Comma before "Evans"

Added.

• That's all I see right now. Also, it's nice to see another 2Pac article attempting to achieve a higher status. I recently nominated Me Against The World for GA and was passed. If this is to fail FAC again, I strongly suggest that you or someone else nominate it for GA. CrowzRSA 03:28, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

• Thank you CrowzRSA. - Theornamentalist (talk) 04:25, 9 December 2010 (UTC)
  

---

Doom Bar

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I am hoping to put Doom Bar forward for Featured article status at some point in the future, and was wonder what recommendations other members of the community would have for improvement beforehand.

I would also appreciate it if someone could tell me outright if this article will never reach featured status, for whatever reason.

Thanks, Worm 11:28, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I think this is an interesting article and do not see any readon why it could not eventually be a FA. Thanks for you work on it. That said, it needs quite a bit of work before it would stand a chance of passing FAC, so here are some suggestions for improvement.

• The lead is pretty short and could be expanded to provide a better overview of and introduction to the article. I would mention the earliest recorded dates for the bar in the lead, and would also mention some of the shipwrecks which have their own sections. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way.
• One of the most difficult criteria for FAC is 1a - a professional level of English. This article has a fair number of typos and rough spots, as well as some places where the meaning is just not as clear as it could be. One example is in the lead It became so notorious that many vessels would risk being wrecked rather than negotiate the entrance to Padstow. First off, Padstow has not been mentioned before, so the average reader does not know it is a harbor. Second, it seems somewhat contradictory - the previous sentence said the bar was the site of many wrecks, then this says ships risked being wrecked rather than ... being wrecked on the bar?? Third, can a vessel really risk something? Isn't it the captain and crew who make such decisions?
• Per WP:LEAD alternate names, such as Dunbar Sands, are usually shown in boldface font in the lead.
• I would also give the pronounciation of Dunbar (I usually think of the word as rhyming with "run far", but the name Doom bar makes think that the syllable Dun rhymes with tune or tune instead.
• I will try to nopte as many typos and rough spots as I can, but this is not a complete list. I will start with the
  • Missing word? Sand bars [form?] when surface waves from the ocean is forced against the flow of a river.
  • Water in and of itself does not have directions - its flow can though and I think that is what it meant in The different directions of the water [flow?] create a process of forced diffusion,[1] scattering the sedimentary deposit from both at a harbour entrance or river mouth.[2] It is also not super clear here what both refers to (assume it is the river and ocean)
  • Could be tightened ("in the case of" is almost never needed in Wikipedia articles: In the case of the Doom Bar, it was created by the Celtic Sea meeting the River Camel.
  • Gaelic is usually capitalized
  • I would provide years where possible - this is done in some cases, but not all (Saxon times).
• I think these examples make it clear that the article needs a copyedit
• Any idea why the name was changed to Doom Bar from Dunbar sands? Why did it form when it did?
• Another major potential issue at FAC would be the references. There are several potential problems with the ones used in the article.
• First off, some of the sources used as references are incomplete. Current ref 3 is just "England's Riviera. Taylor & Francis. p. 339. http://books.google.com/books?id=maA9AAAAIAAJ&lpg=PA339&pg=PA339#v=onepage&q&f=false." This is a book, but the Google Books link provides very little information on it (no preview is available) so I am not sure what it adds. The ref has no author listed, no date or place of publication, and no ISBN (if it has one). One of the purposes of a reference is to allow interested readers the chance to look up additional information, but I am not even sure what book this is to be able to look into it.
• Another example is current ref 38 "When a ghost took a starring role". Weekend Times. 30 May 1981. http://news.google.com/newspapers?id=aiY-AAAAIBAJ&sjid=sEoMAAAAIBAJ&pg=4568,5910767&dq=doom-bar&hl=en. Retrieved 19 November 2010." which is from a newspaper and also lists an author and a page number
• I am also concerned that the refs used now would not meet WP:WIAFA citerion 1c well-researched: it is a thorough and representative survey of the relevant literature. Claims are verifiable against high-quality reliable sources and are supported by inline citations where appropriate; Many of the books cited which are specific to the DOom Bar are quite old - is there nothing more recent on it?
• Other refs used do not mention the Doom Bar at all - so for example, these two sentences This combined with the natural sea salt made the sand very valuable to farmers to mix into manure, creating an alkaline fertilizer. The newly created fertilizer allows plants to grow in Cornwall's acidic soil.[6] are cited to this ref CORNISH HEDGES IN GARDENS, but it makes no mention that I could find of Doom or bar or Dunbar or even sea salt or manure or farmers, and the only relevant mention of sand is "If you add shell sand or lime you can grow plants that dislike an acid soil..." I do not doubt that the statement is true, but needs better refs
• Another example of the text not being fully supported by the refs cited is One of the best known references to the Doom Bar is the bitter beer by Sharp's Brewery. As the flagship beer for the brewery, it has facilitated the growth from 1,500 barrels in 1994[31] to over 45,000 barrels in 2008.[32]. The refs back up the numbers and the brwery, but do not say this is "One of the best known references to the Doom Bar "
• Another thing to worry about is whether or not these are reliable sources - what makes the ref on Cornish Hedges a RS? or why is Hops and Pips a RS?
• Headers need to follow WP:HEAD - watch capitalization
• Caption of the two maps could mention the years as they are too small to read easily on my computer.
• File:Wrecks off the Doom Bar.jpg has a 1969 copyright notice and is not free.
• Any chance for more photos?
• Why are only these three shipwrecks described of the many that have taken place there?
• SPell out abbreviations on first use.
• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for more details

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:36, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Response copied here from my talk page Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Just a couple of questions, feel free to answer them where you like, I've got pretty much everything watchlisted!

1. The sources are old because it is no longer a significant danger, the channel moved and there are less accidents. I'm already referencing the more modern books I've found, but I found a lot more from the 19th century. Is there a way to resolve this?
2. Regarding the hedges and gardens, I was using that to show that Cornwall specifically has acidic sand, and that shell sand could be used to combat that. That matched my other reference that the doom bar had a high percentage shell sand, and was used in agriculture. When I put it up for a good review, I needed a little more explanation of how and why it was used with manure, and that reference was the best I could find. I'm not sure I could find a Doom Bar reference which states that Cornwall has acidic soil AND how sand from the Doom Bar is used to combat that.

Otherwise, I'll try and have a go at adding your suggestions, thanks again for your help Worm 10:30, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I mis-spoke above, sorry. There is no exclusion of old sources, but modern sources should also be included. When I search for "Doom Bar" on Google Books, it finds 868 books. Now not all of those are going to be useful, but there are many farily recent books that come up. One modern book I looked at in preview there is "Cornwall from the Coast Path" by Michael Kent and Merryn Kent [19] - it mentions the Doom Bar on pp. 41 and 43 and gives the most recent death from it (1997), over 300 boats lost there, including 3 lifeboats, two dramatic 2007 rescues, and the fact that the RNLI station was moved in 1967 because of the Doom Bar. I would look at this and more recent sources to meet the FAC criteria of quality sources and comprehensiveness. Please get the books from a library - don't just depend on Google Books unless it is full view.

Another Google Books find was this from 1865 (full view) [20] which says in part "The Doom Bar is abed of yellow calcareous sand; it extends nearly across the entrance of the Camel river ... The sand of this bar is valued for manure, and is shipped away in great quantities." I do not have a problem with a ref that says sand can be added to Cornwall's soil, but the article says a lot more than that and the ref cited in the article currently does not back everything else up. Multiple refs may be needed - this new one mentions manure and does not mention that the Doom Bar's sand is used this way. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:50, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

PS I just searched "History Padstow" on Google Books and found this. It has a nice breif history of the Padstow Lifeboat and its rescue service and a few mentions of the Doom Bar. Searching for related terms can often be helpful. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:59, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

There are a number of dramatic free images of the Doom Bar and its sands on Geograph - see for example this one. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:18, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Mount Cleveland (Alaska)

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This is a somewhat short GA right now. I am listing at PR with hopes for input for an FAC. I've combed all the sources for even the minute information bits, so it's as complete as it will be atm. ResMar 18:16, 25 November 2010 (UTC)

Lede

• "... symmetrical stratovolcano ..."

  "... symmetrical stratovolcano (a tall, conical volcano formed from several layers of lava and other eruptive materials) ..."

I added the definition in, in what I think is a more elegant way. ResMar 04:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "The native Aleut name for Mount Cleveland, Chuginadak, refers to the Aleut fire goddess, thought to reside in the volcano."

  "The Aleutian natives named the volcano after their fire goddess, Chuginadak, who is believed to reside in the volcano."

Erm, I can't see why this is a needed change. ResMar 03:26, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Because of the commas, certain clauses can be taken as descriptive (optional) and make the sentence read as "The native Aleut name for Mount Cleveland, Chuginadak, refers to the Aleut fire goddess, thought to reside in the volcano.", which is awkward. That aside, two "Aleut"s seem repetitive. Jappalang (talk) 09:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Mount Cleveland is one of the most active volcanoes in the arc, having erupted 10 times since 2001."

  Where is the mention of Mount Cleveland as "one of the most active volcanoes in the arc" in the main text? How does "having erupted 10 times since 2001" qualify that general statement (does it pertain to the entire history or just that time period)?

All of the sources basically point out that it is highly active, as does my correspondence with the AVO people. Changed the 10 times to a better indicator. ResMar 03:26, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Geography and structure

• "Mount Cleveland is a nearly symmetrical andesite stratovolcano in the Islands of Four Mountains, a volcanic grouping in the Aleutian Arc."

  Technical terms might be incomprehensible to layman (concern expanded below).

Symmetrical is, well, symmetrical. It is a function mostly of monocrome locality and few anomalies in eruptive cycles, versus rough rift volcanoes like Mauna Kea, for instance. This seems a little too much for an introductory body sentence, however. Andesite is...a type of rock. In this case I would rather just rely on the link. Stratovolcano is now defined in the lead. ResMar 04:01, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... two prominent peaks that have since been eroded away, in part by glaciers. The two features measure 1,170 m (3,839 ft) and 1,093 m (3,586 ft) in elevation, and a sample of rhyolite has been recovered from one of them."

  How can the peaks be measured when they have been "eroded away"? What is the point of the recovery of a sample of rhyolite?

Changed the wording. ResMar 04:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Like many other Aleutian volcanoes, ..."

  Up to this point, the article mentions only 4 volcanoes. The context for Aleutian as a hotbed region of volcanic activity should have been established earlier.

I added a bit on the Aleutian being volcanic in the lead; it should be enough to cement them to "group status." I think added a section on the characteristics of Aleutian volcanoes would be detracting too much from the point. ResMar 04:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... (under 1 km (0.6 mi)) and thin (less than 10 m (33 ft) thick) ..."

  The Manual of Style discourages nested parantheses of the same form (Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Brackets and parentheses).

Replaced with commas. ResMar 04:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Mount Cleveland's naming is a reference to its constant activity, and shows that it was likely highly active even in the distant past."

  How does the name "Mount Cleveland" refer to a constant activity?

Oy, good catch :) ResMar 04:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... are Vulcanian and Strombolian by nature ..."

  Why are these two terms capitalized?

Both are proper adjectives (nouns? I'm not good at grammer). Vulcanian eruption comes after Vulcano, which also happens to lend its name to volcanoes in general. Strombolian eruption comes after Stromboli. Both are distinctive, low-level eruptive styles, characterized by small but frequent eruptions. Types of volcanic eruptions is a very good reference. ResMar 04:24, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

"Vulcanian eruption" is be a proper noun but "vulcanian" itself is just an adjective. Jappalang (talk) 09:28, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

I disagree, but you seem better informed on this than me, so I changed it. ResMar 05:10, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

• "The native Aleut name for Mount Cleveland is Chuginadak (the name currently given to the island as a whole), referring to the Aleut fire goddess, thought to reside in the volcano. Mount Cleveland's naming is a reference to its constant activity, and shows that it was likely highly active even in the distant past."

  This is an almost exact copy of the lede; see above for my suggested rephrasing.

• "Its current name is derived from a U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey in 1894, when it was originally observed by the USS Concord; like the other volcanoes in the Four Islands group, Mount Cleveland was named after prominent American politicians at the time, Cleveland itself being named after then-president Grover Cleveland."

  Aside from what I think is a repetitive sentence structure at the end, the use of "derive" is incorrect here; it would imply that the Survey gave the volcano some name that later became "Mount Cleveland", which does not seem to be the case. Suggestion: "Its current name was given during a U.S. Coast and Geodetic Survey conducted by the USS Concord in 1894. The volcanoes in the Four Islands group were named after prominent United States politicans in the 1890s, and Mount Cleveland was named after then-president Grover Cleveland."

Done. ResMar 04:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Eruptive history

• I believe "History of eruptions" or "History of eruptive activity" would be a clearer title (to the layman).

Um, what? History of bleck is not better then Bleckish history, it only really makes the title clunkier; I've used it on other articles, without complaint... ResMar 04:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "The first notable eruption ..."

  Who stated it as the "first notable eruption"?

I did. :) I can't really think of any better way to lead off the paragraph, but really, this was THE most notable eruption in its known history, period. ResMar 04:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... which dispersed an unusual distance across much of Alaksa ..."

  What was "an unusual distance"?

• "In addition low resolution allows minor events to go by unnoticed."

  "Low resolution" what?

Satellites. Done. ResMar 04:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... made an effort to expand eruptive coverage ..."

  They made an effort to expand the volcano's activity beyond a certain coverage? Is the intended meaning supposed to be "... made an effort to expand their coverage of eruptive activity ..."? "Eruptive coverage" does not seem to be a proper construct at all.[21]

Exchanged for volcanic: better? ResMar 04:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Image

• File:USA Alaska location map.svg: Per WP:IUP, WP:CITE#IMAGE, and commons:Commons:Image casebook#Maps and satellite images, what is the base map? It is doubtful that Alexrk2 can come up with the detailed isles and river bends on his own. What is the data or public domain map that this work was created from?

Not something I can do anything with. This is the standard map for Alaska in infoboxes, and it's the same format and, probably, source for ALL of the states/countries that use the map box. I'm sure it's written down somewhere, just...I don't know where. ResMar 04:49, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

I think this article is over-relying on links to other articles to explain technical terms (of which the article is quite full of). Linking to other articles for technical terms would be fine if they (the terms) are scattered or few, and more importantly the gist of which are supported/hinted at by context or explained. Here, however, the terms are presented bare. Readers, hence, would be confused by the terms used and have to navigate to another article to clarify their thoughts. They might never return to the article on Mount Cleveland. Instead of constantly linking to other articles, sentences with technical terms can be rephrased to add context (thus hinting to the meaning of the terms) or have the terms explained to help readers instead.

There are also several instances of "noun plus -ing" constructs in the article, which Tony1 has explained as undesirable in most cases (User:Tony1/Noun plus -ing). There are also several sentence constructs (examples of which are above) that I found slightly awkward. Overall, I think a finding an experienced copy-editor could help smooth the prose. Jappalang (talk) 06:54, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I had completely forgotten about this! Tisk, how incompetent of me ;) ResMar 03:14, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

Ok, -ing is indeed rampart. By overlinking technical terms, I think you mean the second to last paragraph in Structure, which I'll get to. ResMar 04:56, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

OK, I've addressed all issues: take a look-see :) ResMar 03:07, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

---

The Last Dog on Earth

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Now that it's copy-edited, I've decided to put this article up for peer review. Primarily, I'd like comments on how to improve it to GAN quality. This includes advice on what information would be nice to include (though do note that I haven't found any conception information or sales numbers). Also, I have a question regarding the reception section. The book was reviewed anywhere from 2002 to 2003. As such, many of the reviews are difficult to locate on the corresponding reviewer websites. Because Barnes and Noble is the only site I've found the full reviews at, I'd very much like to use them (they're under the "Editoral Reviews" tab). Which could be argued means more bias. However, Barnes and Noble has chosen to include the negative portions; the reviews are all more mixed than completely praising. Ehrenhaft even uses the fast-food quote on his homepage as one of the negative quotes about his writing [22]. Seeing as they are the only ones with the full reviews and they are available no where else (that I can find), I'd like opinions on if I should use the site or not. The only other possible issue I have with them is that I've been unable to archive them using Webcite because of that dreaded tab.

In any case, thanks in advance. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 21:29, 1 December 2010 (UTC)

Could you link to the Barnes and Noble reviews you're thinking of using? There's part of a review here that looks interesting, if you can get hold of the whole thing. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 15:37, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

I'm thinking of using the School Library Journal and VOYA reviews (under the Editorial Reviews tab here. The Publishers Weekly one is found both on Ehrenhaft's site and Barnes and Noble, so that one is referenced with both (and is able to be archived). Thanks for the link! The review looks complete and there's a sense a finality in the final paragraph, but a link at the bottom seems to imply there is more. I'm not a subscriber, though. Would it be fine to use quotes from that portion? It seems any more information would be simply describing already illustrated points in more detail. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 20:22, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

It would be fine just to use that portion, yes, but better if you see the whole thing, given that it's a scholarly review. Perhaps if you wrote to the writer and explain it's for Wikipedia, she would send you a copy. I looked around for an email address, and the only one I can find for an academic of that name is rachel.seftel@pem.cam.ac.uk. It may not be the same person, and may not be a current address, but there's no harm in trying. The other reviews listed at Barnes and Noble look fine too. SlimVirgin ^{talk|contribs} 09:48, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for the e-mail address! Hopefully I can acquire the entire review. Though if I cannot, I at least won't have qualms about using that portion. It's much better than a one-liner on Amazon. WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 22:15, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

I'll start my peer review now, but it will likely take more than one sitting. Please check back periodically for updates; I'll sign over in the last bullet when I'm done. BrianTung (talk) 00:19, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

• The lead would read better if the first two paragraphs were switched (except for the very first sentence); it would also better match the organization in the rest of the article. In what follows, I'll refer to the publication paragraph (which is now first) and the plot paragraph (which is now second).

• Dell Publishing is well enough known that I think you don't need to mention in the lead that it's a division of Random House; it can be pushed off into the main body of the article.

• The publication history can be summarized more succinctly along the lines of: "They published it in hardcover in 2003, in paperback in 2004, and for e-book reading devices in 2009." You need not list applicable devices in the lead, in my opinion.

• "but criticized characterization and its use of coincidence" reads better as "but criticized its characterization and use of coincidence".

• The plot paragraph could use tightening. By moving the plot summary to the front of the lead, one can dispense with identifying it as such and open the summary simply, as for example: "Logan, a lonely 14-year-old boy, adopts a dog from the animal shelter and quickly grows close to her, naming her Jack after his stepfather's dog. An incurable disease spreads across the country that causes dogs and eventually people to become unnaturally violent, eventually attacking and killing [people? other dogs?]. Logan and others struggle with the disease and what the future may hold for Jack."

• It may be worthwhile to make the lead one paragraph instead of two.

• As in the lead, you can dispense with "The story revolves around" in the section "Plot". This gives you an opportunity to tighten the first couple of sentences, along these lines: "Logan, a 14-year-old boy, lives [setting?] with his mother [name?] and stepfather Robert. He struggles continually with Robert over how he treats him, with his mother for allowing it, and with his biological father for abandoning them."

• New Plot, first paragraph, second-to-last sentence: Reduce "While at..." to just "At..."

• New Plot, first paragraph, last sentence: Jack's name does not need to be in quotes.

• New Plot, second paragraph, first sentence: No reason to introduce the term "acronym" (actually, this is usually spelled out "pee-oh-ess" rather than pronounced as a word "pahz"). Instead, try rewording as "Meanwhile, the United States is dealing with a new prion disease called Psychotic Outburst Syndrome (or POS) that affects dogs." Is POS actually limited to the U.S. in this book? (As an aside, could the author conceivably have come up with a more unfortunate abbreviation than POS?)

• New Plot, second paragraph, second sentence: You might want to join this to the first, by continuing thusly: "...affects dogs, causing even friendly pets to become violent."

• New Plot, third paragraph, second sentence: Ordinarily (in U.S. English at least, and possibly generally), just "boot camp", not "a boot camp".

• New Plot, third paragraph, fourth sentence: "While Logan is shoplifting food, Jack is found by three men, who beat her nearly to death." The phrase "who beat her nearly to death" is non-restrictive, and should therefore have a comma. If these men are suffering from POS, or if Logan suspects they are, this should be pointed out.

• New Plot, third paragraph, fifth sentence: "...until he faints...", not "...until fainting..." Where is Logan trying to take her? Or is he just walking aimlessly?

• New Plot, third paragraph, sixth sentence: Use "biological father" instead of "real father" to avoid questions of what "real" means in this context.

• New Plot, third paragraph, seventh sentence: Better reworded as "Logan fears that Jack may have contracted POS (from the men?) and that she will either die from the disease or be euthanized." Note that "euthanized" should be wiki'd.

• Back later...

Thank you for the feedback! I made the fixes, though am unsure about making the lede into one paragraph. It looks better that way, but I feel like there isn't enough transition between plot synopsis and out-of-universe publication information. Would it be fine as it is now? I've followed your suggestion for the opening of the plot section, and will cull more if you feel it is necessary. I'll await your return! WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 01:24, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

I've left some more comments; see above. If you feel so inclined, I'd appreciate it if you could take a look at an article that I've submitted for peer review, Written Chinese. Thanks! BrianTung (talk) 23:16, 6 December 2010 (UTC)

In answer to your other question, I think the basic organization works, and I agree with your reasoning to keep it in two separate paragraphs. I think the text still needs some wordsmithing, but I'll defer that till later. BrianTung (talk) 01:19, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Fixes complete. I've added more to the plot. Particularly information regarding what the men were doing, how Logan winds up at his father's town/home, and why Logan fears Jack may infected (I cannot believe I forgot that plotpoint)--Jack had possibly been infected because her minor-character brother attacked at one point. I may need to go for another copyedit if it sounds too choppy. As a note, characters actually say "paws" instead of saying each letter. I distinctly remember a scene in which a lady asks an official what "'paws' is" after he mentions POS. It's strange that POS was chosen, though I wonder if the whole "paws" thing had anything to do with it...I changed the US line to be more vague. We explicitly know it was in the US, but I don't believe they ever said anything about Canada or Mexico (both of which would likely have cases pop up) or any other nation.

To be honest, I'm fairly fearful when it comes to reviewing others. I wonder if I'm up to par, and time constraints sometimes get in the way. If I get a chance, though, I will most definitely look at it (and it's a very interesting topic!). WhiteArcticWolf (talk) 03:10, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because Beyonce is one of my favourite artist. I have worked a lot on it. I know, how it is now, it can become a GA but i want to make it a FA. I will try my best.

Thanks, Jivesh boodhun (talk), Candyo32 (talk), Adabow (talk) 13:28, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Wikipedia:Peer review/Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)/archive1.

---

Doune Castle

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review to find out what is needed to bring it up to A-class possibly even featured article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wikipedia:Version_1.0_Editorial_Team/Assessment

Thanks, Franko2nd (talk) 17:11, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

This is an excellent article. The only deficiency I can see that would keep it from FA status is the reference style. I'd recommend reformatting the refs in WP:HARV style for uniformity. Tom Reedy (talk) 17:02, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I enjoyed reading this and agree that it is generally well done, but have some more concrete suggestions for improvement before FAC. Thanks for your work on this interesting article.

• The infobox says it is now ruined, but the rest of the article talks about how it has been restored and is not really a ruin (or only partly a ruin)
• Lead can the pronounciation of Doune be given in the lead?
• The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. 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. However the River Forth and town of Callander are only in the lead and should be in the body of the article too.
• The antecedent of his is unclear in It was begun in the late 14th century by Robert Stewart, Duke of Albany (c.1340–1420), the son of King Robert II of Scotland, and Regent of Scotland from 1388 until his death. (whose death?)
• Three sentences in a row in the second paragraph of the lead start with either "The castle..." or in one case "By 1800 the castle..."
• Problem sentence It is now maintained by Historic Scotland. - it is good wherever possible to avoid words like now, currently, etc. Could the date be given instead? so something like "Historic Scotland has maintained it since YEAR."
• Similarly, current is not super clear in Due to the status of its builder, Doune reflected current ideas of what a royal castle building should be.[2] could 14th century be used instead? Or some other more specific time phrase?
• Does between 1475 and 1525 refer specifically to the construction of Doune, or more generally to the creative period? The castle itself was built during one of the most creative and productive periods of Scottish medieval architecture, between 1375 and 1425, ...
• In Regent Albany it is not clear when he stopped being regent for James I ( the next section implies he was regent until his death, but this could be made clearer in this section).
• Royal retreat I am not sure that fairly common words like ransom and treason need to be linked here - see WP:OVERLINK
• I know at this point Murdoch is also Lord Albany, but I still was thinking of his father when I read this: Albany and two of his sons were imprisoned for treason, and then executed in May 1425. Would it be clearer as "Murdoch and two of of his sons... " or even "Murdoch, Lord Albany, and two of his sons..."
• WP:MOSIMAGE says to avoid sandwiching text between two images, but the image of James III and Margaret forms a sandwich with the seal of Robert Stewart and the top of the portrait of James Graham. Adding the "upright" parameter to images will make them narrower and may help. It may also be that two of the images could be placed side by side using the {{double image}} or another similar template
• Prison and garrison When I first read "minister" here I assumed it was one of the king's ministers (an official of state), not a member of the clergy
• Not super clear what is happening again in 1715 - assume it is a garrison, but could also be repairs were ordered: The castle was garrisoned by government troops during the Jacobite Rising of Bonnie Dundee in 1689, when repairs were ordered, and again during the rising of 1715.[6]
• The Ruin and restoration section seemed very brief to me - can it be expanded somehow?
• Too complex, may need to be split into two sentences and reowrded The castle is now maintained by Historic Scotland, having been donated to a predecessor organisation by Douglas Stuart, 20th Earl of Moray, in 1984, and is open to the public. so something like In 1984, Douglas Stuart, 20th Earl of Moray, donated the castle to a predecessor organisation of Historic Scotland, which maintains it. As of 2010, Castle Doune is open to the public.
• The article capitalizes "Lord" as if it were a proper noun, but unless it is part of a name, I do not think this follows the MOS. So "the Lord's Hall" or "Lord Farquaad" are all OK as they are proper nouns, but "He was the Lord of the castle" is not OK as it is just a title, not a proper noun. I am not sure about "the Lord's tower" - is this what the sources use?
• The article must be consistent on what kind of units it uses first. Early on Imperial units (miles) come first, then in 'Description metric units (meters) come first. Pick one and stick with it.
• Not all headers follow WP:HEAD. The Lord's tower probably does not need the "The", and avoid repeating the article name in headers (so change Doune Castle in fiction' - the reader already knows which castle this is ;-) )
• Monty Python and the Holy Grail Make sure that sources used meet WP:RS - for example what makes "Scotland: the Movie Location Guide" a reliable source?
• Avoid bullet lists if at all possible - why can't the list be converted to straight prose?
• The source cited says that it was not the National Trust back then (and isn't it Scottish Trust anyway?): However, the National Trust later withdrew their permission, leaving the producers with little time to find new locations.
• Make sure references have alll information needed- so ref 14 has no publisher listed (and again, why is this a RS?)
• Spell out abbreviations in refs like Royal Commission on the Ancient and Historical Monuments of Scotland
• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for more details

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 04:47, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Over-the-Rhine

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it's a well written article and should be recognized.

Thanks, J.H (talk) 00:44, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting article about an interesting place, and a lot of work has gone into it. However, its Manual of Style problems alone would keep it from making GA at the moment, and it would need much more work to have any chance at FA. That is not meant to be discouraging; it would be great to see this worked up to FA. What follows is not a complete line-by-line review, but it's not a fly-by either.

Lead

• "Built in the nineteenth century during a period of extensive German immigration... ". - For consistency, this should be 19th, as you have it in the first paragraph. Ditto for 20th century later in the sentence and similar instances elsewhere in the article. Be sure to add a no-break code between 19th and century (unless you are using it as a hyphenated adjective) to keep them from separating on line-break. WP:NBSP explains the code and when to use it.

Etymology

• "In German, the district was called "über'm Rhein." - This certainly might be correct, but it looks a little strange to me. I would have thought "über dem Rhein", but this is based on my quite feeble grasp of German. Is 'm a contraction? What is your source? It might be good to add a citation to the source.

German neighborhood

• Citation 26 links to the home page of the Findlay Market web site, but it should link directly to the market history page at [23].

• When I look closely at the market history page, I notice that most of one sentence in the article very closely mirrors one sentence in the source: "...attracted a concentration of bootleggers, entrepreneurs, saloons, gambling houses, dance halls, brothels, and other institutions not tolerated in the city of Cincinnati." It's best to avoid direct copy-and-paste, even of single sentences or strings of attractive nouns. I realize that multiple editors contribute to most articles, so this comment points the finger at no one in particular. Still, it's best to track down anything that looks cutty-pasty and re-write it as a not-too-close paraphrase.

• "In 1850 approximately 62.57893 percent..." - I would round this to "about 63 " percent.

• Much of the second paragraph of this subsection too closely resembles the third paragraph of citation 28. It's not a direct copy-paste, but the sentence structure, the sentence sequence, and much of the word choice is strikingly similar from one to the other. One of the ways I avoid plagiarism or paraphrasing too closely is to find multiple sources, if possible, for as much of an article as possible. I read the source material(s) and then try to write what I've learned in my own words. I check my claims against the sources and then, usually rewriting as I go, add the inline citations. I often do a lot of this sort of thing in my sandbox; this allows me to tinker with large blocks of prose before adding them to the main-space version of an article. Plagiarism and too-close paraphrasing are often unintentional, I believe, and deciding how to paraphrase can be tricky. An article, WP:Wikipedia Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches, has helpful details.

• "By contrast, in 2000 Cincinnati's population density was 3,879.8 people per square mile." - I would round this one to "about 3,900 people per square mile" or maybe "about 4,000 people per square mile" to make it more meaningful and easier to compare to the 32,000 given earlier in the sentence.

Economic decline

• "who distrusted whether the ethnic Germans were loyal to the United States" - Maybe "doubted whether" rather than "distrusted whether"?

• "With the heart of its economic engine gone Over-the-Rhine began a slip into decades of economic decline, which prevented new development and ironically helped preserve much of the neighborhood's historic architecture." - Needs a source. Also, "ironically" is an editorial comment and should probably be deleted. Maybe " ...new development but helped preserve... "?

• "In 1920 the city drained the canal and began construction of the Cincinnati Subway... " - This and the rest of the paragraph beyond this sentence need a source.

African-American neighborhood

• The second paragraph needs inline citation(s) to a source or sources.

2001 race riots and aftermath

• The Manual of Style suggests using "percent" instead of % in simple case. I changed a few of these in the early parts of the article, but I'll leave the rest to you.

• Should "Section 8 voucher holders" be briefly explained?

Architecture

• "but there are other odd balls as well" - Replace slang, "odd balls"?

• "at Twelfth and Walnut streets is ironically one" - Delete "ironically"?

• Is such a large gallery of images needed to make the subject clear to the reader?

• Captions consisting solely of a sentence fragment don't take a terminal period. I fixed quite a few of these in the early sections. I leave the rest to you.

Deterioration, preservation, and demolition

• Would just one image, the fire-damaged house, convey the main idea just as well as a gallery of six images?

Landmarks

• WP:MOS#Bulleted and numbered lists suggests converting lists to ordinary prose paragraphs whenever feasible. I think that could be done here by grouping the music halls in one paragraph, the art venues in another, and so on. Or possibly, the parts of this list that simply repeat what has already been said in earlier sections could be deleted and the other parts merged with earlier sections.

• The direct external link to the Ensemble Theatre of Cincinnati should be removed. You might replace it with an inline citation or add it to "External links".

References

• In some citations you abbreviate "page" as "pg." and in others as "p.". You need to pick one and stick with it throughout. A reliable standard is "p." for single pages and "pp." for multiple pages.

• The date formatting in the citations should be consistent throughout; i.e., don't use 2009-06-18 in one place and 27 May 2007 in another and November 7, 2008 in another. Since this is a U.S.-centric article, you can rule out the form "27 May 2007". Either of the other two is OK in the reference section, but you need to choose one and stick with it. On the other hand, in the main text only the format exemplified by November 7, 2008 is considered correct in a U.S.-centric article.

• Some of the citations may not link to reliable sources as defined by WP:RS. Number 196 links to a personal blog, for example.

• Some of the citations are incomplete. Number 133, for example, lacks a publication date and and a date of most recent access.

• Wikipedia house style takes precedence over other styles sometimes. In citation 48, for example, the all-caps words should be changed to title case even if the source uses all caps; e.g., Harrington, John Walker (July 14, 1918). "German Becoming Dead Tongue Here".

Other

• The tools in the toolbox at the top of this review page find six dead links in the citations and two links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.

• I would suggest turning all of the lists near the bottom of the article into straight prose, eliminating anything that simply repeats what has been said in earlier sections, merging the church section with the landmark section, and deleting the "In media" section on grounds that it is a trivia section and merging anything truly important in it with other sections.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 02:39, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Dance Dance Revelation

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I hope it can become a good article

Thanks, NoD'ohnuts (talk) 21:09, 11 December 2010 (UTC)NoD'ohnuts

Comments by Jappalang

The contents seem too skimpy to me to qualify for broad. The issue could be that the sources are too little to give a reasonable view of the subject. This could get worse; what makes tvbythenumbers.com a reliable source under Wikipedia's policies and guidelines? There should be no all-capital titles according to the manual of style, and slashes as in "4.1 rating/11% share" should not be used. There should also be a comma after the year when using US style dates (month day, year). The writing seems a bit drab but is reasonably clear (not much confusion to the reader). Personally, if it was me, I would not bring this to GAN unless I get more substantial content from reliable sources. Jappalang (talk) 01:59, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Helmichis

This peer review discussion has been closed.
The main reasons behind this request is that I want to submit this article to GAN (and maybe eventually FAC process), but before doing that I need external views on what may not be OK and should be mended. This article is a sort of spin-off of my last FA Alboin; I've wanted to try using a little known and badly documented figure try to make a solid article, a bit like so often has done Mike Christie in his Anglo-Saxon articles. I would in particular like advice regarding the lead and how to better the prose: I'm not a native speaker, so I expect problems especially in that context. Also, I wouldn't mind opinions regarding the insertion of a section (the first) entirely dedicated to discussing the primary sources available: was it a good idea? Does it stand well? And the conclusion, does is flow well enough?

Thanks, Aldux (talk) 00:18, 4 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments.

• You say five primary sources mention Helmichis by name, but there seem to be six:
  1. Marius of Avenches' Chronica
  2. Continuatio Havniensis Prosperi
  3. Origo Gentis Langobardorum
  4. Paul the Deacon's Historia Langobardorum
  5. Historia Langobardorum Codicis Gothani
  6. Liber Pontificalis Ecclesiae Ravennatis
  • Thanks for catching that one, I had forgot the CHP, but that too is actually mentioned in the same page in an abbreviated form. Corrected now.Aldux (talk) 01:46, 12 December 2010 (UTC)
• Generally the article structure looks right to me. I think the section on sources works well -- the reader can't help but understand how limited the data is that we have to deal with. The main problem is prose -- it's very well done for a non-native speaker but does need a fair bit copyediting to make it flow more smoothly. I'll jot a couple of specific points down below, but there are little infelicities sprinkled throughout, so I think the next step is to get a good copyeditor to go through it, and then try for good article status. (I don't think I'll have time to do a copyedit myself, I'm afraid, but I'll keep it on my list in case.)
• "This is the first work to have transmitted to us the name of Rosamund": I think "first" would be more natural than "earliest" here.
• "was further on updated till 671" -- should be something like "continued to be updated till 671".
• " This view is different by Wolfram's" -- "by" isn't the right preposition; people use "to", "from" and "than", but I'd rephrase to something like "Wolfram argues instead that".
• A MOS note: en dashes should be unspaced in page ranges in the notes. You have some spaced dashes and some unspaced hyphens.
• "The following year the Lombards left their homeland and migrated to Italy": I am not expert on this period of history, but as I understand it this was a slow process and we shouldn't give the reader the impression they took over Italy in a year. I think this should be rephrased to give a little more detail.
• The infobox lists Helmichis as a king, with a successor and predecessor, but the text says he was unsuccessful in his attempt to usurp the kingdom. Do historians generally regard him as a king? Should the text just say that his usurpation was shortlived?
• Why do you call the Origo the earliest narrative sources? Doesn't it postdate Marius's Chronica?
• "according to Paolo Delogu, it was Helmichis who was seduced by the queen": Delogu is apparently a modern historian, so this doesn't seem to make sense as it stands -- Delogu must be interpreting the texts here but it's not clear how. Maybe you could just say "Historian Paol Delogu's interpretation is that" but I think it would be helpful to know a little about Delogu's reasoning. Or is Delogu just following Agnellus's version? The passage cited in support of Delogu's opinion actually comes from Paul, so that doesn't seem right either.

-- Mike Christie (talk – library) 01:04, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for your helpful comments and edits, as you noticed I'll need to find a copyeditor to make it good enough for a GA or FA; probably, I'll try submitting it to the guild of copyeditors.

• Regarding the context, I'll add some more on the Lombard takeover in the 569 - 72 years. concerning being a king or not and the infobox, *I've not read of a single source, primary or secondary, that considers Helmichis a king. All early sources are pretty adamant in stating that his usurpation failed and failed fast, and the Lombard kinglists do not mention him. So what do you say, it's better if I avoid any infobox as it may be misleading?
• As for the Origo, well I wrote "the Lombards' earliest narrative source": that is, the earliest source of Lombard origin. Do you feel it isn't clear enough, and the point should be made better?
• Delogu's point is that the story of assassin's seduction by Rosmunda and the taking of the sword reflct Germanic myths that have arrived down to us through Paul in a deformed version that doesn't reflect in a fully correct way the original tradition. Hope it's better now. Aldux (talk) 19:49, 12 December 2010 (UTC)

  Yes, those look like improvements; and I think you were right to remove the infobox -- it's confusing. I went to Grierson and Blackburn's Medieval European Coinage to see if there was any coinage from his (presumably brief) reign; it was the infobox that made me think it was a possibility. So I'm glad it's gone. Re the Origo; yes, I wasn't clear that you meant it was the earliest narrative souce of Lombard origins; I took it as "the earliest Lombard narrative source": that is, the earliest narrative source that mentions the Lombards. Why is it necessary to mention this at that point in the article, though? You've already described the Origo in the sources section; couldn't you move this fact to that section, if you need it at all? Mike Christie (talk – library) 03:00, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

  • OK, removed Origo note; you're probably right, it's not all that necessary especially with a section dedicated to sources.Aldux (talk) 00:32, 14 December 2010 (UTC)
    

---

Mount Fee

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am looking forward to bring Mount Fee to Featured Article status. This article has been at FAC twice, most recently on 2 December, which has been delisted. The entire article may need to be reviewed for issues. It has been awhile since I last did extensive editing on this article.

Thanks, Volcanoguy 20:25, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Comments from Jappalang

• Why are en-dashes used in place of hyphens for hyphenated words like "U-shaped", "north-south", and many more?

If they are not needed I can just replace them with hyphens. Volcanoguy 22:51, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

They have to be replaced with hyphens. En-dashes are not correct. Jappalang (talk) 02:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Lede

• "Mount Fee is a volcanic peak in the Pacific Ranges of the Coast Mountains in southwestern British Columbia, Canada, located 13 km (8.1 mi) south of Callaghan Lake and 21 km (13 mi) west of the resort town of Whistler."

  I think there is too much locational ideas in this one sentence. Separate it into two (the first larger scale, the second more precise).

Fixed. Volcanoguy 21:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... it rises above the surrounding rugged landscape on an alpine mountain ridge."

  This does not read right to me... the mountain is part of the ridge, not "on" it.

Mount Fee lies on top of a mountain ridge. It was constructed after the mountain ridge formed. Volcanoguy 02:06, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• "At least two major summits constitute the summit ridge, with the southern tower being the highest."

  "Mount Fee has two major summits; both lie on a ridge and the highest is the southern of the two."

I did some rewording to this sentence. Volcanoguy 02:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Geology

• "This volcanic zone forms the central portion of the larger Garibaldi Volcanic Belt, the northern extension of the Cascade Volcanic Arc, which extends from the Silverthrone Caldera in the north to the Watts Point volcano in the south."

  Again a long sentence that can be broken down into shorter ones (which might be more smoothly combined/integrated with the following sentences).

Removed "the northern extension of the Cascade Volcanic Arc" bit because it is not necessarily needed. I added that because people are less likely to know what the Garibaldi Volcanic Belt is than the Cascade Volcanic Arc, which is a broader term that includes volcanoes in the United States such as Mount St. Helens, Mount Rainier, Mount Baker, Mount Shasta and so on, which are more known than Mount Fee. Volcanoguy 04:49, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... significantly eroded by former glacial periods."

  "... significantly eroded by glaciers in the past."?

Reworded. I changed it to "significantly eroded by glacial ice." Volcanoguy 05:25, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Stratovolcanoes consist of alternating layers of lava flows, volcanic ash, cinders, blocks and bombs that can reach heights of 2,500 m (8,000 ft)."

  Beware. The bombs can reach 2,500m? Suggestion: "Stratovolcanoes can reach heights of 2,500m (8,000 ft) and consist of alternating layers of lava flows, volcanic bombs, blocks, cinders, and ash." I paused at the end of the original sentence, pondering if "bombs" (even if linked) at the end can confuse; I think this order could prove less confusing.

Fixed. Volcanoguy 22:57, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "As periods of glaciation covered the ancestral volcano, it removed much of the original outer cone of pyroclastic material. The removal of pyroclastics has ..."

  "During the glacial periods, much of the volcano's original outer cone of pyroclastic material was eroded away by moving layers of ice and rock. The removal of the ejected volcanic material has ..."

Fixed. Volcanoguy 23:20, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

Eruptive history

• Although the title is proper, I think "History of eruptive activity" or "History of eruptions" is clearer.

I find "Eruptive history" is more simple and appropiate, especially because it is shorter and easier to read. Volcanoguy 03:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... large amount of dissection ...", "Following extensive dissection, ..."

  How do the acts of dissections help to indicate age? Should it not be analysis of these dissections that reveal something? Or is dissection meaning something else? The Oxford dictionary has no meanings for "dissection" that relates to volcanic activity.[24]

That is because "dissection" is not being used with volcanic activity. It is refering to the volcano. If Mount Fee formed in the past 10,000 years it would not be heavily dissected by glacial ice like it is now. Why? Because heavy dissection by glaciation in the area occurred during the last glacial period, which ended about 10,000 years ago. So given its large amount of dissection and evidence of glacial ice overriding the volcano, it formed more than 75,000 years ago before the Wisconsinan Glaciation like it states. Volcanoguy 02:40, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• What are "volcanics"? Oxford dictionary defines no such term.

What are you, a person fascinated by dictionaries? Of course there is such a term. Do some research. According to the McGraw-Hill Dictionary of Scientific & Technical Terms, it means Igneous rocks that solidified after reaching or nearing the earth's surface, which would be stuff like lava. It is also used in names of volcanic features and webpages like the Newer Volcanics Province, the Sierra Blanca Volcanics, Canada Volcanoes and Volcanics, Wells Creek Volcanics, Shoshone Volcanics and so on. "Volcanics" is basically plural for "volcanic". If there is more than one type of volcanic material its either "volcanic rocks" or "volcanics". For example, "volcanics of the Garibaldi Volcanic Belt range in composition from basalt to rhyolite." Rephrasing that sentence to "volcanic of the Garibaldi Volcanic Belt range in composition from basalt to rhyolite" is just bad grammar. Volcanoguy 21:02, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

The common understanding is that "volcanic" is an adjective, not a noun. If geologists have declared it as a noun and used it in a plural form, it becomes a jargon (technical term) that is not obvious and confusing to the common reader (who Wikipedia is mostly catering for). See Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Clarity, Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Technical language and Wikipedia:Make technical articles understandable. If jargon is to be used in articles, then on its first use, it has to be clarified/explained for the common readers. Jappalang (talk) 02:49, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Just to get past this issue I removed "volcanics" in the text. Volcanoguy 19:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Petrography

• Again the "volcanics"

History

• The section title does not seem appropriate; the section talks of human activity. How the mountain formed and such is in Geology.

I have retitled that section to "Human history" and removed "Human" in "Human habitation" becuase it is redundant. Volcanoguy 03:13, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Human habitation

• "Hunting, trapping and plant gathering occurred in the Mount Garibaldi area, but the most important resource was glassy volcanic rock."

  The clauses seem a bit mismatched. The first refers to activity. The second refers to an object.

Reworded. The bit about Mount Garibaldi dosen't really belong in this section anyway because it is quite aways from Mount Fee. Volcanoguy 05:05, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• What are "pre-contact times"?

Reworded. Volcanoguy 04:34, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• "... collectively dated from about 8,000 to 100 years old."

  "... collectively dated from about 100 to 8,000 years ago."

Fixed. Volcanoguy 23:27, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "Others included Cauldron Dome, Mount Cayley, Slag Hill, Ember Ridge and Ring Mountain, which was titled Crucible Dome at the time."

  Why is the title (Crucible Dome) of a geological feature (Ember Ridge and Ring Mountain) at that time in italics?

I have no idea. The given source does not mention why Ring Mountain was titled Crucible Dome at the time. My only guess is whoever that named the volcano Crucible Dome was not aware the volcano was already officially named Ring Mountain. Volcanoguy 23:09, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "This resulted in the creation of a geologic map ..."

  Note the ambiguity of "this". Coming after the last sentence, "this" can mean the titling of "Ember Ridge and Ring Mountain" as Cruicible Dome...

Reworded. Volcanoguy 03:38, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Monitoring

• "... dealing with other natural processes, including tsunamis, earthquakes ..."

  "... dealing with other natural processes, such as tsunamis, earthquakes ..."

Fixed. Volcanoguy 23:01, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

• "If it were to erupt there would likely be weeks, months or years of warning signs, such as clusters of minor earthquakes that would likely originate less than 15 km (9.3 mi) below the surface. They are generally too small to be felt by people."

  If they are too small to be felt, by what means are they detected to be warnings?

I rewrote a bit in the "monitoring" section. Please see if there is still something awkward in the wording. Volcanoguy 01:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

• "This improvement is continuous and will support the understanding to monitor other volcanoes in the Mount Cayley field for future volcanism."

  This phrasing is speculative.

Deleted. Volcanoguy 01:58, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

I think a copy-edit should be performed on the article (I am not the best judge or consultant for prose). Hopefully the above can help. Jappalang (talk) 09:33, 7 December 2010 (UTC)

What should I do after all issues are solved, repost it for FAC? Volcanoguy 19:00, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

I think you should look for an independent copyeditor first per the comments in the last FAC (I do not consider myself an excellent judge of brilliant prose, so another opinion would help). Jappalang (talk) 08:29, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

---

National Docks Secondary

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the article is well referenced and believe it's a b-class or betterDjflem (talk) 10:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, Djflem (talk) 10:38, 5 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting article with helpful maps. Here are some questions and some suggestions for further improvement.

• The lead should be an inviting summary of the whole article rather than an introductory paragraph. The existing lead introduces the topic but does not summarize the "History" section. I'd suggest expanding the lead to include a summary of the history. WP:LEAD has details.

• Can you include the length of the line, perhaps in the "Route" section and then in the lead as well? It's hard for an outsider to picture the situation except as a tangled web of rail lines in an urban setting. Giving the length of the National Docks Secondary from end point to end point would help place the tangle in a dimensional setting. It might also be helpful to give some other distances such as the length of the part of the line running parallel to the turnpike extension. Maybe some other kinds of distances would help place this in context for the reader as well. Since almost all readers know where New York City is, would it be helpful to say how far the northeastern end of the line is from New York City?

• Would it be helpful to include some tonnage statistics or some other kind of statistics to give the reader a more clear picture of how important this line is and how important (busy) it is expected to be?

• Can you include anything about the costs of expansion and renovation? Who is paying for the renewal and expansion of the port? Anything else about the economics of the line?

• Some of the wikilinks are redundant, and removing them would give more emphasis to the remaining wikilinks. Generally, I would not link a term more than once in the lead and perhaps once again in the main text. For example, "cut" is linked on first use in the "Route" section, which is fine, but I would not link it again in the "History" section. I would not link "right-of-way" more than once; "Lehigh Valley Railroad" should not be linked twice in the final section. You will probably find other redundant links if you hunt for them.

• WP:MOSBOLD suggests a very sparing use of bolding. For this reason, I would suggest using italics instead of bolding on alternate names of the railway that appear in the "History" section.

• File:Lehigh Valley Jersey City Terminal.png should include on its description page the source of the base map and the source of the map details; that is, the description should say what map(s) were used as the basis for this derivative map, and what books or articles or maps supplied the information that were added to the base map. You might have to confer with the map-maker to find out the answers to these questions if you didn't make the map yourself.

• The dab-checker tool in the toolbox at the top of this review page finds four links in the article that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.

History

• "which constructed storage and lighterage facilities on Black Tom Island" - Link lighterage to Lightering?

References

• The date formatting in the citations should be consistent rather than a mixture. For example, citation 1 uses August 24, 2009 but also 2010-11-19. Since the August 24, 2009, form is the only correct one for the main text of a U.S.-centric article, I'd choose that, but you can also choose the 2010-11-19 form for the citations only, if you prefer.

• I'm not sure it helps to link to the Google version of the Acadia book in citation 1 since the online version is incomplete and can't be used to verify the claims in the article.

• The abbreviation for a single page is p. and for multiple pages it is pp. In citation 1, for example, you have used pp. for a single page, and this should be changed to p. To make the change, change the word "pages" to "page" in the citation template.

• Citation templates often have many parameters that are unfilled and are never going to be filled. For example, the "doi" box and the "id" box in the citation 1 template have no practical function in this case. It's good practice to remove the template parameters that you are certain will always be useless in particular cases. This reduces clutter and makes it a bit easier for other editors to find their way around your articles in edit mode.

• In citation 4, the actual publisher seems to be the State of New Jersey Department of Transportation, and the citation needs an access date.

External links

• I would consider moving the three sets of coordinates to a little table in the main text. For lack of a better example, I'll point you to one I made for Pennsylvania Canal (West Branch Division)#Points of interest.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 20:05, 13 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Robert Harold Davidson

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to make sure that it meets a high standard in terms of writing style and documentation as I am contemplating writing more biographical articles about U.S. Marine and Army Officers that served during World War II.

Thanks, Dpatenge (talk) 15:14, 3 December 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this article, here are some suggestions for improvement.

• The biggest issue with this article are its sources. I think that 34 of the 53 references are to Davidson's "personal papers", while there is also a ref that cites "various in-person conversations and email exchanges". The problem is that none of these are published sources and so are not allowed under Wikipedia's policy on verifiability, which states in part that "any material challenged or likely to be challenged must be attributed to a reliable, published source using an inline citation."
• As one example of something likely to be challenged, the lead says in part " At age 24, Davidson was one of the youngest officers in Marine Corps history to be assigned command of a Combat Infantry Battalion.[5]" The problem is that this is an extraordinary claim, and the only reference for it (ref 5) is just "Robert Harold Davidson, Experience Profile 1946. (Civilian Resume), Personnel Papers, op. cit." Now I am not doubting that Davidson really was one of the youngest officers in Marine Corps history to be given command like this, but there has to be a much better source than his own resume for such a claim.
• The basic idea is that references can be verified and must be to reliable sources. I have access to the New York Times archive and with a little searching found four references to Davidson there (there was also a judge named Robert Davidson, so I found a lot of articles on him too). These are:
  • NEW YORKERS PROMOTED; Forty Are Named Second Lieutenants in Marine Reserve, New York Times, Feb 23, 1941
  • MISS A. BREEDING WILL BE MARRIED; Wheaton Graduate Fiancee of Robert H. Davidson, Former Major in Marine Corps, New York Times, Apr 22, 1947. p. 31
  • General Foods Advances Three, New York Times, Jul 31, 1947;
  • MISS ANNE BREEDING, R.H. DAVIDSON MARRY New York Times, Aug 31, 1947. p. 33
• The article also refers to some sources that are relaible, but need more information given. For example his obituary in the New York Times is cited, but the page is not given (p. 15). I would imagine other newspapers (closer to his home) also carried an obituary, probably in more detail than the Times.
• I also googled "Iwo Jima Davidson" and found that he is in the book "Iwo Jima" By Richard F. Newcomb, Harry Schmidt which mentions his being wounded in the rocket attack on pp. 252-253. Other books seem like they mention him there too.
• On to the article - the disambig links finder tool in the box in the upper right corner of this page finds four disambiguation links that need to be fixed.
• Try to avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections as they interrupt the flow of the article
• The link should be to Fanny Farmer for the candy shops
• The article is very heavy on his military service and very light on his life after - please read WP:WEIGHT
• Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches for more details

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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:10, 14 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Malmö FF

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because to improve it would need an extra pair of eyes and I believe the article could reach "Good article" status or even "Featured article" status with some improvements and I would very much appreciate any opinions on how to reach these goals for this article. The section which needs most attention is the "Notable players" section, I'm having a hard time specifying the list criteria within this section, any suggestions will be appreciated. I will also happily accept any suggestions on new sections in the article or removing a section. I can also add that this article can be compared to related article IFK Göteborg, also a swedish football club with simular status as Malmö FF, an article which has reached FA status. I believe this article (Malmö FF) is equally as good as the IFK Göteborg article or even better.

Thanks, Reckless182 (talk) 17:41, 9 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This sounds like a very good team that would be fun to follow. To reach GA with this article, you will at least need to improve the prose, add sources for the unsourced parts of the article, improve the layout, and make sure the image-description pages are complete and correct. I don't know enough about football to say whether or not the article is sufficiently broad in coverage, but it looks at least close. Here are my suggestions and comments.

LayoutY

• The Manual of Style suggests keeping images completely inside of the sections they illustrate. File:Malmoffplayers1962.jpg overlaps two sections and displaces a section head. It should be moved up into the "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory" section. Done
  • Moved into "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory" section.--Reckless182 (talk) 06:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:Nya Malmö Stadion.jpg also overlaps two sections. Perhaps one of the three stadium images could go into another section, or perhaps one of the images could be deleted. Done
  • I moved one of the pictures into a section in the history section and kept the other two in the stadium section with one to the left and one to right.--Reckless182 (talk) 06:39, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

SourcingY

• Quite a few paragraphs in the article are without sources, and parts of other paragraphs are unsourced. In the "Early years" section, for example, the second and third paragraphs need sources. A good rule of thumb is to provide a source for every paragraph as well as every set of statistics, every direct quotation, and every claim that is unusual. If one source supports a whole paragraph, the inline citation should go at the very end of the paragraph. Typically, many paragraphs have multiple citations here and there inside them, as needed, as well as one at the end that covers at least the final sentence or sentences. If you look again at IFK Göteborg, you will see the pattern I am talking about.  Done
  • Will look into it and add more sources.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I have now put down a couple of hours to provide a source for every paragraph. Hopefully it is OK to satisfy GA criteria.--Reckless182 (talk) 21:34, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Subject-verb agreementY

• In the first sentence of the lead, "club" is matched with "is", a singular verb, but in the second sentence it is matched with a singular verb "has" and a plural pronoun "them". In a U.S.-centric article, the singular forms would be the norm, and in U.K.-centric articles the plural would be the norm. Thus in a U.S.-centric article the second sentence would read, "Formed in 1910, the club has won 16 national championship titles and 14 national cup titles, making it one of the most successful clubs in Sweden". In a U.K.-centric article, it would read, "Formed in 1910, the club have won 16 national championship titles and 14 national cup titles, making them one of the most successful clubs in Sweden". You can see the U.K. pattern in History of Bradford City A.F.C., for example. IFK Göteborg, which you mention above, begins like a U.S.-centric article, matching "club" with "it", but later in the lead matching "club" with "they". I see this as a flaw in the IFK Göteborg article, which is a good but not perfect model. Would a Swedish newspaper say "Malmö FF is" or "Malmö FF are"? Would it say "the club have won", or would it say, "the club has won"? My suggestion would be to choose one (club as a plural noun) or the other (club as a singular noun) and stick with it throughout the article. Done
  • I decided to use the UK format since it is the most used in Sweden, thus I've changed all singular form regarding the club to plural instead throughout the entire article.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

CopyeditingY

• I see a lot of small problems with grammar, punctuation, prose flow, wordiness, and the like throughout the article. I did a bit of copyediting near the beginning, but the whole article would benefit from copyediting. You might be able to find a willing copyeditor via WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.  Done
  • After I've finished everything else I will request for someone to do a copyedit.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Copyedit request sent. Waiting for reply from WP:WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors/Requests.--Reckless182 (talk) 23:02, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • Copyediting is being done by Demiurge1000 and will most likely be finished within the next day or two.--Reckless182 (talk) 09:50, 26 December 2010 (UTC)
        • Copeyediting by Demiurge1000 is now finished.--Reckless182 (talk) 23:14, 28 December 2010 (UTC)

ReferencesY

• The citations to Swedish-language publications and web sites should include the |language=Swedish parameter in the citation templates. See IFK Göteborg for examples of how this is done.  Done

Image licensesY

• The description page for File:GamlaIP.jpg includes a link in the "source" line, but the link is circular; it simply links to the image. Instead, it should link to the source in such a way that image reviewers will be able to verify that the image has been correctly licensed. Done
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've added a clarification in the description in the permission field, I've also corrected the link so that it can be verified.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• The description page for File:Malmoffplayers1962.jpg includes a link to a newspaper, but where is the image? Can reviewers use this link to verify the license claims? Done
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've added a clarification in the description in the permission field, there should be no problem with verifying the correctly put license.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:Guldlaget1944.jpg. Does this one have a valid license? How can reviewers be sure? Done
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • I've added a clarification in the description in the permission field, there should be no problem with verifying the correctly put license.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

• File:Nya Malmö Stadion.jpg. I don't see how reviewers can verify the license for this one.
  • Working on it.--Reckless182 (talk) 11:50, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
    • Noticed the problem here, the original uploader is most certainly not the author and therefore the license can't be trusted. I think I might have an idea of who actually took the picture, I will try to veryfy this in some way or otherwise use File:Swedbank stadion 29 june 2009.jpg as a replacement.--Reckless182 (talk) 12:41, 17 December 2010 (UTC)
      • I've notified the author of the picture and he confirmed to me that the image is not in the public domain and that he has copyright. I have nominated the file for speedy deletion and I will replace it in the article with the previous mentioned image which is in the free domain without a doubt.--Reckless182 (talk) 15:26, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

A few other commentsY

• In the lede: "For this, Malmö FF were awarded the Svenska Dagbladet Gold Medal, as of 2010 the only club to have been so." - Maybe "as of 2010 the only club so honored"?  Done

• In "Early years": "... the club was relegated... " - Link to Promotion and relegation for readers unfamiliar with football leagues? Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "The club had paid their players a small sum of money for each game, something which was against the rules at the time but which was common to do by many clubs;" - Perhaps "... which many clubs commonly did"?  Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "The unofficial version of the events tells the story that it was in fact local rival IFK Malmö who reported this to the Swedish Football Association." - Tighten to "The unofficial version of events suggests that local rival IFK Malmö reported the violation to the Swedish Football Association"? Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "Many of Malmö FF fans, especially among the older ones, still think of IFK Malmö's way of acting as an act of treason." - Tighten to "Many Malmö FF fans, especially older ones, still think of IFK Malmö's actions as treason"? Done

• In "First years in Allsvenskan and early glory": "In the same year legendary chairman Eric Persson was elected after being secretary since 1929, he would go on to serve as chairman until 1974." - Delete "legendary"? If you choose to keep "legendary", you should provide a source.  Done
  • I chose to remove "legendary" as it is hard to support the statement and I believe that it may be too subjective for the article, even though I am a fan of the club I want a neautral point of view.--Reckless182 (talk) 09:47, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 02:36, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Richie McCaw

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it is very close to good article quality and is possibly not that far from featured article. I have read it too many times now and it needs a fresh pair of eyes.

Thanks, AIRcorn (talk) 11:41, 8 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I've never played rugby or watched a complete game, and I come to this review with outsider eyes. The article is certainly broad in coverage. On the other hand, the lead's a bit too skimpy, and some of the jargon eludes me, as noted below. In addition, your lead image is marked for deletion and should be replaced with something else. Here are additional comments, mostly about Manual of Style issues.

Lead

• The lead should be an inviting summary of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to try to at least mention the main topic of each text section somewhere in the lead. The existing lead says nothing about the "Concussions" section, for example, and says little or nothing about his early years, international debut, personal life, and so on. I think you could easily expand the lead to two or three paragraphs. WP:LEAD has further advice.

• "a record-equaling 94 tests" - Link "test" to Test match (rugby union) for readers unfamiliar with rugby?

• "is now the most capped All Black captain" - Briefly explain or link "capped" on first use? What does it mean?

• "the joint highest paid player" - Why "joint" highest paid player? Does the meaning differ from "the highest paid player"?

Extended lead and wikilinked or reworded as suggested

Early years

• "played in the school's first fifteen" - Should "first fifteen" be briefly explained? Does it mean the regular starting players for the rugby team?

There are 15 players on a rugby team and in schoolboy rugby the "first fifteen" is the top school team followed by second fifteen then third fifteen etc. Will reword

• "That year he only got two starts off the bench... " - The phrase "starts off the bench" might need something more to clarify the jargon for non-fans. I think it means something like, "... only played twice, both times as a substitute".

Correct. I will use your wording

International debut

• "with an injury time try to number eight" - I have no idea what this means.

Injury time is when a ref adds a few more minutes to the game after it has finished to account for any time lost due to injuries. "Number eight" is a rugby position. I will reword and wikilink number eight.

Build-up to 2003 World Cup

• "McCaw was rested, along with 20 other members of the Tri Nations squad, from the 2002 end-of-year tour to the Europe." - I'm not sure sure what "to the Europe" means? Are some words missing?

"the" shouldn't be there. The tour was to Europe (England, Wales and France).

2003 World Cup

• "McCaw was selected in the 2003 All Blacks World Cup squad" - "Selected in" sounds odd. Maybe "selected for"?

Will change

• "New Zealand defeated South Africa in the quarter-finals 29–9,[32] in the second meeting between the two sides in a World Cup, the first being the Rugby World Cup Final in 1995, which the South African team won 15–12." - Too complex. I'd consider breaking this into two sentences: "New Zealand defeated South Africa in the quarter-finals 29–9,[32] in the second meeting between the two sides in a World Cup. The first had occurred in the 1995 Rugby World Cup Final, which the South Africans won 15–12."

Yep. I might even remove the second part as it is not really important to McCaw as he wasn't even playing then.

Concussions

• "His successor (and still current All Black coach)" - Here and in the lead and elsewhere, the word "current" poses problems for the future. As time passes, things described as "current" will no longer be current. It's usually better to specify a time or to find a work-around. Maybe something like "His successor (and All Black coach through 2010)" might work. Alternatively, you could simply delete "and still current All Black coach)" entirely.

Good point. I will change or delete where appropriate

• I think I'd add nbsps (no-break codes) to Tri Nations to keep it from being split awkwardly by line-break on computer screens. I didn't think of this until one in this section was split on my screen. Different screens split in different places, and the no-break codes solve the problem for all screens. WP:NBSP has details.

Will do.

Captaincy

• "or the one off test against Argentina" - Link or briefly explain "one-off test"?

Will change to "a single"

2007 World Cup

• "they were once again accused of choking on the world's biggest stage" - I'd substitute something literal for the "choking on stage" metaphor. Maybe something like "once again accused of weak play in the most important game"? Or something like that?

I might put it in quotation marks instead. "Choking" has become a bit of catchphrase among the media (in New Zealand and internationally) for the All Blacks performances during during world cups.

Redemption

• I'd move File:Richie McCaw in London, November 2008.jpg to the left so that he looks into the page rather than out per MOS:IMAGES.

Makes sense

• To remain neutral, the article should probably not say "an impressive 34–19 victory" but just "a 34-19 victory". Likewise "Another thrilling 24–28 victory" would be more neutral as "Another 24–28 victory".

I will tone down the scores a bit more.

Personal life

• "He is also raising money for a young Samoan from a village destroyed in the 2009 Tsunami, who broke his neck while playing rugby." - It's better to put the modifying clause right after the thing modified. Suggestion: "He is also raising money for a young Samoan who broke his neck playing rugby and whose village was destroyed in the 2009 Tsunami".

Good change

• "This high-paying contract with the New Zealand Rugby Union is not subject to form or fitness" - I have no idea what "not subject to form and fitness" means.

Someone else added this. It basically means that if he gets injured or starts playing badly he will still be paid the full amount. Will reword

References

• The dates should not include the day of the week.
• All of the citations to on-line sources should include the date of most recent access. You can add the |accessdate = parameter to the "cite" templates and add the date there.
• The date formatting in the citations can follow the same format as the main text (31 December 1980) or can be formatted like this: 1980-12-31. In either case, the date formatting should be consistent throughout the reference section.

I will work through these.

Image licenses

• The lead image is marked for deletion and should be replaced with something else. The other image licenses look fine to me.

A discussion is in progress and I will await the outcome. Unfortunately I don't think there are any other free images available. I wish I had taken my camera to the last game I watched, will have to wait awhile before they start playing again.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 22:16, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks, I will work my way through your suggestions. AIRcorn (talk) 23:39, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

---

Conspiracy journalism

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Article listed to validate that it meets WP standards and provides sufficient WP:NOT. Article has been revamped since original WP:MfD.

Thanks, Jettparmer (talk) 19:05, 20 December 2010 (UTC)

PR is meant for well-developed articles that are getting ready for WP:GAN, WP:FAC, or WP:FLC. The existing article does not fall into any of those categories. In addition, it has major clean-up tags (orphan and possible deletion) and is unstable. Finetooth (talk) 02:41, 25 December 2010 (UTC)

---

List of manga series by volume count

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think it should need one.

Thanks

---

History of the New York Jets

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…after initially failing to bring this article to FA status, extensive renovations have been made however Wehwalt and I would like any additional feedback before we take it to FAC.

Thanks, The Writer 2.0 ^Talk 21:56, 15 December 2010 (UTC)

• Comments Looks better, I'm a little jealous because it looks like you're going to beat me to the punch and have the first NFL history FA. Some preliminary notes (I may look more later):

• See WP:PLUSING; a reading of that could improve the article, especially as concerns the word "with". You can just use the google highlight function to help fix that. Sometimes the word is ok, but like Tony says in that piece it can be ambiguous.
• Its good that you incorporated "New York" in place of just referring to the team as the Jets, which fan editors normally do out of habit, as this gives the article more of a neutral tone. But I would even use it a little more, it instantly increases the perceived neutrality of the article because you'll never hear a fan refer to his team that way. Don't get redundant with it but a little more imho. Also, when you do its better to refer to the opposing team by their city as well. "New York beat Chicago" sounds more fluid and consistent than "New York beat the Bears". Also one is plural and one is singular so there's a discord. If you have to say the full name like when you're saying the team for the first time, I would stick with the Jets that way both are plural. "The Jets beat the Denver Broncos" sounds better than the "New York beat the Denver Broncos".
• In general try to tighten writing and avoid repetitiveness. In sentences like this "In spite of these departures, the Jets managed to finish with a 8–7–1 record." I would just shorten the last half to "the Jets finished 8–7–1." And here: "Jimmy the Greek predicted the Jets would go to the Super Bowl in 1980, but the Jets' record fell to 4–12 by the end of the season." This one: "but they ended the season 4–12." Especially since you don't have to say "Jets" twice in one sentence in that example, and the other changes tighten the wording. I am aware you have to alternate the phraseology to avoid repetitiveness, but anytime there are too many needless words I don't think its worth it.
• "After a strong performance by rookie quarterback Browning Nagle in the team's 5–0 1992 preseason, Coslet chose him as the Jets starting quarterback." The ending could be "Coslet promoted him to the starting lineup." That way you don't say quarterback twice in the same sentence.
• "legendary quarterback Johnny Unitas" "Hall of Fame" might be better than legendary, even though legendary is true in this case. People get annoyed by descriptive terms even if they're true at FAC.
• Cimini's theory about Thomas is not the accepted general opinion of him. I know its sourced but I would not include it personally.

• In a sense sports articles are very hard to write in that you have to repeat the same kind of info over and over again without sounding repetitive. Every other sentence has records, division standings, game scores, or playoff results. When I work on other kinds of articles I find them a lot easier to write tbh. Just be sure to take to look at each sentence in comparison to the ones surrounding it for repetitive words or phrases. If I have time later I might try to help, but I'm not really an expert myself. AaronY (talk) 00:39, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

Thanks for the quick response, Aaron. I would be grateful for guidance from all reviewers on the use of sports idiom in the article. As you may know, we had an objection from an Australian cricket fan, and I'll quote " Some examples from the Lead include, "the Jets made the playoffs" – I assume this means the Jets reached the playoff stage of the competition. And does "blowing a ten-point fourth quarter lead" mean "despite having achieved.."? " Now, those comments were made I believe in good faith. It is easy to smile at this, but the fact is that this and similar comments cost us our first shot at FA, and it is symptomatic of the audience we have to play to. Thoughts on gearing the article to the sensibilities of the reviewers would especially be welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:47, 16 December 2010 (UTC)

---

List of awards and nominations received by Kid Cudi

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I would like to nominated it for Featured List status in the near future. I've done my best to model the article after other FL lists about recording artists. Any input on changes that need to be made for it to be FL status would be very appreciated. Thanks, Crystal Clear x3 09:16, 2 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: The basic layout looks fine to me and seems parallel to FLs in the same sub-category of the music lists. I know nothing about Kid Cudi except what this article tells me. Here are my further thoughts:

Heads and subheads

• The Manual of Style advises against repeating the main words of the article title in the section heads and subheads. For this reason, I would suggest dropping the word "award" from "BET Award" and the others. Just "BET", "BET Hip Hop", and so on would be fine. WP:MOSHEAD has details.

 Done

Overlinking

• The linking is a bit irregular. It's good practice to link unfamiliar terms once in the lead on first use and perhaps once in the main text on first use. You link Day 'n' Nite on first use in the lead, which is fine, but then don't link it on first use in "BET Hip Hop Awards" and do link it "Beatport Music Awards" and again and again in the later tables. I think just linking it once in the lead and once in the "BET Hip Hop Awards" would be fine; the other links are redundant.

 Done

Lead

• Since the lead makes claims not supported by a reliable source later in the article, they should be supported with inline citations here. I'm thinking specifically of the few biographical details; e.g. birth in Cleveland, notice by West, signing with GOOD Music. Where does this information come from? See List of awards and nominations received by Timbaland for examples of citations in the lead of a featured list.

• "Kid Cudi is a three-time Grammy Award nominated American rapper and actor from Cleveland, Ohio." - Rather than stringing together so many adjectives in front of "rapper", I'd consider recasting. Suggestion: "Kid Cudi is an American rapper and actor from Cleveland, Ohio, who has been nominated for Grammy Awards three times."

 Done

• Not knowing much about the Grammys, I wonder how unusual it is to be nominated. Lots of people get nominated for political offices, for example, but few win. Would it be useful to add some statistics here; e.g., number of nominations per year and number of winners per year? Ditto for the BET awards and the other categories of awards. I don't see that other editors provide this kind of information in the few parallel music FLs I've looked at, but I would ask the same question of them.

• Who are the nominators? Can anyone nominate anyone? Would it be helpful to include something brief about the nominating procedures for each kind of award? Even if other music FLs don't include this kind of information, I would at least consider including it. Something that is featured can still be improved.

• Link mixtape in the second sentence?

 Done

• "The release of his debut album, as well as its lead single "Day 'n' Nite", saw him be nominated for a number of awards, including three Grammy Awards and a MTV Video Music Award." - Since a release can literally see, I'd recommend something else. Suggestion: "The release of his debut album, as well as its lead single "Day 'n' Nite", led to his nomination for three Grammy Awards, an MTV Video Music Award, and other honors."

 Done

• "He has thus far in his career won..." - Instead of saying "thus far", which is ambiguous, I'd suggest saying something like "Through 2010 he has won... ".

 Done

BET Awards

• "and other minorities in music, acting, sports, and other fields of entertainment over the past year." - Tighten by deleting "over the past year".

 Done

References

• Citation 2 should include the date of publication, September 17, 2009.

 Done

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 21:08, 11 December 2010 (UTC)

---

C. D. Howe

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… It is on my FAC list and I'd appreciate feedback.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 23:03, 17 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is an excellent piece of work, nearly ready for FAC. I did not check all of the image licenses, but I did a pretty close line-by-line reading of the text. Here is my list of suggestions and comments:

Infobox

• Shouldn't the credit line beneath the Howe image be replaced with something like "Formal portrait, about 1940"? The credits belong on the image description page, I reckon.

Lead

• "After working for the Canadian Government as an engineer" - Lowercase "government"?

• "There, he took major parts in many new enterprises, including the founding of the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation (CBC), Trans-Canada Air Lines (today Air Canada), and playing a crucial role in Canada's war effort." - To maintain parallel construction, "and played" rather than "and playing"?

• "The Government's attempt to impose closure... " - Lowercase "government"? Ditto elsewhere throughout the article?

Early years and academic career

• "Barker stated he was determined on a business career... " - Maybe "determined to follow" or "determined to pursue" would be slightly better than "determined on"?

Engineer and businessman

• "After some surprise at the unusual suit from a man she barely knew... " - Will average readers stumble over "suit" used in this way"? Would "attention" be more clear?

• "Still considering that offer, and waiting to hear from Mackenzie King, in late 1934, Howe agreed to be accepted as the Liberal candidate in Port Arthur." - This sentence would flow a little better if you removed the comma after 1934.

• "Over the next several years, Howe's business expanded, serving as consulting engineers, and, much more profitably, as general contractors." - "Business" is singular, whereas "engineers" and "contractors" are plural. Suggestion: "Over the next several years, Howe's business expanded into engineering consulting and, much more profitably, general contracting".

• "This made him unpopular among private wheat companies: his firm did not receive one contract to build terminal elevators for private firms in the 1920s... " - "One contract" is ambiguous. At first glance, it might mean "all but one". Would "did not receive any contracts" be more clear?

• "In the early 1920s, Howe turned down several requests that he run for alderman in Port Arthur." - Maybe "that he campaign for the office of alderman" would be more clear than "run for"? Also, link "alderman"?

• "During his ministerial career, he replied in response to an opposition question hinting at nepotism... " - Link nepotism?

• "with capacity of 7,000,000 bu (21,000,000 mm)" - Bushels and millimetres? If the first unit is the bushel, then this conversion might the right one: 7,000,000 imperial bushels (250,000 m³). Or you can choose just one of the three outputs. Maybe litres is best. These can be linked by adding the |lk=on parameter to the {{convert}} template like this: 7,000,000 imperial bushels (250,000 m³). Maybe best is 7,000,000 imperial bushels (250,000,000 L). A further complication is that there seems to be a slight difference between a U.S. bushel and a U.K. bushel. (I don't know this stuff off the top of my head; I'm just looking it up now.) I'm just assuming that these are U.K. (imperial) bushels. The difference is probably not significant enough to worry about in this context.

Election and prewar

• "to deal with the Depression" - Link to Great Depression?

• "He finally received a promise of a Cabinet position were both Howe and the Liberals elected;" - Suggestion: "He finally received a promise of a Cabinet position if both Howe and the Liberals were elected;"

• "amassing a majority of 3,784" - Does this mean he got 3,784 votes, or does this mean he won by 3,784 votes, or does it mean something else. I'm not sure.

• "Howe was the only engineer in Cabinet" - Should this be "in the Cabinet" or is "the" not necessary?

• "Mackenzie King appointed Howe to two portfolios" - Would it be useful to briefly explain "portfolio" or to link it to Portfolio (government)#Canada?

• "The debate in the House went smoothly until Howe angered the opposition by declaring, under Bennett's administration, the Conservatives had been corrupt." - Slightly ambiguous. More clear might be "The debate in the House went smoothly until Howe angered the opposition by declaring that under Bennett's administration the Conservatives had been corrupt."

Second World War

• "With almost four years gone in his government's five-year term, in mid-1939, Mackenzie King considered an election, and asked British Prime Minister Neville Chamberlain in early August if he thought anything was likely to happen in the international scene" - I think the flow would be better if you removed the comma after "mid-1939" and the comma after "election". Also, would "in the international scene" be better as "on the international scene"?

• "near the German-Polish border" - En dash rather than hyphen here; i.e., "German–Polish"?

• "promptly announced that it would immediately be prorogued" - Link "prorogued" to Wiktionary entry, prorogue?

• "lent for a token one dollar a year by their companies" - Maybe "loaned to the government by their companies for a token payment of one dollar a year"?

• "Victory was turned around and went on to" - For clarity, maybe "The Victory Corporation went on to... "? Otherwise, a comical reading would be that Victory was "turned around" into Defeat.

• "Opposition question on whether such a large sum could be cut" - Would "reduced" be slightly more clear than "cut"?

McKenzie King years

• "but was returned in an Ontario by-election within months" - Link by-election?

• Remove credit line from caption?

• "Hon. C. D. Howe watches a male scientist" - Delete "male"?

• Link "interference fringe" in the caption to Interference (wave propagation)?

St. Laurent government

• "In early 1950, St. Laurent considered recommending the appointment of Howe as governor general." - Maybe I am not seeing an earlier instance, but should governor general be linked here to Governor General of Canada?

• "—St. Laurent and his External Relations minister, Lester Pearson, began planning the troop movements on the train returning from the funeral." - I think here I'd replace the em dash with a terminal period and then cast the next sentence as "On the train returning from the funeral, Laurent and his External Relations minister, Lester Pearson, began planning troop movements."

• "Howe was unenthusiastic about the war, seeing it as the wrong war in the wrong place, and that Canadian troops should not be sent." - Not parallel. Suggestion: "Howe, unenthusiastic about the war, saw it as the wrong war in the wrong place and thought that Canadian troops should not be sent."

• "The early 1950s saw an era of prosperity in Canada; most years there was a government surplus." - Missing word? More clear would be "The early 1950s saw an era of prosperity in Canada; in most years there was a government surplus."

• "In 1951, the Government brought in an old age pension for Canadians to receive at age 70." - Lowercase "government"? Also, "brought in" might not be clear to everyone. Something like "approved" or "created" or "legislated"?

• "Tory frontbencher Donald Fleming contended that the extension" - Link "Tory" to Tory#Canada and frontbencher and maybe re-casting as "Donald Fleming, a Tory frontbencher," to keep from creating a long set of bumped links?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 21:18, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. I will work through your comments before nominating for FAC, and I will look at the backlog and see what's up.--Wehwalt (talk) 00:17, 24 December 2010 (UTC)

---