Wikipedia:Peer review/Antarctica/archive1

Antarctica[edit]

I've expanded this article from a barely-above stub status. I'm looking for proofreaders and comments. Thanks! Gflores ^Talk 19:13, 6 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I think it odd that the Flora & Fauna section is several times longer than the short Geography section. Surely the geography is the main thing going for it? --Oldak Quill 08:19, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. That was one of the first things I noted on Talk:Antarctica/to do. I'll try to expand from the relatively short main geography article. Gflores ^Talk 18:06, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I've expanded it a bit more. There's the main article for readers interested in more specific information. Gflores ^Talk 20:24, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Some comments:

It's a decent-enough article, but I think that the prose could use a little extra fine-tuning in places. Perhaps an editor could give it a once-over?
Please don't use external links as references. The links tend to suffer from rot over time. The final link ([16] I think) was broken when I checked. Inline citations are generally much preferred for references.
Finally, shouldn't some mention be made of Lake Vostok?

Thank you. — RJH 15:41, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

1. Hopefully someone can copyedit it, my native language isn't English. 2. Yup, references are on the to-do list. Link [16] was working just a couple of days ago... just my luck. 3. Good idea. Gflores ^Talk 15:51, 8 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I caught a small typo. It looks like good work. Although if you're planning on the next level the recent FAs tend to have more than 13 footnotes. Durova 03:23, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good catch. I always get confused with phenomena/phenomenon. I've now added a few more references. Gflores ^Talk 04:43, 10 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]