Wikipedia:Peer review/Aredvi Sura Anahita/archive1
Please review the above-mentioned article, in particular looking for weaknesses in style, cohesiveness, structure and factual or logic errors. Even if not immediately evident from the article's history, it is the work of many months. Thanks. -- Fullstop 10:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Here are my thoughts.
- "- together with other shrine cults –" here you use two different types of dash.
- The lead is somewhat confusing and intense. I'm sure for someone schooled on the subject, such as you are, it makes perfect sense, but for the layman, it's boggling. Perhaps it could be "tamed".
- At points, you reference the same... reference twice within one sentence. For instance: "Only Arədvī (a word otherwise unknown) is specific to the divinity,[3] but - for etymological reasons - could originally have meant 'moist'.[3]" I don't think that the reference halfway through is necessary; if someone looks to verify what you have said, they can simply read the reference at the end.
As for logical and scholastic content, I'm not even going to try because this goes right over my head. Seegoon 15:31, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- I agree, I'm having a hard time understanding the text. But very well referenced. - Tutmosis 17:04, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ t 21:32, 3 November 2006 (UTC)
- Thanks very much for the tips so far. I'll get to them tomorrow.
- Any suggestions how the article could be changed so as to be more meaningful to a general audience? Is the vocabulary too technical? Does the article demand "prior knowledge"? Is it poorly structured?