Wikipedia:Peer review/July 2011

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

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.


The Space Between Us (novel)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to know how to further improve it. The style and reception sections will probably need the most looking at. I would eventually like to nominate it at GAN and then FAC. Thanks, Kaguya-chan (talk) 16:00, 31 May 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: Because I am pressed for time at the moment, I have confined myself to comments on the lead and "Plot" section.

  • The lead must specify name of publisher and date of publication.
  • Overlinking: "widow", "domestic servant" (possibly other terms throughout article)
  • "a common bond" sits oddly in the list of "similar situations". The common bond between the two women is that they have shared experiences - abuse, loneliness etc
  • The word "descendant" is generally used for several generations down the line. I would not call my children my "descendents", or if I had any, my grandchildren, any more than they would call me their ancestor. Perhaps "dependents" would be a beter choice of word.
  • "the social class in India" - delete "the"
  • "and whom Umrigar had much admiration for" → "and for whom Umrigar had much admiration".
  • As the setting is modern India, why "Bombay" not Mumbai?

This section is weak at present, difficult to follow if you don't know the book. I found the summary rather confusing, with a lot of awkwardness in the prose. Here are a few examples of problems:-

  • "six-five" → "sixty-five" (or 65)
  • "after getting into a work-related accident which caused him to lose three fingers" Clumsy. Try: "after a work-related accident caused him to lose three fingers..."
  • More awkwardness in prose and punctuation: "Her other child, Pooja married, only to die of AIDS along with her husband, and orphaned Maya at a young age." Perhaps "Her daughter Pooja had married, but had died of AIDS together with her husband, leaving Maya an orphan at a young age"
  • "Meanwhile" is superfluous, as is "own" in "her own physically abusive husband"
  • Is "Sera" the same person as "Serabai"? If so, use one form of the name. But this sentence is at present very difficult to follow: "abusively forced her superstitions about menstruation on her" needs more clarity. Then, "tends to her pregnant daughter Dinaz while she pays for Maya's abortion" - is a very awkward combination of two distinct events.
  • What does the reference to the balloon seller mean?

One general point: the book itself should not be listed among the references.

Brianboulton (talk) 19:09, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to look over the article. Your comments are appreciated. Kaguya-chan (talk) 14:14, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

American Cream Draft[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…this has been a GA for a while, and I'm playing with the idea of taking it to FAC. An overall eye for horsey jargon would be appreciated, as well as a feeling for comprehensiveness. This article is shorter than the ones that I generally take to FAC, so I'm wondering if there are any holes that I'm missing. Also, comments on whether I've focused too much on a few refs - although there's really not that much out there on this breed. Thanks in advance, Dana boomer (talk) 21:43, 1 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on yet another interesting horse article, here are some nit-picky suggestions for improvement. I think this is nearly ready for FAC.

  • The lead says The American Cream Draft is a rare draft horse breed, the only such breed developed in the United States. but the body of the article qualifies that statement as The American Cream is the only breed of draft horse developed in the United States that is still in existence today.[4] The led makes it sounds as if this the only draft horse breed ever developed in the US, the body seems to say it is one of several such breeds developed, though the only one still in existence.
  • Tweaked.
  • By the way, it might be useful to mention the other extinct breeds (assume there are not many, if there are many name a few). Also if the date of extinction of the last other breed is known, that would be useful to include (so something like "The American Cream is the only breed of draft horse developed in the United States that is still in existence; the X BREED went extinct in YEAR.") Not great, but gives you an idea hopefully
  • I understand your point, but I honestly don't know what other breeds the source is discussing. They could be meaning the draft types that were prominent in early America, but these were more styles than actual breeds. Or there could have been some smaller breeds that died out in the early to mid 20th century as mechanization became more prominent.
  • Problem with conversion Mares stand 15 to 16 hands (60 to 64 inches, 152 to 163 cm) high and weigh 1,500 to 1,600 pounds (680 to 730 kg), while stallions and geldings stand 16 to 16.3 hands (64 to 67 inches, 163 to 170 cm) for mares 1 hand difference is 4 inches (60 to 64), for the stallons 0.3 hands difference is 3 inches (64 to 67).
  • Actually, the conversion is correct. A hand is four inches (it's linked by the conversion template used), and to count portions of hands you use .# of inches. So, 14.0, 14.1, 14.2, 14.3, 15, etc.
  • I would briefly explain or link foundation stock in A cream mare with dark skin and a light mane and tail can be accepted for "foundation stock," while ...
  • Done.
  • Is this an error? Purebred American Cream foals that are too dark are accepted into the main breed registry may be recorded into an appendix registry.[4] If they are too dark how are they accepted in the main breed registry?
  • That was supposed to be "to be accepted". Fixed.
  • Avoid vague time terms like current Based on current knowledge, [the?] breed also does not carry the cream gene, even though breeders refer to the desired color as "cream".[6] Since the source cited is from 2003, I would use that year to define the knowledge.
  • Fixed.
  • Shouldn't the verb eb plural (are produced, not is produced)? ...and the gold champagne body color, ivory mane and tail, light skin and light eyes associated with the American Cream Draft is produced by the action of the champagne gene on a chestnut base coat.[11][12]
  • Fixed
  • Link foal on earlier first use and why is it capitalized here? The eyes of champagne Foals are blue at birth, darkening as they age, and a foal's skin is bright pink.[14]
  • Fixed.
  • Any way to avoid "map[ping] the gene" twice in one sentence? The mapping of the gene was announced in 2008, and an American Cream Draft Cross was one of the animals used to help map the gene.[16]
  • Fixed.
  • Tweak The breed descends from a foundation mare named Old Granny, who [which?] was probably foaled between 1900 and 1905. She was first noticed at an auction in Story County, Iowa in 1911 and purchased by Harry Lakin, a well known stock dealer.[5]
  • I think that "who" is correct in this instance. "Which" sounds to me like an object, rather than an animal.
  • I assume the breeding program mentioned in the last sentence is specific to Colonial Williamsburg In the villiage they are used for wagon and carriage rides, and there is breeding program there that is working to increase breed numbers.[21] If so, it would help to say so, as breeding programs to increase numbers have already been mentioned.
  • Fixed.
  • Refs used look OK to me and there does not seem to be an over-reliance on any one source.
  • Images are also fine (though I did not check all)
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 13:50, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

I tweaked a couple of Dana's tweaks. Dana is correct on the conversion and we can't seem to find any other draft breeds developed in the US, most stuff here other than the American Cream is, at best, crossbreds from stock of the European breeds. To the extent some American-developed breeds had workhorse uses, they were the all-purpose breeds like the "foundation type" Morgan, which is not at all a draft-type animal, just a sturdy one. Montanabw(talk) 16:50, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Cog (advertisement)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm looking to push this article through the FAC process soon, so any comments on structure, referencing, copyediting, or general fixes would be greatly appreciated! GeeJo (t)(c) • 06:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Thanks for your work on this interesting article about an especially clever ad. I remember finding the ad especially entertaining the first time I saw it (or bits of it online). Here are a few suggestions for further improvement.


  • "On the other end of the seesaw is a 12 V battery." - Should "volt" be spelled out? Can the viewer really tell for sure that it's a 12-volt battery, or is that an assumption? Would "car battery" be better?


  • "The stated goal of the campaign was to increase Honda's share of the UK market to 5% within three years and to change the public image of the brand to from dull but functional to warm and consumer-friendly, all on a lower marketing budget than their predecessors had demanded." - Two things: (1) "Percent" or "per cent" is preferred to % in simple cases like this. (2) The "to from" combination appears to be a typo. Probably this should read "... change the public image of the brand from dull but functional to warm and consumer friendly."
  • Link "strapline" to Advertising slogan? I had never heard of "strapline", although I could guess at its meaning from the context.


  • "Approval for the script took another month, with Honda requesting several specific features of the Accord appear in the final cut... " - Insert "that" between "requesting" and "several"?
  • "Approval for the script took another month, with Honda requesting several specific features of the Accord appear in the final cut, such as a door with a wing-mirror indicator and a rain-sensitive windscreen, as the company were looking to highlight these features in sales brochures. - On the other hand, it might be better to recast the whole sentence since the "with plus -ing" construction is somewhat awkward, and the sentence seems a bit too complicated. Maybe: "Approval for the script took another month. Honda insisted that several specific Accord features, such as a door with a wing-mirror indicator and a rain-sensitive windscreen, appear in the final cut. The company planned to highlight these features in sales brochures." Or something like that.
  • Do "direct" and "music videos" need to be linked. Most readers already know what they mean, I think.


  • "during the moment when the muffler rolls across the floor.[18]) - I think the ref number should come after the end parentheses rather than before.
  • "The Accord shown at the end of Cog was, at the time, one of only six hand-assembled models in the world... " - This is a bit ambiguous. Does it mean "car models" rather than models of any sort? Does it mean "Accord models"?
  • "Flame artist Barnsley (aka Andrew Wood[20])," - Here I'd move the ref number to right after the comma.


  • "Even so, the constant movement of parts on-camera meant that there were no good lighting references to work from when the time came to stitch the two 60-second shots into a single seamless piece." - It won't be clear to most readers what a "good lighting reference" means. Could the technical importance of a lighting reference be briefly explained, maybe in a note if adding it to the main text damages the prose flow?


  • "The full 120-second version of the advertisement aired only ten times in all, and only in the ten days after the initial screening." - Generally, numbers larger than nine appear as digits. Maybe "10 times" and "10 days"?
  • Linking "remote control", "documentary", "brochure", and "music video" seems unnecessary.
  • "Sales of Honda vehicles in the United Kingdom jumped by 28%... " - I'd recommend "percent" or "per cent".


  • The collapsing list might be better at the bottom of the article. I would think about a horizontal, non-collapsing format and about checking WP:FA for models of how this might be done.
  • "It receiving more awards than any commercial in history;" - Should that be "received"?
  • "with the jury's chairman Charles Inge commenting" - Generally, it's best to recast the "with plus -ing" constructions. "With" isn't a conjunction.
  • "tradition holds that it is bad form for the chairman of the jury to vote for a piece by his own agency." - Since the chair could in some cases be a woman, should this be recast to remain gender-neutral? Maybe: "tradition holds that it is bad form for the chairperson of the jury to vote for a piece by his or her own agency."

In advertising

  • "an 30-second animated advertisement for Heinz Tomato Ketchup" - Shouldn't this be "a" rather than "an"?


  • I count 20 red links in the article, which is quite a lot. Generally, before heading to FAC with something, I try to create articles for the red links, partly to avoid trouble but mainly to expand the encyclopedia. The total of 20 can be quickly pared down somewhat by eliminating duplicate red links. For example, Sense is redlinked in three places.
  • The link checker tool at the top of this review page finds one dead URL in the citations. It's in citation 52.
  • To citation 76, you might add "registration required".
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:10, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! This is exactly the type of thing I was looking for. GeeJo (t)(c) • 11:49, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Jonuz Kaceli[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would know what I could improve on the article.

Thanks, Vinie007 18:57, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

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

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many FA political biographies at Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Politics_and_government_biographies which should have some useful model articles.
  • The lead does not really follow WP:LEAD. It should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article, and 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 fact that he was one of the 23 victims of the regime's Massacre of 1951 is only in the lead.
  • For expansion ideas, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
  • The article leaves me with more questions than answers. What did his company do? WHy did the regime arrest him? What is the background of the massacre? Why was he singled out as one of the victims?
  • A good rule to remember is provide context to the reader - my guess is that readers from Albania will know much more about the massacre, but the general reader needs some background and context.
  • The image File:Junuz Kaceli.png has to specify the source - where did the photo come from? It cannot be PD if the source etc are not specified (and even then I assume it is WP:FAIR USE as I imagine the image is still under copyright)
  • 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
  • Lots of little typos. June is the ENglish spelling (not Juni). He received the death penalty, not the "dead penalty" - this needs a copyedit.
  • Not much else to say as it is so short an article
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 13:58, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


This peer review discussion has been closed.
Would like to see this article developing into a FA someday with inputs from experienced editors. Thanks, morelMWilliam 08:43, 16 June 2011 (UTC)


This looks like an interesting film, but I think more can be done with the article. Here are some suggestions:

  • Needs a copyedit for prose and WP:MOS problems. Perhaps someone at the WP:Guild of Copyeditors can help.
  • Each of the sections can do with more expansion. Here is a sampling of information that should be incorporated. Perhaps somebody of Wikiproject Films could help with finding industry sources:
  • Do you know the shooting schedule?
  • How long did it take to shoot the film?
  • Was the film set primarily outdoors, or were indoor scenes shot in a studio or someplace?
  • What did it cost to make the film? How much money did the film earn?
  • The cast section should be more that a bulleted list. Depending on what the sources tell you, try to fill information about the cast in relation to the film. For example:
  • How did the actors become involved?
  • Did the director want specific actors?
  • The "screening" should also be more than a bulleted list. Do any of the sources give reactions or post-screening reviews of the film?
  • The critical reception section isn't too bad. The link to the Arizona Reporter should be reformatted to link in the references section, and the names of magazines and newspapers should be in italics.
  • The Awards section needs to be tidied.
  • The article needs a themes and maybe style section. What are the themes in the film? Does the filmmaker use a specific style?
  • Use the toolbox at the top of the page to identify links to be disambiguated, and fix.

I don't know a lot about film articles, but I'd suggest having a look at other articles about films that are featured articles, found here.

I hope this is helpful. Thanks. Truthkeeper88 (talk) 19:40, 18 June 2011 (UTC)


Thanks for your time, Truthkeeper88. I would redo the article with your comments in mind. morelMWilliam 03:00, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

I converted the sections, Screenings, Cast and awards to tables. I am not sure about the themes and style section. Let me check the featured articles. I think I should expand the lead. Now trying to find the production info.morelMWilliam 05:45, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Abraham Quintanilla Jr[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like it to be a GA article. I addressed all concerns that the GAN had to say. There may be a prose problem with this article, but I will try to get that done.

Thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 22:16, 3 June 2011 (UTC)

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

  • I deleted the image of him in the article. Since he is a living person it is theoretically possible to obtain a free image of him, so Wikipedia policy is not to allow fair use images of such people.
  • I see this article was failed at WP:GAN with the comment Oh this is very bad, spelling and grammar mistakes throughout. Please get this copy-edited. Then it had a peer review without a copyedit. The first peer review said in part Your lack of activity means that a PR review is likely to highlight exactly the same issues as arose in the GA review.
  • Review processes like GAN and PR identify problems with articles, but are not usually places where such problems are fixed. Reviewers are almost always in short supply and do not have time to fix the problems, just point them out for the nominator to fix them. Having reviewed quite a few articles you have nominated at PR, I can say that poor grammar and spelling is a consistent problem in those articles. The problem is that a reviewer reads such articles and cannot get past the poor grammar to other problems.
  • That said here are a few issues I noticed. The first sentence does not follow WP:LEAD which says in part The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject. Since this man is best known as Selena's father that should be in the first sentence.
  • The italicized Abraham in the first sentence does not follow WP:ITALIC
  • In the second sentence, why is past yense (was) used? Since the man is still alive, it should be is.
  • Yet another problem sentence: Abraham is mostly known as the father of Selena, whose passion for music arose in his teens when he joined the group Los Dinos (English: The Guys) in the 1950s[3]. Here "whose" seems to refer to Selena (the noun right before it), but the phrase refers to her father.
  • Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase
  • Lots of spelling errors and odd word choices - "decent" is used where "descent" is meant
  • Article just does not make logical sense in places - for example in the lead two sentences in a row say Abraham quit the band in the early 1970s to support his family.[9] During the mid-1970s, while trying desperately to leave the music world... WHich is it it - did he quit the band in the early 1970s, or was he still trying to leave music in the mid-1970s?
  • Or what is the middle number of six? ...the middle child of six siblings...
  • Or a choir with only three members? raham attended Ray Miller High School and soon joined with two of his friends to form a high school choir called the Gumdrops
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 13:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)


Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take the article to FAC soon. Its recently had a copyedit but as FAC is very stringent I feel a peer review beforehand would help improve the article to the standard required. Thanks, NapHit (talk) 12:10, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this - I enjoyed reading it and it looks pretty good to me, here are some suggestions for improvement - mostly nitpicks, and a few places where citations are needed.

  • Since the stadium is mostly known as the home of Liverpool FC, I think I would include that in the first sentence.
  • Tighten The ground is due to host matches during the 2015 Rugby World Cup, with pool matches taking place at the stadium. to just The ground is due to host pool matches during the 2015 Rugby World Cup.
  • When I first read this sentence I was not sure what these four were - could this sentence make it clearer that they are stands? Perhaps something like Over the course of its history the stadium has gone through various stages of renovation and development, resulting in the current configuration of [four stands:] the Spion Kop, Main Stand, Centenary Stand, and Anfield Road.
  • More tightening Notable features of the stadium include two gates named after former Liverpool managers: the Bob Paisley gate and the Bill Shankly gate.
  • In the lead I would put the distance from the train station in the same paragraph with the public transit information - currently they are in two separate paragraphs.
  • I would start the third paragraph of the lead with the year of the initial plans. I would also mention the changes in ownership of the club as these seem to be involved in the changes in plans.
  • The infobox says the surface is grass, but the article does not repeat this.
  • Any idea of how much the land / stadium cost originally? Or what exactly the facilities were like when it opened? Perhaps include the etymology of Anfield?
  • MOS says just Houlding in Everton's landlord changed when John Houlding purchased the land from Orrell in 1885, charging direct rent.
  • Is Mr. Orrell of the first paragraph the same as John Orrell in the second? If so, why not call him John Orrell on first use?
  • When was the topmast of the Great Eastern added (year)? SInce the ship was broken up in 1889 or so, the chronology confuses me (unless the topmast was in the shipyard for decades before moving to the Kop).
  • I would give the year in this sentence Floodlights were installed at a cost of £12,000. and just say on 30 October of that year in the next sentence.
  • I would add that this was adopted during Shankly's time as manager in Across the Shankly Gates are the words You'll Never Walk Alone, the title of the hit song by Gerry & The Pacemakers adopted by Liverpool fans as the club's anthem.[14]
  • I would make the Liverpool connection to the Hillsborough disaster clearer - this is done nicely for the Kop. I realize most British readers will know this already, but I had to follow the link to find out what exactly it involved.
  • History section is pretty long - could it be split into two or perhaps three subsections?
Structures and facilities
  • Could File:Anfield outline.svg be color coded so that the 4 different stands are clearer - the labels are too small to read as it is in the article. If colors can't be added, the caption should make it clearer (top, left, right, bottom)
  • WP:MOSIMAGE says not to sandwich text between two images but the outline diagram and image of the Kop sandwich the text. Since Future and Other uses have no images, could one of the images from this section be moved down - the Kop is described as being unrivaled in the Future section, so could the Kop image be moved there and the caption tweaked? Or could a {{Doubleimage}} template be used?
  • Can the Reduc@te centre either be linked or briefly explained?
  • Make clearer that Shankly was Scottish so this make sense The Shankly Gates, in tribute of Bill Shankly, Paisley's predecessor between 1959 and 1974, are at the Anfield Road end. Their design includes a Scottish flag, a Scottish thistle, the Liverpool badge, and the words "You'll Never Walk Alone".[30]
  • Tweak ter attending a number of games at Anfield, Henry stated that "the Kop is unrivaled", and "it would be hard to replicate that feeling anywhere else."[40] to ...unrivaled", adding "it would be hard to replicate that feeling anywhere else."[40]
Other uses
  • Needs a ref Wales have staged three matches at Anfield—against Scotland in 1977, Italy in 1998, and Denmark in 1999.
  • Indicate who won or lost? on 12 June 1934 Nelson Tarleton [lost a bout?] fought for the World Featherweight title against Freddie Miller
  • When was this Professional tennis was played at Anfield on boards on the pitch. US Open champion, Bill Tilden, and Wimbledon champion, Fred Perry, entertained the crowds in an exhibition match.
  • Any reason not to have these events more in chronological order (at least within a paragraph)?
  • Needs a ref or two - The highest average attendance at Anfield over a league season was 48,127, set in the 1972–73 season. The lowest average attendance at Anfield was 29,608, set in the 1960–61 season, whilst the team was in the Second Division. The highest total seasonal attendance was recorded during the 2000–01 season, when the aggregate was 1,328,482. Also some FAC editors do not like "whilst" (I find it charming, though very British)
  • I would try to make captions more descriptive - I think many readers look at the pictures and read the captions first, so explaining a bit more helps.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 02:46, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Bernard Levin[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Levin was, in my view, technically and aesthetically the finest writer of English since Wodehouse (of whom he was a great admirer) as well as an idealistic journalist, a champion of individual freedom and implacably hostile to tyranny, whether of the left or right wing kind. There is no printed biography of him (nor, I suspect, any imminent prospect of one) and in overhauling this article I have been reliant entirely on online resources and Levin's own books. I don't, therefore, suppose that this article can be got up to FA standard, but I hope it might be possible to get it to GA. Any comments on the content and the prose will be gratefully received. Tim riley (talk) 20:16, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Ssilvers comments: From a quick look at it, I wonder if you can break up the long section called The Times into two sections? -- Ssilvers (talk) 21:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Done. Thank you for that. Tim riley (talk) 07:12, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I shall enjoy reading this at leisure, later today or tomorrow. Just one comment, meanwhile: I think the first sentence needs a stronger summary characterisation of Levin, rather than the bald facts of "English journalist, author and broadcaster". He was a lot more interesting than that. Brianboulton (talk) 09:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Done, I think, but happy to be steered towards other additions. Tim riley (talk) 14:14, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

More BB comments: As anticipated, I really enjoyed this. I read a lot of Levin, and though I was never a particular admirer, particularly in his later manifestations, he could be extremely funny, though cruel at times. Here are some areas for consideration:-

  • "Levin hoped to go to the University of Cambridge, but, as his obituarist in The Times wrote, he "was not considered Oxbridge material".[9] Instead, he enrolled at the London School of Economics (LSE), where he studied from 1948 to 1952.[1]" These two sentences, as presently written, give the unaware reader a very odd idea about how the English higher education system works, or worked. You need to reword; I suggest you at least indicate who it was that didn't consider him Oxbridge material, (and incidentally explain what "Oxbridge" means), and replace "Instead, he enrolled at..." with "However, he was accepted by..." or some such wording that doesn't suggest that LSE is somewhere you can just enrol at.
I can't do much with the first bit: that's all the source says. My guess would be that as admission to Oxbridge in those days was more by Establishment contacts than nowadays Macnutt and/or the Cambridge authorities earmarked Levin as "Not One Of Us", but I can't support that with a citation. I've redrawn the bit about getting into the LSE and blue-linked Oxbridge. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "" is a normal construction, but I am less sure about "", which reads very awkwardly. See the sentence beginning "He wrote on a wide range of subjects..."
I rather like it, but have redrawn. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • In the same paragraph, it would help to explain that Gilmour remained the Spectator's proprietor after he relinquished the editorship.
Yes. I wondered about that when writing it, and am happy to add it for clarity. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Some referencing has been overlooked. See, for example, first paragraph of "The Spectator" section and third para of "Television and The Pendulum Years" section
Done (I think) – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "He compiled his own [index] for this book" - can you clarify which book (last title mentioned was Chatterley)?
Done. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "Music was a frequent theme, not only Wagner..." You have mentioned Wagner once before, briefly, in a list of topics that Levin wrote on, but haven't indicated that Levin wrote copiously and frequently on Wagner, so as to justify the phrase "not only Wagner". I think this aspect of his work needs a little more fleshing-out; he was devoted to Wagner's music to the point of obsession, or so it seemed.
Good point. I've added a bit. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Why is the number of words in Levin's Shakespeare paragraph significant?
Redrawn. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Politics: you mention Levin's early enthusiasm for Marxism, and indicate his general sympathy for Labour and the left at least until the early 1970s. You don't mention the distinctly right-wing slant he took from the mid 1970s; I remember articles and TV appearances in the late 1970s or early 1980s, in which he lauded aspects of Thatcherism and derided the left. At the time I placed him firmly in that group of journalists (Paul Johnson was an even more outstanding example) who crossed from the left to the right under the baleful spell of That Woman. But I also remember that when Tony Blair became leader of the Labour Party in 1994 Levin, in one of his later articles, hailed him as the hope of the future. So much for that, but I would like to see in the article a more detailed reflection of Levin's political journey, whatever form it took.
Done. I think you will like the Levin quote I have added. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • CBE: I am regularly called to account by knowledgeable people for writing that so and so was "awarded" a CBE etc. I am informed that CBEs are appointed. (See elegant wording in Ferrier article).
It takes all sorts! I suppose, as Fowler said, "my pedantry is your scholarship, his reasonable accuracy, her irreducible minimum of education and someone else’s ignorance" – he said nothing of lunatic obsessions, but we must be all-embracing and I have redrawn. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

That's really all I have. It's certainly within range of GA and with a little more research could, I believe, make the top rank. Brianboulton (talk) 20:56, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Many thanks for these points. All very much ad rem. I think I'll keep my sights on GA. The absence of a proper biographical book makes me feel FA would be not quite the thing. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Well, I got C. R. M. F. Cruttwell through FAC on little more than Evelyn Waugh's harassment of the poor sod, and on that basis I'd say that there is plenty of material on Levin, but perhaps you are less of a chancer than I am. Brianboulton (talk) 00:20, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Guillaume Tell comments: I've just had a brief glance through and wonder if there could be a bit more on Conducted Tour than just note 11. In particular, The Year of the Missing Lemon Juice - please try not to fall off your chair laughing - deserves a mention and perhaps a quote, IMO. I've got a copy somewhere if you need page numbers. --GuillaumeTell 10:24, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Lead me not into temptation! I have all Levin's books except the Shakespeare and Utopia ones, and in particular I've long had the entire Vestale episode transcribed in my commonplace book, and would love to quote it, but I can't think how to do so effectively. As Simon Hoggart said, "It's hard to quote Levin, since his pieces depended on a long build-up, beginning with the simple and even the banal, ending with an assault which could make you come close to doubling up with laughter". I'd be happy to include a sample if you can home in on a bite-size chunk, though. Tim riley (talk) 12:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments: An interesting article! It feels as if I'm nit-picking but I would recommend the following minor alterations:

  • With your block quote "Until then sketch writers ...", I would use Template:Quote or something similar, as you have to include the attribution after the quote.
  • You have used semicolons in a liberal way, (e.g., "...prosecuted for criminal libel;"), but I think colons are more correct. Ignore this if you know better!
  • British Empire, not empire.
  • Many of your quotations are cited - I would write "...gfngn fgfngm".[1] and not "...gfngn fgfngm."[1] --Amitchell125 (talk) 21:35, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
Some very interesting and helpful points there – thank you! I have dealt with the third and fourth points, will ponder the first (terra incognita to me) and will comb through to see if any semicolons ought to be colons – I hope not, but we shall see. Many thanks for your suggestions. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Comments by Wehwalt
I am forced by circumstances (exhaustion) only to do part of this tonight, and a small part at that. What I have seen looks quite good, but I have a few comments:

"The Times as "the most famous journalist of his day". " Ultimately it is editorial judgment but I would say that I'd rather have a fact than an opinion so early in the lede. I suggest stating something outstanding Levin did.

I'll look something up on those lines and substitute. – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Perhaps combine the two small paragraphs?
Early years
  • "The father abandoned the family when Levin" I suggest "Philip Levin abandoned his family when his son ..."
  • " were still children." Can you be more specific? Because right now it is just stating the obvious.
  • "Kreisler or Heifetz" This will be easier in the reader if you use the word "violin" before mentioning these virtuosos.
  • "his mother encouraged him" Suggest finding a verb that will imply that he actually won the scholarship.
  • I would suggest swapping the second and third paragraphs of this section.
  • "gentile" Suggest, if the source will support it, "Christian
    • Now recast, and much the better for it – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
I will hope to get in a few more licks in the morning (early afternoon your time), unfortunately, being on the road, these things take a little longer!--Wehwalt (talk) 04:07, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Warmest thanks for these points. There is absolutely no hurry with this article – please only look at it further when you have time, inclination and enough sleep! – Tim riley (talk) 09:49, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • More points:
Continuing with Early years:
  • "it struck Levin as so appalling" perhaps "According to Levin, it was so appalling"
  • " It was suggested that he should study for the Bar," By whom? Also, there may be a better term for "study for the Bar", which might confuse American readers as the course of study for the bar exam is separate from "law school".
    • Deleted the law bit. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "selecting cuttings". They weren't cut yet, were they? Perhaps "selecting articles". Nice work, if you can get it.
    • Done. And yes, I had this as part of my job many years ago, and it was bliss. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "Ronald Staples, who, together with his new editor Vincent Evans, was determined " I would cut at least two of the commas, possibly retaining the one after "Staples" (Frankly, that one could go as well).
  • "Levin's noticeably Jewish surname, together with such skills as he had acquired in shorthand and typing, gained him immediate acceptance." You mean if Levin was a goy, he would not have been accepted? Oy gevalt. I suggest a rephrase.
    • Yes, that is pretty much what I mean. When the editor heard that he had an applicant with a non-WASP name he said, "Send him in – he's got the job". No doubt being called Makhaya Ntini or Sachin Tendulkar or Imran Khan would have been equally advantageous, but the point is that the idealistic new brooms at Truth grappled to them with hoops of steel someone who was patently anathema to the paper's previous Mosleyite galère.
  • "He gave the opening programmes" Is "He" Levin or Mooney?
The Spectator
  • "against the attempted takeover by the Egyptian dictator Colonel Nasser" If you leave it like this, you are going to get POV concerns. I would avoid, in this paragraph, detailed info about the Suez Crisis, and either call Nasser, er "Nasser" or call him president (or whatever his title was).
    • I wondered how long I'd get away with this. (POV? You should see the Suez Crisis article, which seems to have been written by Colonel Nasser and John Foster Dulles!) I shall ponder on a more emollient phrasing. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "had already spotted Levin and" Delete these words, change the word him a couple of words later to "Levin".
  • "Lord Stillborn" I'm not sure if you should link Stillborn to the article about still births, but at least give it a thought.
    • Pondered, but I think not. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • " three Arabs unjustly imprisoned by the British authorities" Is it unanimously held, even by the British government, that these three were unjustly imprisoned? If not, avoid the term. Also consider a few words to describe the book there, since not everyone may have read LC'sL.
    • "Unjustly" deleted. Have worked up a few words about Lady C. (Not a word to the vicar about this.) Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
  • " professing himself" A little flowery! Perhaps "stating". Also, end the paragraph after this sentence, and start a new one.
    • I'll fight for flowery in re Levin of all people! Para - good idea. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

More later.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:00, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

All marvellously helpful, thank you. I look forward to more, but I repeat, please deal with this article only when you have world enough and time. Tim riley (talk) 20:06, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Resuming with Television
  • "In 1963" suggest somewhere in the sentence you throw in the term "short-lived" so readers understand that when you wrote "In 1963" you did not mean "From 1963".
  • "In 1966" "In 1970". I would not begin consecutive paragraphs like this. It will probably get cleaned in the wash, but for future information, I see no reason why the one is followed with a comma, and the other is not.
  • Was Levin a panelist throughout Face the Music's run?
  • "Among his topics " This is awkward. You've put a little known figure (well, in 2011) before two PMs, yet because you comment on the PMs, it is awkward if you rearrange things. At least take a second look at this sentence.
    • As you say, St. Mugg is now rather forgotten, and I have removed reference to him. Tim riley (talk) 18:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I would clarify the image caption to make sure people understand that it is an image from 1871.
  • "A by-product" I would make the interest in indexes the subject of this sentence, as in: Levin's interest in indexes developed ...
The Times
  • I would move the clause about the general election campaign to immediately following "In June 1970".
  • "He commandeered a desk in the anteroom" Suggest ending the sentence after the words "affairs of the paper" and spin off the rest into its own sentence with the words "In addition" beginning it.
  • "Levin caused a lawsuit" Perhaps "provoked"?
  • "After Levin's death The Times published an article showing that information " I think this is a bit POV; after all The Times only has to print one side of the evidence. Something along the lines of "stating" or "alleging" might be in order rather than "showing".
  • Just as a thought, you might want to make the Shakespeare quote a blockquote.
    • Excellent idea!

All your suggestions acted on. Thank you so much. Looking forward to your last lot of comments (when you are good and ready, that is). Tim riley (talk) 18:11, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

I will finish, I hope, tonight, then read through for a doublecheck.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:24, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

i won't be finishing the review.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:32, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
Grateful for what you have been able to do already. Thank you very much. Tim riley (talk) 07:05, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
  • The name rang no bell with me until I saw "Huffington" when of course I recognized it. As she is best known under that name, esp in US, perhaps put it in the section name perhaps in parens? It might catch the eye of the casual browser. And I would certainly at least mention her present name in the caption.
  • "still a youth" Strike "still".
  • Bhagwan: As he is (at least among those who remember) notorious in the US for the Oregon commune (joined, famously by Bill the Cat), it might be worth a phrase or a parenthetical saying that he relocated to Oregon. Wonder if Levin wrote later columns about him ...
    • I'll read up on this and add a few words if I come up with something suitable. An interesting sidelight.
  • "For the BBC, Levin travelled to musical festivals around the world," reverse the clauses.
  • I don't think you have to list all the festivals he went to.
  • "Within a year " split sentence, perhaps also say when the falling out/replacement occurred.
  • Ultimately your choice but I think it's more effective if you mention the 1982 phrase first, then say something like "This recalled Levin's first column after a 1979 printer's strike, when he ..."
    • Yes, I wondered about this when I was writing it. Now done – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "another leading Jewish intellectual " The word "Jewish" is a can of worms here. First, you tell us Levin did not consider himself Jewish. Now, there is a school of Jewish thought that says you are a Jew no matter what if you are born as such, some even go to far as to say even a Jew who has converted, using the proof text, as I recall, "until the day of his death God waits for him". But you don't want to know all that. Additionally, unless they were depicted as Jews (straggly beards, prayer shawls) I don't see the relevance of even Miller's Judaism. Unless there is a strong reason for describing them as Jewish, I wouldn't.
    • Done. I felt uneasy at the time that there was (it seemed to me) a whiff of anti-Semitism in the caricatures of Levin and Miller, but I have no citation to back this up, and have deleted as suggested. – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "The nearest Levin came to publishing an autobiography was his book Enthusiasms published in 1983:" Perhaps better as: Levin never published an autobiography, though his 1983 book Enthusiasms contains chapters on ..." Break out that lenghy parentetical into a sentence of its own, perhaps ending the paragraph.
    • Done, and much improved thereby. – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "visited the home of eau de Cologne" If you are saying he went to Koln, say so. If you are saying he went to a manufactory, say so. If you are saying both, say both.
  • " from a sword-swallowing unicyclist to Jacqueline Kennedy Onassis, Donald Trump, and a bag lady in Central Park." I see a from/to construction as the demonstration of a contrast. Some of that is lost by the inclusion of the bag lady; I'd either strike that or move it to after the unicyclist. Better yet, strike the unicyclist and put the bag lady in his place, reading a clear contrast based on wealth.
    • Redrawn, splitting into famous and not famous. – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Last years
  • " delivering the eulogy described Levin as" Better, "eulogised Levin as"
    • That reads oddly to a British reader's eye: pithier undeniably, but somehow unidiomatic – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "He was appointed CBE" Is this the proper terminology for one who is made a CBE? I would doublecheck. And while what the Times said is great, I'd put the CBE first.
    • Done (and Brianboulton has sternly enjoined me to use "appointed CBE") – Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Good luck with it.--Wehwalt (talk) 14:39, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
I am so grateful for the very considerable detail of your suggestions. Heartfelt thanks. Tim riley (talk) 09:17, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Foot drop[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I need all sections especially the epidemiology to be reviewed because I want to know that this will be beneficial to the public in gaining and understanding the topic of drop foot. Bavill (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC) Thanks, Bavill (talk) 00:27, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Comment: Your objective is praiseworthy. However, the article is not yet in a sufficiently prepared state to warrant a full-scale peer review - articles with major cleanup banners are specifically excluded by WP:PR, which stipulates that PR is "intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work". At present the article contains bare links to a few online sources; it needs to be properly referenced per the requirements of Wikipedia:Citing sources, with attention to the section "How to format and place citations". Sources should be high-quality - the best available - and I doubt that Sweed-O would qualify. There are also prose issues, in particular the tendency to write material in very short paragraphs. I note that you have not contributed much to the article thus far; maybe your first step should be to contact other editors who are knowledgeable in the area and work with them on improving the article before bringing it back here. Brianboulton (talk) 20:47, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Please note also:

  • The tool on the right indicates two links to disambiguation pages.
  • One of your external links (in the "Features" section) is dead.
  • The link marked "Drop Foot Explanation" goes to a completely unrelated page.

Brianboulton (talk) 20:59, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Oblation Run[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this has recently been promoted to GA and I am very interested to help this get to FA. Among the primary concerns are the inconsistent histories published by several reliable sources (Associated Press, APO's own website, several Philippine newspapers).

Thanks, Moray An Par (talk) 03:10, 2 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this interesting article, here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC.

  • I am not sure that the lead follows WP:LEAD. 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 name "Ritual Dance of the Brave" and the Tagalog translation of the name of the play as "Naked Hero" are only in the lead, and need to be repeated in the body of the article.
  • I would start the History section with a little more background. I would include a sentence that says the UP was founded in YEAR and as of 2011 has seven campuses. I would also include a sentence on APO's founding date in the UP system. Then I would include one or two sentences on the Oblation statue, including its original year (1939), the fact that it is a nude male statue (though now covered with a fig leaf), and that it is on every UP campus and seen as a symbol of the university. This would be one paragraph.
  • I would then have some sort of blanket statement along the lines that while sources disagree on many of the details, they all (or almost all agree) that the Oblation Run started in 1977 on the UP Diliman campus to promote the play Hubad na Bayani (Tagalog for Naked Hero). Then I would go into the details of the different accounts.
  • It seems to me that the film vs. play should be fairly easy to figure out - films are more major and I owuld think there should be some place to find out if there was ever a Filipino film of this name produced (my guess is it is just an error, and it was a play). So the source could be cited and then some sort of statement that the BIG SOURCE OF PHILLIPINE FILMS (or whatever) lists no such film could follow.
  • The article is geographically fuzzy - for example the location of the naked women protestors is not stated in the article that I can see.
  • There are a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs in the article which interrupt the flow of the article's prose. They should be combined with others or perhaps expanded wherever possible.
  • Problem sentence in several ways Women participating in the event, however, is not unheard of.[7] First off, having read the article, there were only two women who ran along one year and the APO organizers made it very clear that they were not participating officially. The other problem is that I checked the reference and there is NO (zero) mention of the women running in that reference.
  • The lead does not need generally references as it is a summary of the article and the refs are supposed to be there. The exceptions are direct quotations and extraordinary statements in the lead.
  • Nitpicky point, but references should be in numerical order.
  • Was the Centennial Run in addition to the regular run that year - this is unclear.
  • The article uses {{cquote}} but according the documentation at Template:Cquote this is for pull quotes only, and this should probably use {{blockquote}} or a {{quote box}} instead.
  • In Criticism what was the outcome of Pimentel's call for investigation? I would also include the year for the various criticisms - when was the Catholic criticism, for example?
  • Once these other points have been addressed, I would get a copyedit - WP:WIAFA 1a is a professional level of English. This is the most difficult FA criterion for most articles to meet - the language here is decent, but not great.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 13:54, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much. Your concerns have been addressed. As for the status of the Oblation run after Pimentel's outcry, it's very much obvious that it still continuous today. I was unable to research on its aftermath. It seems that he just complained and no actual investigation precipitated. I will request a copy-edit once this peer review gets done. Thank you again. Moray An Par (talk) 14:32, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
The Centennial Run seems to be extraordinary of the usual run. How do I indicate this? Moray An Par (talk) 14:42, 18 June 2011 (UTC)
While it seems clear that the run continues, it would be interesting to know for sure if there was no investigation, or if there was one that went nowhere, or whatever happened. Assuming that the run is annual with extra runs for special occasions (and there are refs to back this up), I would say something like "While the Oblation Run is typically held each year on DATE, additional runs are sometimes held. For example, in YEAR, a special Centennial Run with 100 members was held to celebrate the 100th anniversary of..." Ruhrfisch ><>°° 00:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
I'm sorry. I really can't find anything regarding its aftermath. It's a privilege speech and not an actual senate proceeding. Moray An Par (talk) 05:21, 19 June 2011 (UTC)
OK, if there is nothing to be found, then there is nothing to be found. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 14:56, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

The Downward Spiral[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Here's a Peer Review (PR) of this article. It's called "The Downward Spiral", and it's about a Nine Inch Nails album. I expanded and improved it starting in Spring 2011, and reworked the article, succeeded by a Good Article Nomination (GAN) by me. User:IHelpWhenICan reviewed it in a mixed critical consensus, and the first Good Article Review (GAR) was a failed scab to bring it up to Good Article (GA) status.

Most recently, I have listed "The Downward Spiral" for peer review, so please... Don't give any fuck about it. Just talk about the article and suggest to me any improvements to mend the article. I appreciate my move, just because it's a easy job. By the way, the GA review lasted for a few weeks, and was declared an epic failure.

According to the paragraph above this one, make any comments about it and give me suggestions to improve it. All right? Okay. Just make comments and suggest random improvements to me. 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 02:57, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

I am removing this PR request from the backlog and closing it as the nominator has been indefintely blocked for disruptive editing. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 18:10, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Tranmere Rovers F.C.[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because History of Tranmere Rovers F.C. recently made it to GA status and I'd like to get the parent article to the same standard. However, it's quite a different type of article (more lists, less prose), so would appreciate advice as to the best way forward.

Thanks! U+003F? 16:45, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

I'm away until 4 July and probably won't be able to respond to any comments until then. U+003F? 10:41, 20 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on the article and enjoy your time away. I think this would need a lot of work before it would be able to pass GA, here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are several FAs on British football clubs at Category:FA-Class football articles and I would think these would be useful models.
  • The current lead is not detailed enough and needs to be expanded. 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
  • For exapnasion, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
  • The GA criteria include broad coverage of the material - to me this seems too sparse and needs more detail. The History section is very short - since there is a GA history article on the club, more of that material should be included here - see WP:Summary style. I think every section in the History article should be represented with a few sentences here.
  • Article needs more references. There are some citation needed tags and the whole In popular culture and Rivalries sections have no refs.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. For example ref 6 (BBC) has an author listed but that is not shown here. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful.
  • The article should use independent third-party sources wherever possible. It is OK to use the club's website for some things, but more independent sources would be very useful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Article has a fair number of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs which interrupt the narrative flow - wherever possible, these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
  • Avoid bullet point lists wherever possible - In popeular culture would read better as straight prose, as would the crest description.
  • The articler needs more images - I note that there is one of the stadium in its article, and a historic one of the team in the history article.
  • My guess is that there are free images of at least some of the players and managers mentioned in the article.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 14:08, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Only Girl (In the World)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… GA review was not helpful, and it has been suggested that I have the article Peer Reviewed instead for a much more thorough analysis of the articles individual sections.

Thanks, Calvin999 00:00, 24 June 2011 (UTC)

Check out the GA review for another Rihanna song (Umbrella (song)), which is this page. There might be suggestions to help you fix the "Only Girl (In The World)" article, but the page I want you to go to talks about "Umbrella" instead. 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 07:17, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Why can't you just review this page?? I get given a crap GA review and get told to list for a Peer Review, so I did. Now I am getting buoyed off and told to look at a GA Review which doesn't relate to this article after waiting 5 days. Give me one that is specific to this page. Calvin999 10:29, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Okay, read several Rihanna good articles, then look back to the GA review of "Only Girl (In the World). That is what I want you to do. 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 22:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
GA Review 1? I've already addressed those points by looking at other GA's for guidance, hence the " Done" symbols. Calvin999 16:37, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
In addition to this, look up "only girl rihanna production", "only girl rihanna writing", "only girl rihanna recording", "only girl rihanna development", and whatever with "only girl rihanna" in it at Google. 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 22:47, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
I've already done those searches, there simply isn't any info about the song on the web. I've watched interviews as well where she performed the song on tv and she didn't say anything about how the idea came about. Calvin999 16:34, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Also, read several Rihanna interviews in the forth quarter of 2010 (Sep, Oct, Nov, Dec). 'I () () `'/ I><pron0un¢ed "On£-ThouSand-$e7enT¥"> 22:49, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I can't believe I am not getting any support for this article. I want someone else to review this please. Been buoyed off now from a GA Review AND a Peer Review. This is ridiculous. Calvin999 00:53, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Novice7
  • Lead
The song was released as the albums lead single on September 10, 2010. → album's  Done Calvin999
Production of the song was done by Stargate and Sandy Vee. - writing credits?  Done Calvin999
The lyrics of the song see Rihanna singing about how she wants to be made to feel important in a relationship and be loved as if she was literally "the only girl in the world", as well as featuring some references to sexual acts. - case of WP:OR. Not sourced in the composition section/any other section.  Done Removed Calvin999
Musically, "Only Girl (In the World)" is an up-tempo dance-pop song which incorporates elements of Europop. - source for "uptempo composition"? I think you can use the sheetmusic source here.  Done The source is in the first line of the second paragraph in the Background and composition section Calvin999
"Only Girl (In the World)" debuted at number seventy-five on the Billboard Hot 100 and peaked at number one in its eleventh week (after the second single from the album, "What's My Name?", had peaked at number one 2 weeks previous), giving Rihanna her ninth number one single on the chart. I think the information about "What's My Name" is irrelevant here.  Done Removed Calvin999
The song reached number one on most of the world charts, including Australia, Ireland, Italy, Poland, Norway and the United Kingdom, as well as peaking at number one on the Billboard Hot Dance Club Songs and Pop Songs charts. The song attained top-five positions in the Czech Republic, France and Germany. - The song "also" reached number one ... Also, tense should be checked.  Done Calvin999
The song's accompanying music video was directed by Anthony Mandler and filmed outside of Los Angeles. The video uses the simplistic theme of predominantly focusing on Rihanna with an array of artistic sceneries and props in the state of nature, frolicking on a hillside with life size flowers placed near her. - The song's accompanying music video ... and "was" filmed outside of Los Angeles?? Also, how is focusing on Rihanna a theme??  Done Re-worded it to make it not sound like it is just focusing on Rihanna, but what she is doing. Calvin999
The song was performed for the first time on Saturday Night Live, as well as being performed on series seven of The X Factor in the United Kingdom and the 2010 American Music Awards in Los Angeles as part of a medley with "Love the Way You Lie (Part II)" and "What's My Name?" - tense.  Done Calvin999
The song won the Grammy Award for Best Dance Recording at the 53rd Grammy Awards in Los Angeles. - Grammy Awards "held" in Los Angeles on (date here).  Done Calvin999
The song has also received multiple covers by other artists, such as British singer-songwriter Ellie Goulding on BBC Radio 1's Live Lounge and American pop musician Katy Perry, at her second concert tour, The California Dreams Tour. - two things. First, change the "song has also received part" to "The song has been covered". Second, what do you mean by multiple covers?  Done Calvin999
  • Background and composition
"Only Girl (In the World)" is the lead release from Rihanna's fifth studio album, Loud, and premiered on Ryan Seacrest's radio station on September 7, 2011.[2][3] Mention the radio station.  Done Calvin999


"Only Girl" is an up-tempo dominant dance-pop song that incorporates elements of eurodance in its production.[7][1][8] - dominant dance-pop? Also, arrange the refs according to their number.  Done Calvin999
The song was written by Crystal Johnson, Mikkel S. Eriksen, Tor Erik Hermansen and Sandy Wilhelm. Stargate and Sandy Vee produced the song - actually, this should belong in the Background paragraph.  Done Calvin999
Brad Wete, a reviewer for The Music Mix at Entertainment Weekly, - why is The Music Mix italicized?  Done Calvin999
Calvin, you should use the {{music}} template to indicate sharp and flat and not a "#".  Done Calvin999
No description of the lyrics?  Done Calvin999
  • Critical reception
"Only Girl" received positive reviews from music critics, with the majority of acclaim going to the song's powerful chorus and thunderous beat. - WP:OR?  Done Calvin999's reliability is being debated upon, so be careful not to rely too much on it.  Done Calvin999
Quoting some of Rihanna's comments about the song, he reported - not needed.  Done Calvin999
Rated R is linked in the section above. So, no need to link it here.  Done Calvin999
Monica Herrera of Billboard complimented the production of the song as well as Rihanna - Rihanna? Her what? Vocals? Singing style?  Done Calvin999
Be careful about linking so that you don't WP:OVERLINK any terms/articles.
James Dinh of MTV News praised the lyics of the song, stating that after (going having) fairly dark and deep lyrics on her previous album, (and that) Rihanna has returned to the dance scene with "Only Girl" - tense and mistakes bracketed.  Done Calvin999
Overlink "Don't Stop the Music".  Done Calvin999
He also said that even though the song might not be original - what do you mean? Its production or lyrics? I think you should quote the word "original".  Done Calvin999
"whatever you may think about Rihanna, she is very good at demanding that you listen to what she has to say, even if she has to hurt you in order to do it." - does this review say about Rihanna or "Only Girl"? I find it a bit confusing.
In this category, Rihanna was competing against Goldfrapp's "Rocket", La Roux's "In for the Kill", Lady Gaga's "Dance in the Dark" and Robyn's "Dancing on My Own".[16] - reword.  Done Calvin999
It is the first time Rihanna has won an award in this category, despite being nominated in 2008 with "Don't Stop the Music"[17] and 2009 with "Disturbia",[18] bringing the singers total number of Grammy wins to four. again, try to rewrite it better. Also, the total nominations thing is unsourced.  Done Calvin999
At the MuchMusic Video Awards held in Canada on June 19, 2011, the song was nominated for " Most Watched Video of the Year", but lost to Taio Cruz's "Dynamite".[19] - this would fit better in the Music video section. Also, archive the MuchMusic link as it may rot soon.  Done Calvin999
"Only Girl" is also nominated for two MTV Video Music Awards Japan. - unsourced.  Done Calvin999
Only this much reviews? I'm sure there are lots more, can you add them?
  • Chart performance
It was the first time in the chart's history for an album's lead single to reach number one after the second single, "What's My Name?", two weeks previous.[22] - poor wording.  Done Calvin999
It became Rihanna's sixth single to debut at number one and is her eighth number one single on the chart.[ - became ... is (tense?)  Done Calvin999
and has been certified 2x Platinum by the Recording Industry Association of America (RIAA).[26] - use × instead of "x".  Done Calvin999
The following week, the single jumped to attain the number one position, where it remained for one week.[28] - jumped what?  Done Calvin999
spending four non-consecutive weeks in total - spending four non-consecutive weeks "at the top" in total.  Done Calvin999
The song held the position for a total of three weeks before being replaced by Pink's, "Raise Your Glass". - source?  Done Calvin999
It has since been certified 5x Platinum by the Australian Recording Industry Association (ARIA) for shipments of 350,000 units.[34] Again, no "x".  Done Calvin999
In New Zealand, the song debuted and peaked at number one for one week - debuted on what?  Done Calvin999
The sales gave Rihanna the second-biggest first-week single - "The figure gave Rihanna the second-biggest first-week single sales of 2010"?  Done Calvin999
Also, it is "the UK"  Done Calvin999
Chartstats is unreliable.  Done Calvin999
making it her third single to do so (following "Umbrella" and "Love The Way You Lie", on which she is featured by Eminem) and her first to do so without having peaked at number one there. - OR  Done Calvin999
You have not listed many other markets here. Maybe you could include a few of them?
  • Music video
In an interview, Rihanna - with whom?  Done Calvin999
The video mimics the carefree lyrics to the song, which suggest that she is the "only girl in the world".[45] The video features Rihanna as the only person in the video singing and dancing among different surroundings and props.[45] The majority of the video features Rihanna prancing around hillsides wearing a mohair sweater and shorter skirt, a bustier and mini floral skirt, and lastly, a white bra and "boy shorts."[44] Other scenes in the video include Rihanna surrounded by multi-colored balloons, riding on a swing that hangs from the sky, lying in a bed of flowers and then dancing in front of a tree covered with blinking lights that adds to the surreal imagery.[47] - "the video" repeats.  Done Calvin999
The Music Mix is Entertainment Weekly's blog. It need not be italicized or put in quotes. Same with CBS.  Done Calvin999
Link the first occurrence of Rated R in the section and remove the existing link.  Done Calvin999
the change in the stylization from Rihanna's previous from Rated R which featured a darker themes - ??  Done Calvin999
Quotes within quotes should be fixed properly according to MOS:QUOTE.
Mail Online should not be italicized.  Done Calvin999
The reviewer continued to say that, - continued? You mean, "went on to say that ..."  Done Calvin999
huge bow in it[...]The tone -space after it and before The.  Done Calvin999
from her previous albums video's - album's  Done Calvin999
flaunted on Rated R - italicize Rated R.  Done Calvin999
  • Live performances
"Only Girl" was performed for the first time in North America on Saturday Night Live on October 30, 2010, where Rihanna also debuted "What's My Name?" (without Drake) as well as featuring in a 'skit' performance on the show.[1][2] - link Drake. Also, why is skit within single inverted commas?  Done Calvin999
The performance featured Rihanna at a masquerade ball, which then resulted in the dancers having an on stage "cake fight" as well as having a fire backdrop.[4 - rewrite.  Done Calvin999
Elsewhere in Europe, Rihanna performed the song at the MTV Europe Music Awards 2010 in Madrid, Spain, on November 7, 2010, where she was surrounded by flowers on a set which resembled that of a fairytale,[5] in addition to performing on The X Factor in Italy on November 9, 2010, which featured Rihanna wearing a red pig-tail wig and a flowered bikini,[6] as well as performing on Le Grand Journal in France on November 10, 2010.[7] - tense. Rewrite and maybe split a sentence or two off.  Done Calvin999
She was sitting on a stylized tree hovering above a field of sable-colored blades of grass. Once she had finished the first frame of the song, she plummeted from the tree to the ground - "she sat on a stylized tree ... ground." Did she jump intentionally?  Done Calvin999
reemerge - re-emerge  Done Calvin999
She reemerged from the fog revealing a changed costume now consisting of a black-and-white bra top and shorts singing "What's My Name?".[9] - lol, the costume sang "What's My Name"? singing → and sang.  Done Calvin999
Brit Awards and BRIT Awards. Be consistent.  Done Calvin999
Hmm, This was due to the BRIT Awards corporation trying to avoid receiving similar complaints about Rihanna on the final of the seventh season of The X Factor on December 11, 2010, for wearing a provocative outfit and performing a suggestive dance routine before the watershed.[13] is a very huge point. I feel it needs a few more (two or three more) sources to backup the claim. Daily Mail is considered unreliable, so, yeah, it needs more reliable sources.  Done Calvin999
The song was covered by British singer-songwriter Ellie Goulding on BBC Radio 1's Live Lounge in late 2010 and featured as a B-side to Goulding's single "Lights" in 2011. - source?  Done Calvin999
Is reliable?
  • Charts
The succession boxes should be placed below the External links per WP:FOOTER.  Done Calvin999
  • References
Ref #1, #6 missing publisher.  Done Calvin999
Ref #5 why is "M" italicized?  Done Calvin999
Dates formatting is inconsistent (you use both September xx, 2010 and 2011-09-xx)
Ref #8 incorrect work and publisher (work=Entertainment Weekly and publisher =Time Inc.). Same with #9, #11  Done Calvin999
Ref #12 coding issue.  Done Calvin999
I haven't checked them all, but I can see that most of them should be formatted properly. Some online websites are italicized, some refs are not formatted, some unreliable websites etc.

Well, good luck with GAN. Make sure you check the prose and refs thoroughly. If you have any questions, feel free to ask me. Thanks. Novice7 (talk) 13:29, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

List of NK Maribor seasons[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… it is completed and I am wondering what need to be done for this article to become a GA or FA. If it meets all of the criteria for at least a GA it will be put to a GA nomination process. This is the first peer review of the article.

Thanks, Ratipok (talk) 01:14, 8 June 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: This should be of considrable interest to football fans. Here are some suggestions for improvement:-

  • The opening sentence needs some attention. It is hard to make sense of it at the moment.
  • As this is a list, it would make sense to merge the brief lead and the Background sections. This would avoid some repetition in the prose.
  • I have copyedited the first paragraph of the Background section, but further work is necessary on the remainder of the prose. Examples:-
    • "the team competes" → "the team has competed"
    • "from top division" → "from the top division"
    • "a feat repeated six times to date" → "a feat it has repeated six times to date"
    • "first built in 1962" → "built in 1962"

These are generally good. A couple of points:-

  • The keys to column headings and colours should precede, not follow, the tables to which they relate.
  • Column headings should be defined in the keys, not by links (e.g. "SC" in second table.

It is not necessary to specify language when sources are in English.

As I cannot watch individual PR pages, please contact me on my talkpage if you have questions arising from this review or if you want me to look again. Brianboulton (talk) 15:14, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from PeeJay
  • The most glaring thing I can see is the infobox. I think you should delete it and increase the font size in the tables back to 100%. The infobox really adds little to the list, in my opinion, and the list would benefit from having full sized text, as some users may have trouble reading text when it is smaller than normal. – PeeJay 10:16, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Comment: I'm wondering if it would be better to merge the background info up into the lead. Right now the lead is quite short, and modifying that all into 4 paragraphs or so would make it a solid, potentially FLC-ready list. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:13, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Moonrise (Warriors)[edit]

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

I'm hoping to improve this article, with the possibility of FA status my long-term goal. Therefore, I am looking for all manner of suggestions. I understand that the two main concerns raised over this article's history has been lack of RS and a need for expansion of the reception section. I acknowledge these, but also point out that there seem to be no other editorial reviews of the novel in question that I haven't found yet, and that few sources exist for this topic. Therefore, style-related suggestions are greatly appreciated, and if any sources can be suggested, those would be helpful too.

Thanks, Brambleclawx 14:40, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Mostly style-related suggestions from Nikkimaria
  • "reviewers such as Booklist and Horn Book Review, who" - those publications aren't reviewers (or people - can't use "who" as written), but publish reviews by reviewers
  • "The" in "The New York Times" is part of the title and should be italicized
  • Can the "series editor" be included in the infobox?
  • Media type in infobox excludes the e-book format mentioned in the lead
  • "it was hard to write the death of Feathertail at the end of Moonrise because death is a difficult subject" - that doesn't really tell us anything. If she gives more info (as in why it's a difficult subject), then include that; if not, rephrase to something like "noted that the death of Feathertail at the end of Moonrise was particularly difficult to write" and leave out the attempted explanation
  • WP:ENGVAR - use consistent spellings. For example, you currently have both "travelling" and "traveling"
  • Is Sharptooth killed by crushing or from a pierced throat? If this is not specified in the book, it shouldn't be specified here
  • Ellipses shouldn't be in square brackets
  • Referencing format needs some cleaning up for consistency. All web citations should include publisher and access date
  • Don't repeat cited sources in External links. Nikkimaria (talk) 15:14, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Tropical Storm Nicole (2010)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like the opinions of others to optimize the quality of the article.

Thanks, ★ Auree talk 07:11, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Thanks for your work on this interesting article. Poor Jamaica. I have several suggestions for further improvement.


  • "Due to the asymmetric structure of Nicole, torrential rains fell along its eastern periphery across the western Caribbean, particularly Jamaica." - This can be understood in two quite different ways. It might mean that the asymmetric structure caused the rains to be torrential. Or it might mean that the torrential rains normally associated with a tropical storm were concentrated along its eastern periphery. Could the intended meaning be made more clear?
I've tried to clarify; I'm not sure if this is alright. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Meteorological history

  • "Only hours after formation, a Hurricane Hunters flight into the system observed a similar composition as initially discerned, with the deepest convection dislocated from the center." - This sentence seems a bit fuzzy to me. Would this be better: "Only hours after the storm's formation, a Hurricane Hunters flight into the system observed a composition similar to the one initially discerned, with the deepest convection dislocated from the center"?
Yes, that does seem better. Thanks ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "In addition, the center did not consist of but relatively light winds and sporadic convection — a structure rather characteristic of a monsoon depression." - Tighten to "In addition, the center consisted of relatively light winds and sporadic convection—a structure characteristic of a monsoon depression"? Or am I misunderstanding the meaning? The em dash, by the way, normally appears without spaces in Wikipedia articles.
Tweaked. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "about 27 hours later than the estimated time of formation revealed by post-analysis.[12][7]" - Refs should appear in ascending order; i.e., [7][12] rather than [12][7].
Done. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "By 2100 UTC, the storm circulation had become increasingly elongated to the extent of being untrackable, prompting the NHC to discontinue advisories on the storm while it was located about 165 mi (270 km) west of Nassau, Bahamas." - Tighten to "By 2100 UTC, the storm circulation became increasingly elongated and untrackable, prompting the NHC to discontinue advisories when Nicole was about 165 mi (270 km) west of Nassau, Bahamas.
Tweaked. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
Whoops, my bad. Altered text. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


  • "In anticipation of a tropical storm, warnings were issued on September 28 for the Cayman Islands, the northwestern and central Bahamas, and the Cuban provinces of, and those between Matanzas and Ciego de Avila." - Something seems to be missing after "and the Cuban provinces of". More clear would be to name them all.
Mentioned all of the provinces between those two. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


  • "a house succumbed to the effects of the storm next to a pave gully" - Should "pave gully" be briefly explained or linked to something, perhaps street gutter?
Good call. Gully is synonymous with gutter, so I changed it to street gutter instead. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "Associated monetary losses totaled J$274.3 million, of which an estimated J$75.6 million was required to replace destroyed units." - Since most readers are unfamiliar with the J currency, could these two also be rendered in U.S. dollars?
Ack, I can't believe I forgot to do that. Added. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "In Kingston, underpasses suffered severe flooding due to the overwhelming of storm water drains." - Smoother might be "In Kingston, underpasses suffered severe flooding when storm drains were overwhelmed."
That is much smoother, thanks! ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


  • "Florida was spared of direct impact" - I think that should be "from" rather than "of".
Oops. Fixed ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Post-tropical system

  • "moreover, the Neuse River was predicted to crest in Goldsboro that day, as well as in Kinston on October 5." - I think you need to specify the crest height and compare it to other crest heights. Otherwise, it has little significance since rivers often rise and fall with no special consequence.
That part doesn't add much to the article anyway, so I removed it. ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


  • "Approximately J$4 million (US$46,806.44)" - I'd round the US figure to $47,000, especially since the J$4 million is approximate. Ditto for the other J to US conversions. Even when the J number is exact, rounding will make the US numbers more readable, and the smaller units (pennies, dimes, individual dollars) are not significant.
I agree; I was just unsure if that was allowed. Thanks for noting ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)


  • The date formatting needs to be the same throughout the citations. Citation 2, for example, uses two different formats. Either is OK but not both. Most take the form 2011-01-09 already, so switching them all to that form would be fairly easy.
  • Newspaper names should appear in italics. In citation 32, for example, it should be Jamaica Gleaner. Actually, it should be The Gleaner, since that seems to be the actual name of the newspaper. You can use the "work" parameter for the name of the newspaper, and the software will italicize it automatically, or you can italicize it by hand.
  • Citations to web sites should include the name of the publisher. For example, The Gleaner is published by Gleaner Company Ltd. For another example, the publisher of citation 29 is ABC News. In this case, I would probably use Reuters in the author slot and let "staff writer" be assumed.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 18:32, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions! ★ Auree talk 22:46, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Louisiana Tech University[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the article has been extensively revised and reworked over the past few weeks and months. The number of references has increased from 18 to about 90 since the revisions started, and each major heading has been heavily revised to include information on numerous topics related to Louisiana Tech University.

I need the article reviewed to identify and correct any deficiencies with the content, spelling, and grammar. The article is rated as Start-Class, and I am working with a few other people to turn the article on Louisiana Tech into a featured article. This is the first step of our process to review and improve upon our work on this article so far.

Thanks for your work and any comments on the article, Arkansas3544 (talk) 21:03, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

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

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many FAs on univeristies at Category:FA-Class Universities articles, which seem like they would be useful model articles.
  • The toolbox on this PR page finds one dab link which needs to be fixed.
  • I am not sure that the lead follows WP: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 space grant is only in the lead and infobox (did not check everything in the lead)
  • My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but I do not see anything about Traditions or University presidents or notable alumni in the lead (to name a few).
  • Biggest problem I see with this article is a lack of references. For examp;le the last three paragraphs of the "Establishment of the Industrial Institute and College of Louisiana" section have no refs and all need at least one.
  • ANy time there is a reference in a paragraph with one or more unreferenced sentences after, those sentences need at least one ref too - one exampole (from the same section) The act established "The Industrial Institute and College of Louisiana", a first class industrial institute created to provide education in the arts and sciences. Control of the school was entrusted to a board of trustees, which elected Colonel Arthur T. Prescott of Baton Rouge as the first president of the college.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs at least one ref.
  • Many of the existing refs are incomplete. 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
  • Make sure that refs follow WP:RS - what makes a reliable source (why not link to Kiplinger's directly)?
  • Articles are also supposed to use independent third-party sources wherever possible - this article depends pretty heavily on LA Tech sources (some are OK, but try to use as little as possible)
  • The current state of references would be enough to result in a quick fail for the article if it were at WP:GAN (and FAC is even more stringent)
  • Avoid vague time terms like "currently" as these can become out of date quickly Currently Louisiana Tech sponsors men's intercollegiate baseball, basketball, cross country, football, golf, indoor track and outdoor track along with women's intercollegiate basketball, bowling, indoor track, outdoor track, volleyball, soccer, softball and tennis. Use things like "As of 2011..." instead
  • Article has a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections that break up the narrative flow. These should be combined with others or perhaps expanded wherever possible.
  • Make sure section headers follow WP:HEAD - usually section headers on Wikipedia are more concise (telegraphic)
  • I would spread the images through the article and not just put them in galleries. See some model FAs for ideas.
  • SOme of the images are problematic. File:Techxx.JPG is almost certainly a copyvio.
  • SInce the Lady of the Mist was created after 1923, it is probably still under copyright, so photos of it have to be WP:FAIR USE. So File:Revised Lady of the Mist at LA Tech IMG 3767.JPG needs its license changed and has to have a fair use rationale.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 04:27, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your help! :) AllisonFoley (talk) 20:33, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Juno (film)[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because someone suggested that I list it for peer review before jumping into WP:FAC. I think the sections that need the most reviewing are from "Reception" downwards, and the list of references and external links. (The rest seems perfect).

Thanks. --Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 22:38, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Wizardman:

  • I didn't see any issues before the Reception section.
  • "Juno grossed US$420,113 over its debut weekend," the US$ part can be delinked and it can just show $, since it was linked in the previous section.
  • Three of the four paragraphs in Juno effect start with 'In [year]...'; mix it up a bit to avoid repetition.
  • "and not some heinous trend brought about by pop culture" " I think that stray quotation is supposed to be a comma
  • "it's time to stop worrying and ask what we can do to help." [97]." remove space between quotation and ref, and take out second period.
  • The block quote needs a citation in the awards section.
  • Not sure why some wins and nominations are cited while others aren't. Shouldn't all of them be?
  • There's no title on Ref #2.
  • Make sure refs are not in all caps (ref #115).
  • I'd remove Facebook as an rs (ref #77).
  • Linking newspapers in the refs on first mention would be nice (Boston Globe, NYT), since you do it for other sites in the refs.
  • There are a few deadlinks that need to be fixed; see here.

I think once these changes are made, it would stand a decent chance at FAC. If you're still not sure you could ask for someone from the Film WikiProject to take a look at it; they may catch things I didn't see. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 21:43, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

How do I archive this page? I only know how to archive talk pages. --Whoop whoop pull up Bitching Betty | Averted crashes 21:29, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Stone Temple Pilots (album)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This GA album article has been solidly stable for pretty much a year now, and I think it's time to kick it up a notch and prep it for FA review. I've done two (failed) FA reviews for another article, so I'm somewhat familiar with the prose issues (flow and grammar!) that can always be tweaked. But I thought this time I'd go the PR route before I attempt FA—learned a little lesson there, methinks. My goals are to tighten the article a bit as well. Any edits I've done in the last couple days have been to prep it for PR. From this point forward, I'll most likely be concentrating on prose, triple checking the citations, etc. Essentially, I'll be working constantly before, during, and after any comments here at PR.

Two things before I continue:

  1. I believe that my writing style has a slight dependency on quotes/quotations. I will do my best to incorporate this information in my own words if I find a quote to be more or less unnecessary. Please feel free to point out any quotes you feel aren't needed or are just puffery or should be "absorbed" into the text better.
  2. At the moment, I believe there are two {{citation needed}} tags. These are brand new, temporary, and I tagged them myself due to a dead link. They are connected to information that's pretty filler material at this point and will most likely be removed entirely.

What I'm looking for is essentially a super B-class checklist, I think: Does the article seem comprehensive? Was there too much information, does it get bogged down with facts at any point? Or is the information spread out nicely, and you learned about the album without feeling overwhelmed? One goal here, as said above, is to tighten the article and I may get rid of some superfluous information that seemed important at the time but now, a year later, is probably junk. Are there any terms that you may not be familiar with, like genres or production lingo that I have a tendency to ignore out of familiarity, but that you may notice sticks out like a sore thumb?

FA really emphasizes excellent grammar, and I would love to have several reviewers keep an eye out for any awkward phrases (any grammatical issue) that I most likely haven't noticed simply because I'm "used" to the way I write. How is the style of the article? Several FA reviewers use the term "flow" and as it stands, this article is probably on the clunky side. It was written with the facts in mind, and to regurgitate the facts. One thing FA reiterates is the usage of simple English, so I will undoubtedly by rewriting as much of the article as I can in an easier-to-read format.

In conclusion, I want the article shorter, but just as comprehensive. Any help, even the tiniest most random thing you wish to contribute, will be immensely appreciated.

Thank you – Kerαunoςcopiagalaxies 09:37, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110

First of all I'll say I know exactly what you mean when you say you're used to the way you write. I can't count the number of times an obvious error has been pointed out to me that I haven't seen because when copyediting my own work I've read what I want to read. Alas. The article was a pleasure to read and though there are grammatical issues, they did not make me want to vomit.

As I read the article, I didn't so much get the impression that there was that much of a problem with flow per se, but there's something about the language itself. It has a too much of a narrative style, like the voice-overs on Behind the Music. Although the band's reformation does make a good story, it's important to present the information factually.

You've got a lot of conditionals in there that don't need to be there, e.g. "Scott Weiland would hear new material from Robert and Dean DeLeo while the band performed sound checks during the tour, but he would not collaborate in the songwriting process until he was through promoting his solo album, "Happy" in Galoshes." Weiland heard new material but did not collaborate. "Woulds" appear throughout the article and need to be changed.

As for the quotes, my philosophy on using them is a bit like using a non-free image; is the only way to get the correct meaning across to the reader to use a quote? If not, it should be paraphrased. For example in the background section, probably the only thing that should have the quotation is the Robert quote at the end of the section. Other quotes can simply be recast as prose; in the fourth paragraph you could just put "Weiland later clarified that he did not want to work with Atlantic because he did not know any of the staff, though since the original negotiations he had become familiar with the label's personnel." (or something along those lines).

In terms of "puffery" quotes (your word!), consider whether they are just being used for decoration. You've got a pull-quote from Robert in the Background section. My eyes are drawn to it immediately, as it should be with a pull-quote, yet I don't understand the context without having read the section. If you feel this quote is important, maybe you could describe it a bit more in the quote box (e.g. "Robert DeLeo in the Toronto Sun on the band's reformation").

The reviews section is primarily where quotations are most likely to be used, but, again, some can be paraphrased, e.g. "USA Today's Jerry Schriver praised the band for releasing a "cohesive, self-produced reunion album", but admitted the tracks were not "timeless". The songs were found to be "pleasant" but "disposable" and inoffensive. Schriver commended Dean DeLeo for keeping the "well-constructed tunes" moving forward, despite Weiland's lyrics." There are a lot of one-word quotations in there and the prose of the article would definitely flow better if it was either rephrased or the quotes around single words just removed.

Re the citation tags you've added, I wouldn't consider information about a limited-edition cover to be "filler". I notice that the Peters Billboard article makes reference to "a deluxe version with expanded artwork" and then mentions Target. If you rephrase the sentence in the article you could probably weasel this in as a reference, if you cannot find another citation. There are a few reference issues that I think will come up at FAC. There are a lot of citations to (sometimes formatted as "" and "Grunge" - this needs to be consistent). Is this a high-quality reliable source? What standard of fact-checking do they have? In the references section, websites like,, Allmusic,, etc, should not be presented in italics.

The factual style of the writing is generally good and unbiased. One thing that stuck out was "The album was prevented from reaching No. 1 by the television soundtrack Glee: The Music, Volume 3 Showstoppers." The use of "prevented" makes it sound like the sentence was written by a very disgruntled hard rock fan! I don't see that much production lingo but the music-specific language is written well enough for the uninitiated to understand what it refers to.

As I write this review, the article is at 4272 words and c.88kb (the high file size compared to the word count is presumably due to the use of cite templates). What sort of size were you looking for when you say you want it to be shorter? I'll put this PR on my watchlist so I can come back to your responses. Bradley0110 (talk) 12:29, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Two Hearted River
  • When I write "Critical reception" sections, I organize them by positing a few theses and then backing them up with examples, lest the section read like a list. I think you'd do well to try that here. (See Lions (album) and By Your Side (The Black Crowes album) for my examples.)
  • Those music samples aren't going to fly with the captions you have now, because quoting lyrics is less intrusive than reproducing music when it comes to illustrating what influenced the lyrics. I try to include quotes from critics in my sample captions to justify the samples, because hearing the music is necessary to evaluate the validity of the critics' statements.
  • Do we need the "Release history" section, given that you've covered the highlights in prose earlier? I'm of the opinion that listing, say, the release date in New Zealand provides no further insight into the album beyond what's already written in the prose.

Nice work overall. I'm going to tackle a few MOS things myself. By the way, if you'd like to reciprocate, By Your Side (The Black Crowes album) is up for peer review... :) Two Hearted River (paddle / fish) 12:57, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Rod Blagojevich corruption charges[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because after two and a half years, this article finally has some closure. The article has had numerous editors with varying styles and may need to be massaged a bit. I hope to get this to WP:GA.

Thanks, TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:34, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Withdrawn I feel this article is a lot farther from GA than I had hoped and do not intend to invest significant time in it. I am no longer watching this review and will not address comments.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 06:00, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

This peer review discussion has been closed.

List of awards and nominations received by Kamal Haasan[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to nominate it for a FL. Thanks in advance! Commander (Ping Me) 12:54, 12 June 2011 (UTC)

Found5dollar comments: Here are some general comments and thoughts to hopefully get this list further along:

  • the caption "Kamal Haasan at an event organised by FICCI to felicitate him." I think you mean "to honor him," either way, that last part of the sentence really isn't needed.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 16:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
  • "In fact, Haasan is claimed to be..." it can not be a fact, if it is only claimed to be. to saw "in fact" it must be a hard and fast truth, not just a belief.
Green tickY Removed that claim --Commander (Ping Me) 10:50, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The next few sentences summing up his awards really do not seem to flow well. There has to be a better way to word all of this, perhaps condense it into just one sentence?
I've expanded the lead. Can you comment more about this. --Commander (Ping Me) 10:50, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
  • This article is crying out for a small section explaining who Kamal Haasan is and what flims he has been in.
Green tickY Expanded lead --Commander (Ping Me) 16:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
  • Usually you should try not to wikilink section headings.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 16:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
  • According to this tool one of your references has a dead link. I did not check to see if each of your references states what it claims to.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 16:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
  • in the info box the total number of wins and nominations is not filled in.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 10:48, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

This was just a quick review. please let me know if you have any questions about what i have suggested or pointed out.--Found5dollar (talk) 23:52, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

The actor has also won many other awards from various organisations. Is it necessary to inlude all those? I did not include those awards since finding sources for that was very difficult. --Commander (Ping Me) 16:26, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
I have sorted out most of the issues that you pointed out. Please let me know what has to be done further. Commander (Ping Me) 10:36, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
I am sorry, but i am incredably busy right now with real world work. when my job calms down some, i'll take another look at this for you.--Found5dollar (talk) 03:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Biggest blunder, how is it that he has won 45 awards, but 21 nominations? — Legolas (talk2me) 05:51, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Green tickY Corrected. --Commander (Ping Me) 06:14, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
It's a well known fact that most of the awards presented in India, even National Awards do not list out the nominees. The same applies for state awards too. Only filmfare awards give out the nominees-list, and Filmfare Awards South is listing out the nominees only after 2002. --Commander (Ping Me) 06:04, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
You have a wrong conception. Even if NA and FF don't or do handout the noms, its still a nomination at the EOD. Hassan's NAs are first considered as a nomination, and then its him who receives the awards. — Legolas (talk2me) 10:20, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
No it's not a misconception. I actually corrected it after you pointed out. They never announce the list of nominees. --Commander (Ping Me) 10:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments from Legolas2186
  • Lead fails WP:LEAD. It should be encompassing all the major points in the article. At present it talks about the win for major wards, and shounds quite bland. Things can be improved by adding a little sass. For eg, if Hassan went to win awards for Sadma, one or two lines describing what the film was about etc.
I've expanded the lead, by highlighting the major points of his career. --Commander (Ping Me) 11:21, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Everything would benefit from a table.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 11:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Awards should be arranged alphabetically, for consistency and precision. Same in the infobox.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 10:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Tables should be of equal width, for visual pleasure for the readers. At present it appears pretty haphazard.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 07:25, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Check the colspan for the year of the awards and same range should be merged.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 10:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Some of the awards would benefit from a one line description.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 11:21, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Reference formatting really needs work. The Reflinks tool is what you have used, but a featured quality list should refrain from it and correction of the work and publisher parameters are needed. I saw the same problem in Chiranjeevi and in your failed nomination of Aishwarya.
  • For references which appear like this: [28][24][25][26], you should use WP:CITEKILL.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 11:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The awards and nomination tabulation still doesn't match. You are supposed to include all recognitions also, as they are categorized as awards per FLC.
Green tickY Done --Commander (Ping Me) 10:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Lastly, en-dash and em-dash correction is needed. — Legolas (talk2me) 10:33, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
I have transformed every one-line descriptions to tables. I've not used dashes anymore. If you still find anything wrong please let me know. --Commander (Ping Me) 11:49, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Georgi Kinkladze[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article, about a Georgian football (soccer) player best known for his time in England, failed an FAC nomination some three years ago. As Kinkladze is retired and lives out of the public eye, little content has changed since then. However, FAC standards most likely have changed in that time, so I'm looking for feedback with a view to a second run at FAC.

Thanks, Oldelpaso (talk) 18:50, 9 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this. Interesting article and Sorry to take so long to review this. Here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC. Article seems fairly comprehensive, but could use some material on his personal and retirement life, if available. There are some language and MOS issues I will try to point out too.

  • There are a bunch of dead links which will need to be fixed before FAC - see here
  • 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, but his nicknames (Kinky etc.) seem to be only in the lead.
  • I would identify Ajax as a Dutch team in the lead - I knew it was not British, but was not sure where it was until I followed the link - see WP:PCR
  • Comprehensiveness is a FA criterion. As far as I can tell there are only two sentences about his life since 2006 (5 years) and not much on his personal life. If this can be added, there should be a sentence or two in the lead, depending.
Early life
  • When he was born the Soviet Union still existed, so tweak Georgi Kinkladze was born on 6 July 1973 in Tbilisi, Georgia, part of the former Soviet Union. perhaps to something like Georgi Kinkladze was born on 6 July 1973 in Tbilisi, Georgia, which was then part of the Soviet Union.
  • I would be consistent in setting off his parents professions (father uses commas, mother uses parentheses)
  • Two levels, so plural needed in Over the next few years, Kinkladze played in Dinamo Tbilisi's youth teams, progressing as far as the reserve team, where he played alongside Shota Arveladze, who would later become his teammate at both senior and international level.[8] Also I expected to see him mentioned again later in the article but did not (where did they play together later?)
Early career
  • Need to specify it was Kinkladze who moved in When Georgian football formed leagues independent of Soviet competition in 1989, a family friend arranged a move [for Kinkladze] to Mretebi Tbilisi, the first openly professional club in the Soviet Union.[8]
  • Give the year too? In his first professional season, aged 16, Kinkladze played 20 games.
  • Perhaps give the rough equivalent in dollars or euros of the roubles After a second season at Mretebi, he was signed by Dinamo, the team he represented as a youth, for one million roubles.[9]
  • I would use Kinkladze and not he in On 17 September 1992, at the age of 19, he made his senior international debut against Azerbaijan,[10]...
  • Sounds like he got a red card at Saarbruecken and was sent off in a 1–3 defeat to Hertha Berlin.[13] but none is shown in the table at bottom
  • Witnessed is an odd verb in It was not until Manchester City chairman Francis Lee witnessed the recording that negotiations for a permanent move abroad occurred.
Manchester City
  • A number of FAC reviewers do not like verb+ing constructions so thinsg like Manchester City's form stuttered during the 1995–96 season, failing to win a single game in the first three months of the season... could be problematic (the team failed to win a single game... would work too)
  • I do not know lots oabout football, but winner here sounds slangy Kinkladze scored the winner following a one-two with Niall Quinn.[21] would "winning goal" work? (If this is standard football worsing, it is fine) Ditto for "chipping" later
  • Say Match of the Day is a BBC program somehow?
  • Do yards need to be converted to metres too - assume so per the MOS
  • Advertisements instead of adverts? Also if they paid for them, didn't make the "adverts" The campaign even extended to the half-time adverts on the scoreboard, the "adverts" being messages from supporter groups who had paid to display them.[29]
  • Spell out abbreviations on first use, so "Queens Park Rangers {QPR}"
  • Contained is an odd verb The QPR team contained hardman Vinnie Jones - perhaps just "Vinnie Jones was a member of the QPR team..."?
  • There are some photos of the old Manchester City stadium - could any of these be used in this article? Same idea for stadium / players / managers of the temas he played for - if there is a free image can it be included here?
  • Missing word He immediately started to look elsewhere, but several English top-flight clubs which showed interest in signing him were discouraged by work permit issues, as his lack of regular football [???] also resulted in him losing his place in the Georgian national team.[51][53]
Derby County
  • Can this be clarified - did they fear injuring him? His new team-mates, keeping his performances for Manchester City in mind, feared even touching him during his first training session.[57]
  • Awkward At the end of the season, the loan move was made permanent, the transfer fee £3 million,[61] which was a club record until 2007.[62]
  • Wouldn't it be better as "the goalkeeper" - also not sure what 17 minutes from time means - end of the match? Beginning? He came on as a substitute 17 minutes from time and levelled the game 1–1 with a solo goal two minutes later, jinking between two defenders before curling a left-foot shot beyond a goalkeeper.[68]
  • There are at least two places where there will be a full date (day month year) in one sentence followed by a sentence with a full date a few days later - in cases like this I do not think the second (same) year is needed. One example Jim Smith resigned from his managerial position at Derby on 7 October 2001,[72] leaving Kinkladze, a Smith favourite, bitterly disappointed.[73] The appointment of new manager Colin Todd on 8 October 2001[74] signalled a change in the club's playing style.
  • Any idea how much money he made for Derby County?
  • Tighten and two days later, on the day of the second leg of the tie against Rangers, he left for Rubin Kazan to close a deal with Rubin.[114] to something like ... and two days later, on the day of the second leg of the tie against Rangers, he left to close a deal with Rubin Kazan.[114]
Rubin Kazan
  • Don't need two firsts in one sentence At first he took part in a short corner which resulted in the first goal of the game.
  • Seemes like these two consective sentences do not agree with each other After the match Berdyev claimed he made a mistake in his choice of penalty taker.[124] Then at the start of the next paragraph Berdyev continued to have faith in Kinkladze...
  • Tighten The 2006 season, however, transpired to be his final season. How about just The 2006 season, however, was his last.
  • Odd wording - sounds like he went to the store for some milk and picked up an injury while he was there, and if it was the first competitive match doesn't that imply of the year? How about just "He was inhured in Rubin's first competitive match." instead of He picked up an injury in Rubin's first competitive match of the year
  • What part(s) of his body did he injure? A recurrence of an old injury meant he was sidelined for longer than expected...
  • "struggle for fitness" seems odd to my ears, why not just "struggle" Kinkladze continued to struggle for fitness,[143] making five further appearances for Rubin, two of which were starts.[140]
  • Missing word He also passed a thorough medical [examination?], the results of which were reported as the deciding factor for his future at the club.[148]
Career Statistics
  • Most of Career statistics needs refs.
  • I am also not sure why some things are totaled and others are not - looking more carefully these are totals for multiple years with one team - can this be made clearer?
  • Tblisis team stats are missing, as are yellow and red card stats for htose and other teams.
  • Needs refs
  • Why are his English team honors not shown here (player of the year, goal of the month)?
  • I see there is a bit more on his personal life in the article than I realized at first. I know some articles have separate sections on personal lives. While it is up to you, some recent FAs I looked at follow this model. There are several FAs on football players that may be useful models. The three most recent seem to be
    • Sigi Schmid - has a personal life section
    • Eduard Streltsov - post retirement section
    • John Wark - Life outside football section (a bit older as an FA compared to the other 2, but was on the main page in 2011
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 04:55, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for a very thorough review, it is just the type of feedback I was looking for. I've made a number of the suggested changes, and will act upon most of the others in due course. Some of the language things e.g. medical without examination are fairly standard in BrEng sporting use, but its always worth thinking about alternative ways to phrase them if there's the potential for confusion when read by a wider audience. A roubles conversion for the 1991 transfer could be difficult. I don't have the exact date, and it was a period of very high inflation. According to a NYT article I found while searching for values, the rate was 6 to the dollar in 1989, but was 47 to the dollar by November 1991.
Unfortunately there has been nothing in reliable sources about Kinkladze's post-retirement life whatsoever as far as I can tell. LexisNexis only turns up articles harking back to previous performances, or comparing young up-and-coming Georgians with Kinkladze. Likewise on Google news archive search, including for his name in Cyrillic script. This paucity of sources is partly why I made the call to include personal life details in the narrative, to prevent a stubby section. Thanks again for your review. Oldelpaso (talk) 21:03, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
If there are no sources on his recent life, then there are none. Please let me know when this is at FAC. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 20:04, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

The New Girl in Town[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like it to be a GA article

Thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 02:20, 4 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110

The primary issue with this article is the prose; there are many redundancies in the text and many instances in which it could be smoothed out.

  • Lead
    • "Before signing a record deal with Cara Records, Abraham Quintanilla Jr and Brian "Red" Moore released four promotional recordings that Selena recorded initially for her debut album." Who are Quintanilla and Moore? Why is "initially" needed in this sentence?
    • Please ensure contractions are not used in the text. I see "couldn't"s and "wouldn't"s.
    • "Her performance helped her become a music guest in future episodes, as she grew with the show." What does "she grew with the show" mean? Did she gain popularity because of her appearances?
  • Production and development
    • "Prior to signing a record deal with Cara Records[...]" "Before" would be better than "Prior to".
    • Quintanilla and Moore's first name should appear here as the body of the article is considered a fresh start after the lead. Again you need to say who they are.
    • English language does not need linking.
    • Freddie Records should not be italicised.
    • Ah! The article tells me who Quintanilla is at last. In the middle of the first section on his second mention, for some reason.
    • "Selena's father and manager, Abraham Quintanilla Jr, believed otherwise, and was underpaid by venues who booked Selena to perform." It took me a while to understand this. Are you saying he was underpaid by the venues because he believed Selena would bring in large crowds? Maybe "Quintanilla believed that she would, though was underpaid by venues who booked Selena."?
    • "After the release of their debut album in 1984, Abraham[...]". I see from his article that he was commonly referred to as Abraham. This article uses both "Abraham" and "Quintanilla". You should choose just one for consistency.
    • "The album was scheduled to be released in 1985; however, the album was never finalized by Cara Records, because of copyright control." You don't need to use a semi-colon and "however". I suggest "Cara Records were scheduled to release the album in 1985 but, due to copyright control, it was never finalized." Is there any further information about the copyright problems that could be included here?
    • ""The New Girl in Town" was later released as a cassette,". The album title to be in italics.
    • "In 1995, Selena's father bought the rights to the album from EMI Records". Can you not just say "Abraham"/"Quintanilla"?
  • Composition
    • There is only one sub-section in this section. Why not just remove the "Musical style and lyrics" heading?
    • "The album had mostly Jazz influences and Chicano rock songs that were all recorded in Spanish." The influences need citing.
    • When referring to the producers of the tracks, you say "while" (e.g. "[...] was written by Abraham Quintanilla Jr, while it was produced by José Ramón Florez, Bob Grever, Miguel Blasco and Steven Alvarez."). This should be "and".
    • This section is sparse on citations. Are there any other sources you could tap besides Richmond? Some interpretations of the lyrics and the style of the music are uncited (e.g. the "Se Me Hace" section). This needs fixing if you want this article to pass GAN.
    • This section also needs a good copyedit, as the prose is extremely formulaic and repetitive ("The song was written by [so-and-so] and produced by [so-and-so]. The lyrics describe [something]. It is a [whatever style of music] song.").
  • Release and Promotion
    • The "p" in Promotion should be lower-case.
    • ""The New Girl in Town" was initially going to be released as the second LP record for Selena y Los Dinos in 1985, however, due to copyright control, the album was released temporarily on a compact cassette in South Texas." This sentence needs breaking up. I'd put a full stop after 1985. Again, is there any further information about the copyright control?
    • "The album was pulled off shelves within two months of its release, whereas lead vocalist Selena, promoted the album during her tour in Texas." This is unclear. Does this mean Selena continued to promote the album after it was pulled?
    • "Her performance, helped her become a music guest in future episodes, as she grew with the show." As with the lead "she grew with the show" needs clarifying, and the comma after "performance" should be removed.
  • Release history
    • I don't see much point to having a table with just one release date; you've already mentioned the limited release in 1985 in above sections, and the date is in the infobox too.
  • References
    • Billboard was not published by Prometheus Global Media in 1985, so you need to correct this (check the editorial column in the source).
    • Reference 7 needs a space after p.
    • Can you find a better source for Reference 10 than an mp3 dowload on Amazon?
  • Further reading
    • Patoski and Richmond should be in the references section. All three of these books need the year of publication after the author name.

I see from your talk page that you are away on holiday for the next month or too. Hopefully when you get back you will be refreshed and will be able to work your way through these issues and get the article listed at GA. Bradley0110 (talk) 11:35, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Michael Jester Thanks for you work on this interesting article. It had a bit of work though before it will pass a GA. Some comments:

  • Use example FA album articles such as Dookie, Surfer Rosa, and Maya (M.I.A. album). I just picked three; the whole list is located at [1]
  • Why do you have "(U.S.)" in the infobox after the release date if the article states it was only released in the US?
  • Lead:
    • There should not be quotations around the album.
    • It was very unorganized. You start talking about Cara Records, then instantly talk about her departure from Freddie Records.
  • Maybe add a background section?
  • Add a "Critical reception" section.
  • Either take away the "Composition" section, or take away "Musical style and lyrics".
  • There is a lot of red links in the Personnel section. Unless they are important, un-wikilink or change the link. Example: link back-up guitarist to just guitarist.
  • For the references. Make a section called "Footnotes" where you're now references should go and have the "references" section contain what has your "Further reading" section.
  • In your references section, spaces should be after the period. Example: "Patoski p.348" should be "Patoski p. 348"
  • In your references section, be consistent on your dates. One ref you have the day first, then the month. On the other ref you the month first, then the date. Pick a way and stick with it.
  • For your "Further reading" section, they are formatted wrong. The author's last name should be first, then last name. Also, try to add more fields, if possible.
  • Others
    • I see many contractions that should be expanded.
    • Just say "Cara" instead of "Cara Records" after the first time.
    • Maybe you should link her debut album in the lead
    • Why is it in the category "Unreleased album" if the article says it was released December 26, 1985?

I don't watch peer review pages, so if you have any questions, feel free to contact me on my talk page.

 Done All have been fixed. Thank you again for your comments. Take care, AJona1992 (talk) 23:05, 8 July 2011 (UTC)


Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because i want to see if the article still meets the requirements for a good article. If so, what further improvements do i need to make/consider before it is good enough for feature article criteria.

Thanks, Kilnburn (talk) 15:26, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Chipmunkdavis
  • To me "may suggest" sounds like a tautology, as suggests already contains the connotations of may.
  • Add a date for the Battle of Raith.
  • Mention Malcomn III was the King of Scotland
  • Was Scotland under occupation by England? Is there a wikipedia article about this you can link to?
  • "Maps from the 16th and 17th centuries, have recognised that even then, the shape of the town, consisting of a 0.9 mile (1.4 km) main street was described as a '"lang toun"'." needs to be reworded.
  • A better explanation of what the 17th century political crisis was would be helpful, as well as a clarification of what a major setback is.
  • Are the prices given in contemporary value?
  • This section looks really good. The only thing I suggest is clarification of what the local government does, what services they provide etc.
  • How does a raised beach affect medieval town development?
  • "A good mix of both private and public housing was guaranteed and having more smaller scale residential developments including land that applies to availability returns." Can this sentence be reworded? What does it mean?
  • Is it possible to get a satellite photo as well as an estimate of size?
  • Is the second paragraph based off the same sources as the table? If so, indicate in text.
  • More information, perhaps about religion or ethnicity, could be useful. Information on immigration if available should be provided too.
  • This again is a very good section. In terms of GA requirements it is definitely broad, and it looks to me to be comprehensive. I can only suggest statistics for each sectors growth/profit etc., and perhaps the rate of employment of the larger companies.
  • "is considered to be one of Scotland's finest museums" can be seen as WP:PEACOCKy. Finest in what sense?
  • Is the wikilink from "Britain" to Great Britain correct?
  • I suggest rewording the sports paragraph, it reads choppily to me, and I'm not sure phrases like "turned professional" are correct.
  • What religious and defensive roles has the medieval tower taken?
  • What is the phrase "associated with or at one stage" trying to communicate?
  • What out again for peacocky phrasing. The third to last paragraph has some questionable language, such as describing a building as "impressive".
  • Again in the third to last paragraph, can you explain the listings? (A-list, B-list)
  • What is a "Philp School"?
  • "The school which is one of the best performing schools in Scotland" is sounding peacocky again. Who considers it the best, and why?
Public services
  • I suggest including this section with the governance section, but that's up to you.
  • Is tap water supplied by the government?
  • Phrases like "south of the border" are better clarified with which border is meant.
Notable people
  • This section could use with slightly better organisation, and I'm not sure it's necessary to say a person is famous "in music" or "in broadcasting"; instead describe each person's actions.

This is a very detailed and well-sourced article, probably one of the best town articles I have read. I'm quite sure it stands up to all GA criteria, the most obvious issue being that there are some small paragraphs, which is discouraged by the MOS. With a few tweaks in prose, I think it'll be quite close to FA level. The above comments are simply suggestions, you may take them or leave them. At any rate, good luck, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 08:44, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

List of dog breeds[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has had a major overhaul since the last peer review and most of the items suggested then have been incorporated into the list. Would like to know what needs to be done to make this a Featured list.

Thanks, GB fan (talk) 20:32, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: A great effort getting all those breed photographs. This looks to be the basis of a very impressive list, after a bit more work

  • It is not appropriate to head the article with a "Further information" link to List of dog types. That is a very sketchy list, much inferior to this, and it's hard to see what "further information" could be gleaned from it. The link is already in "See also".
  • Removed. GB fan (talk) 19:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I suggest, too, that you look at the longish list of "see also" links and decide how many of these are really needed.
  • Pared down to three see also links. GB fan (talk) 19:52, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
  • The list needs a better introduction than the present brief lead. For example, you should not ake readers rely on links to interpret youy cryptic column headings - FCI, AKC etc. You need to provide a key which states what these bodies are.
  • It is quite hard to interpret some the information in the table. For example, "Group 02 Section 01 #186" - what does this mean?
  • The table is preceded by a note stating that it is incomplete. Is this leaving the way open to the addition of further breeds, or is it suggesting that some of the large number of empty cells will eventually be filled? In this connection, a fair number of entries have no information in any of the columns, which seems strange.
  • The referencing seems to be very slight? A few cells are cited to sources, but the great majority are not. What are the sources for these? (This point was raised at the last peer review).
  • What is the relationship to the table of the list that follows the References section, consisting of links to various kennel clubs and other bodies? Are these sources? If so, they should be cited in the normal way. If not, they should be listed under "External links".
  • I note from the toolbox on the upper right of this page that there are two links to disambiguation pages. These need fixing.

I hope these comments are helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 23:20, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, I will work on these and see what I can do to fix them or answer them as I have time. I thought I was going to have more time to work on this in the near future but do to changes in RL it might be longer before I get to this project. GB fan (talk) 12:55, 23 June 2011 (UTC)

Canoe River train crash[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because… I intend to nominate it for FAC in due course (probably not until September) and I'd be grateful for feedback.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 04:32, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Nikkimaria
  • "Wintry weather conditions and an intense oil fire made the rescue efforts difficult; and the attempts to recover the remains of the dead even more so; four bodies were never found." - first semi-colon should be a comma, but more importantly, where was the oil fire? On one or both of the trains, beside the tracks? Was anyone killed by this fire?
  • Where is Camp Wainwright?
  • Lead states that Atherton himself hired Dief, while article says his father - which is correct?
Almost certainly the father, even though Dief stated in his memoirs that Edna said that "Jack Atherton" had come to see her. I suspect that this is Dief misremembering what Edna said, although even cursory analysis of Dief's memoirs shows he was not one to let the truth get in the way of a good story, or his place in history.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "his wife, Edna" - suggest either omitting the comma or just wikilinking Edna
  • What does "break his journey" mean? What is a "trial level court"?

Is "stop over" OK? I don't see what is unclear about "trial level". New York and British Columbia have the Supreme Court be a trial level court ,not the court of final appeal, and I am trying to clarify that.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Why was Atherton only charged in relation to one death?
The sources don't say. I could speculate, but that is not what you want.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The Calgary Herald or The Calgary Herald? Check for consistency in citation formatting. Nikkimaria (talk) 23:37, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments from TCO-troll
  • Major priorities: (1) Better organize Rescue section. (2) Get a picture of either of the two memorials. There are still relatives and survivors alive who may read this article. You don't need to take it, but see if you can get a Wikian to do so or if a blog-owner will donate a photo. You should not need to travel for it. (Newspaper crash photo would be huge EV, too, but I doubt you get that for free.)
  • I hacked away at it. Please change anything back that you want (articles do better with owners!)
  • Detailed comments on talk side of this page (now).
Comments from Finetooth

An interesting read, as always. I have just a few minor suggestions.


  • "396 km (246 mi) west south west from Edmonton" - Maybe "west-southwest"?
  • "Full order not received by troop train, which was for it to pull into siding." - Tighten to "Full order to pull into siding not received by troop train"?


  • "eliminating a sharp curve which prevented crews from seeing approaching trains" - I'd recommend "that" rather than "which" here for clarity.


  • "comprised S-2-a class locomotive 3538 and 17 cars" - Missing word, "of"; that is, "comprised of"? Ditto for "comprised U-1-a class locomotive 6004" further down in this section?
That was added by someone knowledgeable in trains who did the GAN. I assume his phrasing was intentional. In both cases.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Onboard were 23 officers" - Two words here, "on board" rather than one?


  • "there were about 6 inches (150 mm) of snow on the ground" - Although rainfall is generally converted to mm, snowfall is generally given in cm.
  • "The train which arrived three hours after the accident transported the injured to Edmonton." - For clarity, I'd add two commas: "The train, which arrived three hours after the accident, transported the injured to Edmonton."
  • "Wintry weather conditions and an intense oil fire made the rescue efforts difficult; and the attempts to recover the remains of the dead even more so; four bodies were never found." - Replace the first semicolon with a comma?


  • "Atherton, who was aged 22," - Tighten to "Atherton, age 22,"?

Atherton criminal case

  • "Atherton's father approached Member of Parliament John Diefenbaker in December 1950... " - Maybe I'm missing it elsewhere, but I thought maybe this should be prefaced by something like "Anticipating that his son might be charged with a crime, Atherton's father... ".


  • Place of publication for the Shaw book?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 01:56, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks to all. I will give the article one more read through and then start moving it to FAC. I see no reason to wait for a couple of images, what we have now is adequate for an event which occurred in the copyright era.--Wehwalt (talk) 12:28, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Space debris[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it failed a FAC and I'm trying to get more eyeballs on it.

Thanks, Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:22, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Query, are the hints provided by the automated tool tested against the article? If so, is there a link from the hint back to the place in the article where it occurs? It's telling me there's some missing nbsp's in units, but it's tedious to find these manually. Maury Markowitz (talk) 20:24, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Hi Maury, I noticed your earlier FAC attempt and even though I normally don't participate in PR outside of my own Wikiprojects I decided to give this one a quick shot. I just skimmed your article at the lead and at the end a bit so for now I'll leave just a few quick comments.

  • The sentences in the article do not look very organized, and are missing flow. Technical jargon is at times unexplained and MOS at times ignored.
  • The lead section does not summarize the content of the article. Also, the discussion of the impact of debris in the three paragraphs in the lead section seems... unorganized. And I would doubt that an object of 1cm in diameter would have the effect of sandblasting!
  • "Measurement, growth mitigation and active removal of space debris are major activities within the space industry today." I doubt that... that will be true for space agencies but I'm pretty sure commercial satellite operators don't give a damn. As long as they are not forced to deal with their garbage they won't.
  • GEO = Geostationary Earth Orbit
  • DLR is developing under ESA contract a service satellite similar to the MDA Space Infrastructure Servicing vehicle for the GEO orbit. For the moment they are hoping that big companies like SES will show interest and purchase such satellites in order to actually build them, AFAIC. Didn't bother looking for sources at the moment, sorry.
  • There is fear that active cleanup vehicles in space might be used as anti-satellite weapons. This needs to be addressed.
  • There is also fear of collisions between service and dead satellites, which would aggravate the problem of space debris considerably.
  • "Dealing with debris" only talks about attempts to remove debris, not about passive (or even active?) protection mechanisms like improved shielding. This is probably intended but needs to be clarified.
  • There are plans to avoid the problem of space debris for other celestial bodies from the outset. Is this addressed?
  • Are plans for international regulations concerning space debris discussed? E.g. that satellite operators should be made responsible to clean up their own mess?

From this quick skim it looks like there are many holes to be patched in this article. I may do a little more review some other day, but no promise here. Nageh (talk) 18:03, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Huh, was I supposed to comment on this PR? It was closed by a bot right the next day after it was opened. Nageh (talk) 18:07, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

List of G.I. Joe: A Real American Hero vehicles[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review, because I have put a lot of work into making this list as comprehensive as possible, and I would like to submit the article for Featured List status. Thanks! Fortdj33 (talk) 15:04, 13 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110

The main issues I see with the list as it stands is the lead and the format of the main list. The scope of the list is well-defined and the overall descriptions of the products are comprehensive. For a list targeting FL-class, the lead is too short. Can you include further information regarding the style of the whole toy line, or sales figures? Do Bellomo or Santelmo have any other information?

Some issues with prose:

  • "Over the next three decades, various toys in that fictional universe have been released." Where has "fictional universe" come from? The toys have been released in the real world haven't they? Why not just say "Over the next three decades, various toys have been released"?
  • "The Avalanche (not to be confused with the character Avalanche)" Is this confusion likely given that it has already been stated the list is about vehicles?
  • The format of the main list stands out; there are nearly 60 very short sections, all of which offer a year of release and a short description of the product, and some list a driver toy accessory. This means you're left with a very long contents table before you even begin the list. There are ways of clearing this up: You can list just the L2 headings in the contents by putting {{TOC limit|limit=2}} below the lead. Alternatively, you could arrange the list alphabetically. Alternatively you could tabulate the whole thing, allowing users to sort the list by the name of the toy, the year of release, and by the accessory if there is one. e.g.:
G.I. Joe vehicles with drivers
Vehicle name Year introduced Packaged with driver Description
Arctic Blast 1989 Windchill This cold-weather vehicle featured a progressive air suspension system, two "Chain Gang" 30mm Gatling guns, two 7.62mm double-barreled machine guns, and side mounted surface missiles.
Avalanche 1990 Cold Front It featured a digital ice mine deployer, a side-swipe missile-firing pulse cannon, six heat-seeking surface-to-air missiles, and a removable scout craft for arctic reconnaissance.
A.W.E. Striker 1985 Crankcase The All-Weather/Environment Striker featured a removable engine, a 10 round 70mm launcher for projectiles, off-road tires and springing 4WD suspension. Although the release of this toy pre-dates it, it is quite similar to the M1040/41 Fast Attack Vehicle. In 1992, the cannon was replaced by a water-firing gun, and the vehicle was recast as the Eco-Striker, as part of the Eco-Warriors line.
  • Some statements are unreferenced, such as the second and third (short) paragraphs of Conquest X-30 and H.I.S.S.
  • Your reference formating is inconsistent: You use short format for Bellomo in "Notes" but long for Santelmo in the same section each time. Santelmo should be in the short format too for consistency.

Bradley0110 (talk) 22:17, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your suggestions, they are very much appreciated! The lead paragraph and unreferenced statements for Conquest X-30 and H.I.S.S. were written by the creator of the page before I took over adding content, so I just left them in, but I will be happy to follow up and expand on them. The main reason that each of the major vehicles has its own header, is because there are several links which redirect to this page, and point to the specific section header for that link. I'm not opposed to putting everything into a table, but I'm not sure that the table format is right for every section of the list, since some have more information than others. I agree with using the same format for Santelmo that I did for Bellomo, but I'm afraid that will just make any references other than those two stick out even more. Thanks again, and I will start to implement some of the other changes as soon as possible! Fortdj33 (talk) 12:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
You can use {{anchor}} templates within a table that will be recognised by redirects and will serve the same function as a header (e.g. {{anchor|Arctic Blast}}. Bradley0110 (talk) 16:35, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Ted Bundy[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… It's a pending good article with 270+ references and a notable (albeit dark) subject. Most reviewers won't touch it. Be brave and look at it: there's a cohesive group of editors working on it who are open to suggestions. Cheers :> Doc talk 04:35, 15 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thansk to everyone who has worked on this article. It looks much better than when I last looked at it (though I made the mistake of reading it all before going to bed - ugh). Here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC.

  • The lead seems less well written than the rest of the article. I would cut "in many North-Western states" from the first sentence. It is not really accurate (Colorado and Florida are not in the northwest US) and "North-Western states" is an odd construction and too much detail. -  Done
  • Also in the lead, I am not sure what a rigourous denial - perhaps vigorous denial? I think I would rewrite After more than a decade of rigorous denials he confessed to 30 homicides, but the true total remains unknown.[3] to include his pending execution, something like Although Bundy denied involvement for more than a decade, before his execution he confessed to 30 homicides; the true total remains unknown.[3] -  Done
  • My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but the states mentioned in section headers and his escapes are not mentioned in the lead. For the length of the article, I think the lead could be four paragraphs per WP:LEAD -  Done
  • In Early life I would note that his mother is known as Louise - I was not sure who Louise was at first. -  Done
  • I would briefly identify Ann Rule in first mention (coworker and later biographer Ann Rule?) - Already  Done. Mentioned as "biographer" wiki-linked in intro, and second mention also describes her personal knowledge of Bundy.
  • Make sure that quotations follow WP:LQ, basically punctuation goes outside the quotes unless a full sentence is being quoted. So one example is ... Louise would later claim she was seduced by "a sailor" whose name may have been "Jack Worthington."[15]
  • Make sure to give abbreviations after first full use - so "University of Puget Sound (UPS)" -  Done
  • Some general observations about his attacks and victims. First off, there are some many victims that it is difficult for the average reader to keep track of them all by name. So I would make sure that the victim's ultimate fate is made clear on first mention - so for example A month later, again late at night, Bundy broke into the room of UW coed Lynda Ann Healy, who broadcast Seattle's weather reports for skiers on the radio each morning. He beat her unconscious, dressed her in bluejeans, a white blouse, and boots, and carried her away.[66] does not make clear what happened to Healy and the fact that her skull is found is not revealed until 5 paragraphs later. I would add something like "Bundy murdered her, though her remains were not found until the next year." This could also be just "Her remains were found the next year." In this case, she also seems to be his first murder victim whose name is known, so the added sentence could be something along those lines. Anything to make it clear that she did not survive. See WP:PCR
  • Second, in some cases Bundy's role is explicitly stated (in the above quote, where he beats, dresses, and carries away Healy). The fates of other victims are described in passive voice - Melissa Smith and Laura Aime are described this way. Would it make sense to add some statement of Bundy's guilt? Perhaps at the end of the paragraph say something like "Bundy confessed to their murders years later."  Done
  • Third, since some of the people who survived their associations with Bundy are known by pseudonyms, would it make sense to have some sort of statement to that effect at the start of the first section where pseudonyms are used?
  • WP:HEAD says to avoid definite articles in headers, so "The escapes" could just be "Escapes" -  Done
  • Link Green River Killer? Green tickY Fixed. --Diannaa (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • The list of victims has several sentences that do not end with a period. -  Done Actually, they are not sentences, but sentence fragments. So the MoS calls for an introductory fragment and a semi-colon and then the final fragment. I will fix this. --Diannaa (talk) 20:56, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • I was surprised that there was no legacy section or even a paragraph. There is no mention of the film in the article itself, and also none of the books written about him later - I think that to meet the comprehensive criterion for FAC there has to be some mention of these.
  • The article may run into trouble at FAC for WP:NFCC issues. Since there is already a free mug shot of Bundy, I am not sure the 1975 Utah mug shot (which is Fair Use) adds anything to the reader's comprehension. We already know what he looked like.
  • Similarly since there are free images of two of his Florida victims, the fair use image of Caryn Campbell may be questioned. Here it might help to expand the caption ( Done) and note the features she had in common with other victims of the era.
  • I also have concerns about File:Ted Bundy 3.jpg too. The caption seems pretty POV without some source - if the article can quote or at least be attributed a book or tv show or some reliable source saying the same thing, that would help. Done Since the article has many images of Bundy, this is not needed to illustrate what he looked like in general, so discussing his fit of rage in the courtroom within the article would also help, preferably in the same section where the image is used.
  • Language is quite good with a few exceptions noted above.
  • Toolbox on this page shows one dead EL.Green tickY Fixed --Diannaa (talk) 20:45, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
  • External links section has several items which seem like they should be references - TIME magazine article for one. See WP:EL -  Done for the Time Magazine and local newspaper links. Which others are problematic?
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 15:47, 22 June 2011 (UTC)


Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I want to nominate it for FA. It already gained a GA status, but I think with the help of a reviewer, we can make it feature. Thank You. Greetings

Thanks, Tomica1111 (talk) 22:20, 14 June 2011 (UTC)1111tomica

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this and congrats on the GA. I think this needs a fair amount of work before it would be ready to pass at FAC, so here are some suggestions for improvement.

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are 60 FAs on cities at Category:FA-Class WikiProject Cities articles, so there are a lot of potential models to choose from.
  • Toolbox on this page finds one dab link that will need to be fixed before FAC.
  • Same toolbox EL checker finds 3 dead links
  • This article has an unusual structure - Etymology, then Geography, then History. The guidelines at Wikipedia:WikiProject_Cities#Article_guidelines_and_conventions for UK, US, Canadian and Indian cities all suggest putting History before Geography.
  • Biggest problem as I see it with this article is a lack of references in places - this would probably be a quick fail at FAC in its current state. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and at least the end of every paragraph needs a ref.
  • There is at least one citation needed tag and the Landmarks and Culture sections have several unreferenced paragraphs. There are also several places where there are one or more unreferenced sentences after a ref in a paragraph.
  • I checked one ref - current # 85 (Stadiums in the FYR Macedonia". World Stadiums. Retrieved 2011-13-03.) It is at the end of the first paragraph on Sport. The problem is that it does not say anything about swimming pools or water polo, so those statements need refs too. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • References are not consitent in the information provided (and needed). For example, internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful.
  • Dates in refs need to be in a consistent format (several are used), and all sources in Macedonian need to be identified as such.
  • Make sure the article uses reliable sources
  • The lead does not really follow WP: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.
  • My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but many of the headers (sport, notable residents) do not seem to be in the lead at all.
  • Make sure the headers follow WP:HEAD - for example avoid repeating all or part of the name of the article if possible (so "People from Skopje" could just be "Notable residents" (we already know they are from Skopje as that is what the article is about)
  • Article has a lot of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs, which disrupt the narrative flow. These should be combined with others or perhaps expanded wherever possible.
  • Many reviewers at FAC dislike image galleries and this has two large ones.
  • Language is good but not great - for many articles the most difficult FA criterion to meet is 1a, a professional level of English. See WP:WIAFA
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 04:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Crash Bandicoot (character)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would this article to pass FA status I would like to remove this nomination, as it was just recently promoted to GA about two weeks before I nominated it for peer review. Plus, I'm somewhat busy with other reviewed articles that I am backed on. Sorry for doing this, I do apologize.

Thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 07:46, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

International Space Station[edit]

Previous peer review

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

The article went to FA status some time ago, by an editor who has been too busy to maintain it recently. It's become a stagnant outdated patchwork of edits and errors. I "Get Away With"(my own words) fixing entire sections, making new sections, bringing the article up to date, and making it much more Neutral, so long as the lead paragraph is left alone, it's about the only paragraph some people read, and they don't like updates or changes. However I lack ideas on how to encourage other editors to use the talkpage. I set a poor example because I simply fix problems I see without always using the talkpage first, however I DO explain what I am doing, I DO ask for support and comments, but the talkpage often feels more like a personal blog, because so much is one sided. When I articulate a reason for something, it's sometimes countered with 'I don't like it that way' so I simply leave it, to keep the peace, and because there is no-one to turn a critical eye on these items, they turn into holes in prose, holes in continuity, errors that right now, are so plain for me to see.(and reference, but what's the point? it just makes the talk-page list longer still, how does that fix the article?)

The article would in no way survive a FAR request I'm sure, but I don't want to make one for two reasons, one, it may cause ill feelings because people would think the motive is juvenile rather than caring about wiki principles, if there are principles that are not stood up for, they become irrelevant trivia. I've seen other FA's and I so wish I could inspire other editors to help me make this page at least half as good. Two, it wastes time and energy that is better spent simply fixing the article.

My request is twofold, PR, and I don't have the skill to bring other editors on board, can anyone help me in this regard also. Thanks, Penyulap talk 06:39, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

For example, here is a draft for the first paragraph, which gives better context, sucks up a lot of facts in a few lines, and I'd like to know how is the prose ? It is not complete or referenced(I can&will), but there is another older draft on the talkpage also, if that's a problem. Other correct facts in the current lead would get sucked up in the other two or three paragraphs of the lead.

The International Space Station (ISS) is a habitable, artificial satellite in Low Earth Orbit. The ISS is the the 11th space station successfully launched into orbit by humanity following the Salyut, Almaz, Cosmos, Skylab, and Mir space stations. The name Zarya meaning Dawn in Russian was given to the first module, launched in 1998, because it signified the dawn of a new era of international cooperation in space. The ISS program combines two space station projects, the Russian Space Agency MIR-II and NASA's Freedom, with Laboratory modules from the Japanese and European space agencies, and robotics provided by the Canadaian space agency. These 5 agencies are the 5 major partners of the project. The main purpose of the ISS is to conduct scientific research utilizing the space enviroment and/or microgravity.

It looks a bit Russian-focused for people who are used to western media, but keep in mind NASA's stance IS currently changing, the budget (see in the cost section graph), they are using an American based International satellite launch company to take over shipping their supplies, and in Jan/Feb this year began looking for other groups that can take over management of most science on board. Keep in mind each country focuses on it's own contribution and downplays other countries.

The full RFC of the partial draft is here on the talkpage. Penyulap talk 09:48, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

RJHall comments: Well the article doesn't appear to be in that bad a shape. I went through the article and performed various copy edits. Hopefully those meet with general approval. Here's a few issues:

  • '...they had completed 159...' Left me wondering 159 of what? Tasks? Components? The number of listed modules seems much lower than this total.
  • For the table in the 'Pressurised modules' section, I'd move the 'Notes' column one column to the left and combine it with the first row for each module; this will provide more room for the text. You might also consider combining the 'Module' and 'Isolated view' columns so that each of the module names are located below their respective images.
  • I think the paragraph that begins "As a promotional outreach and for stress relief, crew..." doesn't belong in the 'Structure' section. It should probably be merged with the related material in the 'Education and Cultural Outreach'.
  • The 'Microgravity' and 'Sightings' sections also don't belong in a section about the ISS 'Structure'. Microgravity may belong in the 'Purpose' section, while 'Sightings' could perhaps be placed with 'Station operations'.
  • "2 722 kg" and "22 000 meals" => the Wikipedia standard is to use commas for thousands separators. This would make the numbers consistent with other large units in the article. See Wikipedia:MoS#Large numbers.
  • The 'Maintenance' section seems to have too much tactical detail for a summary style section. Can this material be migrated to the linked main article page and the events summarized on the ISS article? Perhaps with some sort of grouping by type, if possible.
  • The paragraph that begins "An air leak from the USOS in 2004..." needs to be completely re-written so that it makes sense.

The article as a whole seems to have some issues staying on topic. I suspect that this may be the result of additions by space advocates, but they add bulk to the article, introduce a certain lack of focus, and are perhaps best covered elsewhere. I've noted these below.

  • I think you can toss out the following content because they read almost like nationalistic glorifications and have little to do with the ISS:
    • 'China is planning to launch its own Space station in 2011, and has officially initiated its program for a modular station. However, China has indicated a willingness to cooperate further with other countries on manned exploration.'
    • The entire paragraph that begins with the sentence: 'The Russian Orbital Segment is the eleventh Soviet-Russian space station.'
  • "The Russian approach allows assembly of space stations..." seems off topic and probably should be removed.
  • This is getting off topic: "Large, acute doses of radiation from Coronal Mass Ejection can cause radiation sickness and can be fatal. Without the protection of the Earth's Magnetosphere, interplanetary manned missions are especially vulnerable." I think it should be removed.

I hope these comments are useful. Thank you. Regards, RJH (talk) 16:51, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Sincere thanks, these issues have been annoying me a great deal and it's an incredible relief to see I'm not the only one. At the moment I'm almost alone on the talkpage, with new editors who are extremely helpful, and the occasional troll, my mentor is away.
All of the entire first section of your points I'll implement as best I can ASAP. I'll chop the nationalistic glorifications, but for now keep the first bit, it is the smallest way I can provide context for the ISS, it is a space station, and needs some kind of context amongst other space stations especially contemporary and past, some people think it is the 2nd or 3rd, some people will be confused when other stations are up there. Context I read is important, in some relevant style articles. Future stations are no context because proposals come and proposals go, dozens at a time. OPSEK gets a mention at the moment because a lot of it's components are in orbit right now, attached to the ISS.
  • Is there a way I can implement an explanation of the end of the ISS mission without mentioning OPSEK ? or remove mentions of opsek altogether ?
  • How can I get rid of mentioning the Russia segment's position in the Russian space station program, it's like the 11th, but can I just leave this out completely ? is that ok for Neutrality ?

I think that is why the sections 'End of Mission' and 'De-Orbit' were left out of the article earlier, because this is a tough nut to crack.

  • "The Russian approach allows assembly of space stations..." should I dump the American approach part also ? Some other editor was saying before I ever got into wiki that the article 'reads like a NASA brochure' I think it should too, it'd sound nice and professional ! but where can I put this stuff so it won't annoy the Americans ? I need help to bury this crap so it goes unnoticed, I'd appreciate anyone's help on this. Penyulap talk 00:19, 30 June 2011 (UTC)
What I like to do in cases like that is to move the material to a more appropriate article, then say so in the edit message. This seems to mollify most objections. The space station article looks like a good place to put information on different approaches to space station construction, along with other, general information that can apply to any space station. Besides, that article could use more content. Regards, RJH (talk) 16:44, 30 June 2011 (UTC)


This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I was wondering what needs to be done to polish it for GAN.

Thanks, Glimmer721 talk 17:08, 14 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Brambleclawx:

I've started by doing a quick copyedit. My first thought is that the lead needs to be expanded. Brambleclawx 15:16, 23 June 2011 (UTC)
I have a question: what does this sentence mean? "the jabberjays were abandoned while Katniss breaks the law by hunting, but the laid-back security in District 12 protects her" Brambleclawx 15:37, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
It's a poorly worded comparison, I think. I'll go back and fix it if I can make sense of it; if not I'll delete it. Glimmer721 talk 01:26, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
In the plot section, it says that as part of the deal, victors of the Hunger Games are granted immunity: immunity from what? You also need to do a little bit of explanation in the plot: readers may not understand what the Hunger Games are, who President Snow is, why there's fighting, etc. We can't assume that readers know what the book is about already, or that they've already read the the plot summaries of the previous books. Brambleclawx 19:47, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

As I'd previously stated, and echoed below: you need to expand the lead. Basically, it should provide a nice summary of all sections of the article. I think, you can look at Moonrise (Warriors)'s lead as an example. Brambleclawx 22:33, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Finally, the DC library page here contains some reviews that you can use that normally require subscription. They generally seem to be the full text of the reviews. Also see the comments made by the other editor below. Good luck with this article, Brambleclawx 17:18, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Olegkagan comments: I'm still a fairly inexperienced Wikipedian, but I noticed you've been waiting a long time to get feedback on Mockingjay and so I figured I'd give it a shot based on what I see as missing/could be improved in this article. Naturally, take from it what you will, discard the rest:

  • Expand the lead: Include something about each section in the article including the inspiration (i.e. something general like "...inspired by the Greek mythology and Roman Gladiator games") a line or two about the plot, reception etc.
  • The article needs to be Wikified to a greater extent. There are a bunch of words that should link to other articles. A few examples that I see right away are Greek, Theseus, and ornithological.
  • The Inspiration and Development section should just be called "Inspiration" or "Sources" since the section does not talk about the book's development.
  • In the same section, it says "Collins has said" twice but the same source for both. Other places in that paragraph have what seems like the wrong tense, "describes" instead of described, "explains" instead of explained. I'm not sure this would be a problem if the transitions between the two inspirations were handled more effectively. That is, short of finding another source which may be a good idea too, if possible.
  • I haven't read any of the books in the Hunger Games trilogy so I had a hard time following the plot description. Since I suspect there's a lot of backstory that's only tangentially related to this article you've got to be careful about including too much. Two suggestions: 1) Short inline descriptions for characters may be a good way to start, for example, "After her rescue by the rebels, Katniss, [a blank-year-old blank...], willingly agrees to become..." 2) Expand it and break it up into a few paragraphs. The plot description on the Hunger Games trilogy article is currently longer then the one in Mockingjay -- this shouldn't be the case, methinks. Breaking it up into paragraphs helps with organization and makes it easier to read. In improving the plot description, my sense is that you should aim to give those of us who haven't read the series some understanding of what's going on in Mockingjay without us having to read three or four other articles.
  • In the Publication History section, you can get rid of the heading Sales and just let it all run together. There's no point in separating the one sentence of release dates (which is already covered in the lead) and the sales. Unless you're going to expand the section to include any other publication history (i.e. further sales figures, different editions), just keep it all one section.
  • You may have done this already and found the resources wanting, but I would consider looking further than newspaper reviews for references relating to, in particular, the themes section. You might consider rustling up some young-adult librarians online (many have blogs) or in rl and see if they can suggest some journals or articles for you.
  • Late addition: The other thing I neglected to mention yesterday but which might be helpful when expanding the article is to, granted you can find the sources, describe how Mockingjay compares to other books within its genre.

In general, the article's B-class rating is accurate. It's mostly well-written and covers the topic in a suitable way. To go further it needs to be expanded per the above suggestions. I may (read: have already) peek in and help out a little. Thanks for working hard on the article. Happy editing! Olegkagan (talk)

{{|page=WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Hema Malini|date=2011-07-16T08:30:03Z }}

List of World Heritage Sites in South Africa[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I created this article at the beginning of June and would like some general feedback on what I can do to improve this article.

Thanks, User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 22:08, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Review by ResMar 22:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC) An excellent article overall. A few things to say:

  • The lead needs to be extended. It should give a few sentences of information as to the scope of the sites; for instance, "since 1972 the organization has accepted X World Heritage Sites, 8 of which are in South Africa." You can then go on to describe the sites in South Africa in a general sense, for instance, "The sites include craters, fossil sites, former prisons, and communally-owned pastor land."
  • What the different categories are is not made clear, only in the general sense of cultural vs. natural; what distinguishes Category I from Category II, for instance? This may be better done as a list, either in the lead or in the first section.
  • I've copyedited it lightly, my feeling are mixed on using "The" to start these sentences as the subject is properly introduced a few table cells over.
  • "It was the heart of the Mapungubwe Kingdom until the 14th century..." When was the Kingdom founded? Ae. "from x to the 14th century."
  • "Its scientific value is demonstrated by the presence of fire and radiation adaptivity..." This sentence is confusing. It's acceptably clear that by radiation adaptivity you mean radioactive resistance, but what do you mean by fire? That the area is prone to fires? Many places are prone to fire, so you need to be more clear in what the value of it is.
  • Period and UNESCO data sorting is broken. I know, it's very annoying, but a lot of times with numerical lists you have to use {{sort}} to properly sortkey the things.
Note: I'm not very good at following much of anything really, so the most reliable way to get further feedback from me is to contact me on my talk page. ResMar 22:16, 26 June 2011 (UTC)
The section on the Floral Region refers specifically to Fynbos, I think, which uses fire for seed dispersal as a reproductive strategy. I shall make that clearer. I did not expand the lead because I did not want to expand it for the sake of expanding it, but your suggestion is good. I shall do that soon. --User:DiscipleOfKnowledge (talk) 13:37, 27 June 2011 (UTC)
Just a heads up: I'm away for 2 weeks starting tomorrow. ResMar 02:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Mohamed Bouazizi[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am hoping to get this up to the status of a Good Article and I wanted to run it through peer review to see what I need to work on. Thanks, The Egyptian Liberal (talk) 04:01, 18 June 2011 (UTC)

Review by ResMar 17:53, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

  • ...more commonly known as Mohamed Bouazizi... This is just a shortened form of his name, so I would change "known as" to "known simply as"
  • His act became a catalyst for the Tunisian Revolution, inciting demonstrations and riots throughout Tunisia in protest of social and political issues in the country. His incident was what "tipped the iceberg" so to speak. I think you should make clear what it catalyzed that led to such a major event.
Early life and employment struggles
  • Bouazizi lived in a modest stucco home... Modest is a peacock word. Especially in the context, I do not know, and most people wouldn't, I think, know what kind of a house a street salesman would live in. Can you provide a size or something similar? I understand this may be an issue with sourcing.
Confiscation of wares and self-immolation
  • It has also been claimed that Bouazizi did not have the funds to bribe police officials to allow his street vending to continue. "Claimed" really sticks out here; the following quote from his sister shows that it's factual, does it not?
Death and funeral
  • According to Bouazizi's sister... How does she know what happened: was she there, or did other people tell her? If she was there, why was she there?
  • He is credited with galvanising the frustrations of the region's youth... By "region's" do you mean Tunisia or North Africa? This should be made more clear.
  • On February 17, 2011, the main square...prior to that... Unnecessary chronological reversal disrupts flow.
  • ...secretary-general of the Sidi Bouzid municipality You repeat the details of his position twice, which is once more then necessary.
  • According to Bouazizi's mother, who was not aware of her son's intentions before he carried out his act of self-immolation... I dare say not! His actions were carried out in anger of an event that occurred after he left for the day, and what kind of suicide victim tells his mother he's about to kill himself? I've gone and removed this bit, but this sentence gave me a good laugh =).
  • I've only lightly touched the material from the beginning of the article, but flow is more of a problem as I work down the article, something I'm fixing right now.
  • Also: you used hard spacing in one date; that's correct, but you need to apply it to other dates as well! I've fixed some of these for you.

Overall I liked it. Interesting topic. ResMar 19:15, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Just a heads up: I'm away for 2 weeks starting tomorrow. ResMar 02:36, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Shea Weber[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm hoping to get this article to FA before the start of the upcoming NHL season and would appreciate any comments on how to improve the prose if it is needed, or if I have missed anything glaring. I believe the only thing this article is missing on its path to becoming an FA is a fresh pair of eyes to read over and enhance the prose.

Thanks, – Nurmsook! talk... 22:54, 25 June 2011 (UTC)

Review by ResMar: per your comments I've concentrated more on copy-editing then on review, but here are a few points:

Early life
  • Weber first played organized ice hockey at the age of six. What do you mean by "organized"?
Junior career
  • Weber went unselected in his Western Hockey League (WHL) Bantam Draft year, but was placed by the Kelowna Rockets on their protected players list during his second season of bantam. What does being on the protected players list entitle?
  • You say the season was 43–5–1–1, so 43 wins, 5 ties, 1 loss, and 1...what is that?
  • In addition to his championship run with the Eagles, Weber played in five games for the Kelowna Rockets during their 2001–02 WHL season. Reference, please.
  • Heading into the draft, he was ranked 42nd among North American skaters by the NHL Central Scouting Bureau, and 54th overall by International Scouting Services. Overall is misleading; what does it mean?
  • This guy is a defense-man, correct? You lean towards his goal numbers, though, isn't there another statistic for blocks or something similar? Or is this lean justified (I'm not an expert in hockey so I wouldn't know ;) )
Nashville Predators
  • He received a single fifth-place vote to tie for 17th with seven other players in James Norris Memorial Trophy voting as the league's best defenceman. This sentence is confusing, I'm not sure what it means.
  • Regarding his signing on and off of being a free agent, doesn't July 1 come before June? I think you switched the dates here.
  • At the game, Weber recorded four assists and was a +6... What does being "+6" mean?
International play
  • However, Weber's experience in this tournament was interrupted by an incident for which he was suspended three games. What incident...?
Personal life
  • Imo, Personal life is too short, you should look into expanding it.
  • Lastly, remember you only need to cite a reference once to cover an unbroken series of sentences; there are several places where you over-reference, for instance in "Personal life", where one reference was cited 3 times in a paragraph where it was the only source.

If you liked this review, be sure to go to Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog/items (which is where I found this article) and review some other waiting editor's backlogged article! ResMar 19:18, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Just a note, I won't be on Wikipedia for the next two weeks. ResMar 02:38, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Darla (Buffy the Vampire Slayer)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would love to see it reach FA status eventually. Darla was a very old vampire, with a much sorted history. She's probably my favorite television character of all time and I would love to see her article reach featured status. It's short (so is Martin Keamy), which is also a FA), but covers a lot of information. I've already requested a copy-edit at WP:GOCE. Feedback would be much appreciated.

Thanks, HorrorFan121 (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by James26 — Hi. I thought it was well-written in general. Here were my issues.

  • The first two sentences of the main body read like a continuation of the lead (one simply refers to a "pilot episode") -- rather than introducing the show and actress on their own.
  • is user-editable, making it questionable as a reliable source.
  • The second "comeback" paragarah ("I was shocked. I just thought once you poof'd. . .") seemed redundant to me. It didn't really add much that I hadn't already gathered (some statements are almost identical to those in the previous paragraph). Someone else could feel differently, though.
(Non-issue) -- James26 (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "She later joked: 'I just didn’t know how it was going to happen. So when they sent me the script. . .' "
Which script/show is this referring to? If this refers to the first death, on Buffy, perhaps "She later joked" could be replaced with something that makes this a bit clearer.
  • "In an interview with BBC, Benz described Darla as being strong:"
Should this part be separate from the rest of the block? Also, should the two different quotes, from separate sources, be in two different blocks? (I'm not entirely familiar with these kinds of block quotes).
  • "I would be a doing huge disservice"
Did you consider adding "[sic]" to this?
  • In most articles I've read, "The" is often used before "BBC".
  • "Demeanour" might be a Canadian spelling (I looked but couldn't find anything), since I notice that the interview was conducted in Toronto. Sort of like the British spellings in the article. Could be worth checking out.
(Non-issue) -- James26 (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Why does she have to die for the baby to be born?
(Non-issue) -- James26 (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The "Reception" section mentions "critics" (plural) but only cites one. Also, having the critic's quote appear twice in the article felt awkward. Might be best if the lead just paraphrased it. -- James26 (talk) 22:32, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
By paraphrase I mostly meant leaving the quote out and summing it up in your own words ("A positive review, citing the character's. . ."), but I suppose it's fine in shortened form. Nice work overall. -- James26 (talk) 10:04, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for this! I'll look over and try to fix your suggestions later on tonight. HorrorFan121 (talk) 00:15, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Winesburg, Ohio (novel)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've greatly expanded it and need some fellow Wikipedians to point out any more improvements that could be made, whether the sections flows well, and to help with any grammatical errors that likely exist. I'm fairly new to WP, and this my first big leap into editing, so I'm sure there are elements that the article is missing. Further, I'm certain this is no longer a Start-Class article, but I'm not sure how high to boost it. Any assistance is appreciated.

Cheers, Olegkagan (talk) 23:59, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Out of curiousity, how does this book compare to James Joyce's Dubliners? ResMar 18:27, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Plot introductions - sections this short are generally discouraged. You should define what a short story cycle is in the lead instead.
  • Figured it adds nothing to the article so I've removed it. --Olegkagan (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
  • What is the reference for the publication table in Composition and Publication?
  • Remember that most of the lines in the article should be cited, there are a few that stick out. Only material that is stating facts directly from the book, for instance plot details, should citation-less, but you'll have to talk to the Books Wikiproject for more specific details on that.
  • Will hit the books and cite Themes section more thoroughly. That's the one that needs more, I think. --Olegkagan (talk) 16:07, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
  • References go after punctuation marks. I fixed a lot of these, but I'm not sure I got all of them.
  • The paragraph on the film adaptation needs references.

Nothing to say content-wise, it's very much ready in that sense, although you might have to move some things around. ResMar 19:42, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

I read Dubliners a few years back so my recollection may be hazy, but the gist is that similar to Winesburg, all the stories in Dubliners take place in roughly the same setting (which is crucial to both books), and have some thematic threads throughout (a bit like the short story collections of D.H. Lawrence). I don't remember the Dubliners stories sharing characters nor having the same approach to time (bouncing back and forth at will) as Winesburg, Ohio. The differences emphasize why Dubliners fits much more within the genre of short story collection, as opposed to Winesburg which is a short story cycle.
With regards to the lines that should be cited, I tried to over-cite, but I'll check with WikiProject:Books regarding what looks like it still needs citations. Pretty much everything in there could be cited, but fresh eyes to determine what still needs citations would certainly help.
Will fix/add refs for the other stuff you mentioned. --Olegkagan (talk) 01:21, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
Just a heads up: I'm away for 2 weeks starting tomorrow. ResMar 02:34, 2 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments from Maria

Overall a very good article! If GAC is the goal, I believe it can certainly be attainable once a few key things are addressed. Some technical aspects first:

  • I see on the talk page that someone has already raised the issue of calling this work a "novel" -- I would argue it's in fact a book, and should probably be renamed as such.
  • The map from the first edition is great, and I see that you uploaded it yourself. It would be wonderful if we could also have the first edition cover/title sheet as the lead image (the one in the infobox), as it would both be in the public domain -- since the present one is not -- AND it would be more historically relevant. It's not necessary, but it would be a great addition to the article if you had access to it.
  • ResMar noted above: "Remember that most of the lines in the article should be cited" -- this is largely incorrect. As can be seen at this FAC discussion, there is obviously a difference of opinion as to citing every sentence in an article, but general consensus is that it's not necessary that every sentence that is not plot or similarly obvious needs citations. Cite where necessary, not mindlessly; always cite direct quotes, however, and make sure that there is at least one cite in each paragraph. I see that "Major themes" needs help on both accounts.
  • I've made a few fixes per the MOS, so keep these in mind:
  • Don't link single years, like 1988.
  • Headings should be in lowercase, except for the first words and proper nouns ("Literary Sources" -> "Literary sources")
  • Wikipedia uses something called logical quotations. Basically it means that punctuation marks such as commas and periods should only placed inside the quotation marks if they are part of the quoted material. There are some examples of this at the linked MOS page, but I notice it's used throughout the Winesburg, Ohio article, especially in terms of short story-titles. For example, it should be:
  • ...two fairly representative examples being the merchant's son Elmer Cowley in the story "Queer", and George Willard's mother Elizabeth in "Mother".
  • NOT
  • ...two fairly representative examples being the merchant's son Elmer Cowley in the story "Queer," and George Willard's mother Elizabeth in "Mother."
  • I've fixed a few of the obvious ones, but you'll want to comb through the prose to make sure it's correct.
  • Under "The stories", these titles should be in quotation marks; I see only one ("Queer"), but I didn't know if you had intentionally left it so...?
  • The list of References may need some help, if only because there are so many nice-quality ones to wade through. If you take a look at other high-quality lit articles, you'll see that they often separate references and citations using shortened footnotes. You can see such a style being used at The Red Badge of Courage or The Sun Also Rises, where book/journal articles are listed in full under the "References" section, whereas shortened footnotes are listed in the inline citations. While it's not required, it's helpful for several reasons: first, and most importantly, it's easier to read. Second, it helps deal with citing works of which you use more than one page. Your first inline citation, to Phillips' "How Sherwood Anderson Wrote Winesburg, Ohio", is used half a dozen times, but because it's listed as being twenty pages long, it's not really exact citing. With shortened citations, you can list Philips' work in the Refs section, and then pinpoint each individual page in a separate footnote: "Philips, p. 7" and "Philips, p. 10", for example. Give it a look at other pages and see if you think it might work or not; I'm obviously a big fan, but there are other ways to format refs, so feel free to experiment. :)

Overall the prose is excellent -- easy to read, very well paced. I don't have time to do a complete read-thru/copy-edit, so just a few notes to get the ball rolling:

  • In the lead: Mostly written from late 1915 to early 1916, with a few stories completed closer to publication, they were... -- the "they were" is ambiguous, although of course the stories are being referred to. Is the aside "with a few stories" even needed here? Since it's implied with "mostly" that not all stories were written from 1915-1916, I think you can drop it and simply have, "to early 1916, the stories were..."
  • I see ellipses used throughout, many of which don't look necessary per WP:ELLIPSES. In the lead, for example, I question whether the ellipses is needed after "they were"?
  • In the lead you may want to mention the adaptations, as well as something about its literary legacy.
  • Every literary work is of course different, and I'm a staunch believer in not using a mold to build each article. Still, I find it kind of confusing that the article discusses influences and genre before plot. Not having read the stories in quite a while, I was confused by several things from the first few sections. That could just be me, however...
  • "Literary and cultural connections" needs to be made into a more cohesive section; as it is now, it appears almost like a list, which is a big no-no in non-list articles. Flesh it out somewhat, and combine the singular sentences so everything fits together.

That's it for now, I think. Mostly suggestions to be taken with a few grains of salt, but there are a few minor MOS things to deal with. The article is quite impressive for a new editor, so well done! If you would like me to take another look, just let me know. María (habla conmigo) 15:06, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Boron group[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I feel that it is now a good enough article and because I really want to weed out the mistakes before going any further with the article. Please comment on anything wrong in the article and I will start to adress these issues once put here. And the status of the article is a C-class but is on the verge of B-class and this is also a reason to why I put this article up for peer review, for I believe that it can become much better with some constructive critizism about it. Thanks :) Geo7777 (talk) 16:43, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

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

  • A model article is useful for exampls and ideas to follow. There are two GAs that seem like they would be good models: Period 1 element and Group 4 element. There are no group of element FAs, but there are 17 element FAs at Category:FA-Class chemical elements articles
  • There is a disambiguation link finder tool in the tool box on this PR page. It finds 9 dab links which need to be fixed.
  • Biggest problem is that the article needs more references, for example the first paragraph of hydrides has no refs and needs at least one. Or (In2O3) is nearly amphoteric, and thallium(III) oxide (Tl2O3) is a stronger base. Each of these are stable compounds, but thallium oxide is shown to decompose at temperatures higher than 100°C. also needs a ref. As does this The exact same can go for electricity because boron is not good at conducting electricity at cool temperatures but is good at high temperatures, and the other metals conduct it. This is in coordance with the long standing generalization that all metals conduct heat and electricity better than most non-metals. This also needs a ref In addition, all of the isotopes stated above are found in nature in macroscopic quantities at any time. This group is special with its isotopes because it contains some of the heaviest stable isotopes ever found. Only lead has a heavier stable isotope. In theory, though, all elements with an isotope above atomic mass > 40 is supposed to be unstable to decays such as spontaneous fission and alpha decay. Also in theory, all elements with an isotope below atomic mass > 40 is supposed to be energetically stable to all forms of decay except proton decay which has not yet been observed ever. as does the first paragraph of History.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • 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
  • The current lead does not really 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.
  • For ideas to expand the lead, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, but I do not see anything about Biology or Tocicity in the lead.
  • Article has a lot of typos - what is "ccordance"? This is in coordance with the long standing generalization that all metals conduct heat and electricity better than most non-metals.
  • Be consistent on spelling - is it British or American (pick one and stick with it). Since then, around 13 atoms have been synthesized to date with various isotopes being characteristed.[26] (assume "characteristed" is a typo for the British spelling "characterised", but "synthesized" is the American spelling).
  • Watch WP:WEASEL formulations and avoid passive voice where possible. So It has been noticed that the elements in the boron group have similar physical properties. could just be The elements in the boron group have similar physical properties.
  • Watch for contradictions But, due to the fact that all of their atomic numbers are odd, each of them have only two stable isotopes, and aluminium and indium only have one, making them monoisotopic. each have two stable isotopes is not true, since two have only one stable isotope.
  • Watch for WP:OVERLINKing - my rule of thumb is to link once in the lead and once in the body, each on first appearance.
  • I would present information consistently in the article - for example natural abundances are given as percentages, as parts per million, and for thallium not at all.
  • There are lots of very good resources available - I would not use Enyclopedia Brittanica as a reference.
  • Greenwood and Earnshaw's book "Chemistry of the Elements" is a good source which is not used here.
  • My understanding was that fiberglass was often made from borosilicate glass - are you sure that A common application is the usage in fiberglass.[34] As an alternative to fiberglass, though, boron has had a rapidly expanding place in borosilicate glass, a different type of glass with its own advantages and disadvantages,...
  • Some of the compounds in "Some common chemical compounds of the boron group" seem to be errors - especially the gallium sulfides (one of which is a formula without sulfur). Another is GaS and then Ga2+S2- (which are the same thing). Or the gamma form of aluminum sulfide is shown, but no mention is made of alpha or beta
  • There is a tendency going down a group in the p-block elements for the oxidation state 2 less than the most common form to become more stable - here +3 is most common, but for thallium +1 is also common. I do not see any mention of this, but there should be (this is sometimes known as the inert s pair effect).
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 01:01, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Detroit Red Wings draft picks[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have listed this article for peer review because I have done as much as I can think to do with it and believe it is time to ask for help to take it to the next level.

Sincerely, Rejectwater (talk) 23:53, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Elimination Chamber[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this article was a Good Article for about a week and then delisted. What can I do to make it a GA again and this time make it stay one longer.

Thanks, Voices in my Head WWE 00:47, 16 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110
  • Please see Finetooth's comments from the 3rd peer review. Many suggestions for improvement have not been approached (providing a short background to professional wrestling, distinguishing between fiction and reality).
  • Please see the most recent GAR in which the issue of referencing was raised; the article still relies heavily on primary sources from WWE and the whole "Match history" section is unreferenced.
  • The language could be smoothed in places, e.g. instead of "prior to", just say "before".

Bradley0110 (talk) 17:52, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Mark Sanchez[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… after attaining GA status, the article fell into a bit of disrepair before extensive changes were made. I would like to take the article to FAC and I would appreciate any feedback prior to that.

Thanks, The Writer 2.0 Talk 19:41, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Giants2008 comments – A review was requested on my talk page, so I'm here. Some ideas:

  • First off, the source reliability is strong. The only one I would call questionable is TheJetsBlog (reference 71). Blogs aren't the best things to be using in an FA in most cases, and a fact from an AFC Championship Game should be avaliable from a more reliable outlet.
Done. I found a more reliable source to take its place.
  • Couple of reference formatting notes. First, non-printed publishers shouldn't be italicized. Second, NESN in reference 62 could be spelled out.
  • General comments: The lead is two short paragraphs. Aim to make it either two larger paragraphs or even three. A good method of writing the lead is to make sure all sections are represented. That, and some more info on his college career and most recent NFL season, should help beef up the lead.
  • I see two award sections, one for his college career and one for his NFL career. How about making them into one Awards section below all of the prose? It is kind of jarring to go from prose to list-type material, and back to prose.
Done. I took a look at Peyton Manning and copied the style utilized there regarding the placement of the Awards/Accomplishments and Statistics.
  • One thing the article is missing is some kind of a Playing style section, which someone at FAC will likely comment on at some point. Such a section could include information on his attributes (arm strength, mobility, opinions on leadership qualities) and perhaps some statistics (like interceptions).
  • The Personal section is usually titled Personal life in most bio articles I've seen, but I don't think this is a biggie.
Done. Might as well make the change just to be safe.
  • No need to link the Jets twice in the first two sentences. The prose/MOS reviewers wouldn't like to see that so early.
Done. I didn't even notice that. Thank you!
  • After the first usage of National Football League, it would be nice to provide the abbreviated version in parentheses, since it is used later in the lead and body.

Will try to come back soon with more prose comments. I only looked closely at the lead and a little of the body. Giants2008 (27 and counting) 00:36, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Eagles247 comments

  • Michigan should be wikilinked in the lead
  • AFC Championship Game should be wikilinked in the lead
  • First name should not be included in infobox image caption
  • Place of birth should be wikilinked in the infobox (due to someone changing the template)
  • I'm not sure, but I've seen "Southern California" under "College" in the infobox before instead of "USC"
  • Touchdowns to interceptions statistics should have an endash instead of a regular dash
  • Use "Sanchez" instead of "Mark" here: "When Mark was four, his parents divorced;" per WP:SURNAME
  • "Kids" is informal, consider using "children"
  • "joined the football team" <-- "football" should be wikilinked to High school football
  • Santa Margarita High should be wikilinked
  • ""quarterback guru"." <--punctuation goes inside the quotation marks
  • California Interscholastic Federation should be wikilinked
  • University of Southern California should be wikilinked in its first instance in Early years
  • I would change "perform" to "play" in the College career section
  • The second and third instances of "John David Booty" should just read "Booty"
  • Arizona should be wikilinked
  • Single-digit numbers should be spelled out as words per WP:ORDINAL
  • Need a comma after "Overall, Sanchez played in six games"
  • "overcoming a shaky first half where he threw" --> "overcoming a shaky first half in which he threw"
  • In between, for example, "35" and "yards," there should be an  
  • Remove second wikilink of "Matt Leinart"
  • "Coaches Poll" --> "Coaches' Poll"
  • Second instance of "Carson Palmer" should read "Palmer"
  • "2009 NFL Draft" should be wikilinked under "College career," and not wikilinked in its second instance under "Pre-draft"
  • "fall" is not capitalized, but "Spring" is capitalized --> need consistency
  • New York Jets should not be wikilinked in its second instance under "Professional career"
  • Cleveland Browns should be wikilinked
  • "It was the Jets first victory" --> "It was the Jets' first victory"
  • "from the Jets defensive unit" --> "from the Jets' defensive unit"
  • Hot dog should be wikilinked
  • Second instance of "Kellen Clemens" should read "Clemens"
  • Same with Rex Ryan
  • "completing eight of sixteen passes for sixty-three yards" --> need consistency with stats
  • "en route to a 37–0 win over the Cincinnati Bengals, who, already clinched the AFC North title and a playoff berth, rested their starters." --> sentence needs cleanup
  • "Sporting News" should be italicized
  • "OTA's" should be changed to "orangized team activities (OTA's)" for clarification
  • Brian Schottenheimer should be wikilinked in the quote
  • "Mark Sanchez" should be changed to "Sanchez" in the quote
  • Should be "Sanchez's father, Nick"
  • "Sanchez is best friends with childhood buddy Scotty McKnight" --> Should not use "buddy"
  • USC should be the first table of statistics shown
  • "Awards, Honors and Accomplishments" heading should be "Awards, honors and accomplishments"

Some of these comments are nit-picky, let me know if you don't understand what I mean for some. Eagles 24/7 (C) 16:04, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate your comments Eagles! I believe I have taken care of everything that you mentioned and if there is anything else, please let me know. -- The Writer 2.0 Talk 21:02, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

The Care Bears Movie[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article is getting better and better (to write and look at) as I go along. At this writing, it measures 135 kB, and contains 223 cites plus 19 notes. Thanks to The Nelvana Story by Daniel Stoffman, it looks like I've almost completed this thing ... after a six-year stretch. I'm sending this up as a GA nominee in due time, and then I'll do FAC before this year's up.

And ... did I forget to mention last time that it was directed by a woman?

Thanks, Slgrandson (How's my egg-throwing coleslaw?) 22:13, 17 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your ongoing work on this article and glad that you found a new source. Here are some suggestions for improvement - I think this would pass at WP:GAN without too much trouble, so they will mostly focus on what was is needed for it to stand a chance at WP:FAC.

  • Model articles are useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are two FAs on animated films (most WikiProject Animation FAs are on tv shows) and these may be good models - they are Fritz the Cat (film) and The Lord of the Rings (1978 film). Both are somewhat older FAs (promoted in 2007) but Fritz was on the Main Page in October 2010 and is in better shape.
  • I assume that all of the issues raised in Talk:The Care Bears Movie/GA1 have been addressed. I note that none of the sources deemed unreliable there are still used in the article. Assuming the issues have all been addressed, and that this follows WP:MOSFILM, and looking at WP:WIAGA, I think this would pass at GAN without too much trouble, although I am sure a reviewer would find some things to change (that's why things are reviewed, right?)
  • I think this would have a much harder time at FAC, mostly because of the language (which is the most difficult FA Criterion for most articles to meet). There are also some other issues - FAC is a place where every i has to be dotted and every t crossed. I will go through the article and try to point out as many examples as I can where improvement is needed, but these are just examples, not an exhaustive list.
  • The lead feels too detailed to me. In general the lead is supposed to be an inviting and concise overview of the whole article, but I am not sure that the current lead is concise or inviting enough.
  • I would focus the llead pretty exclusively on this movie, and would cut out material from the lead which is not directly related to this film. For example, I am not sure why The Black Cauldron has to be in the lead, or why the film's American distributor has to be mentioned three times in the lead. For that matter why does Samuel Goldwyn Jr have to be mentioned in the lead at all? He seems to only be mentioned one other time in the rest of the article. How does knowing in the lead that the film's distributor, The Samuel Goldwyn Company, was founded by Samuel Goldwyn Jr. help the reader's comprehension?
  • Similarly I am not sure that After a 1988 Christmas special, the Toronto studio ceased further work on Care Bears material until 2004's Journey to Joke-a-lot. needs to be in the lead.
  • I was surprised that there was no mention of the film's budget in the lead.
  • The writing style is on the prolix side - FAC wants more concise prose. I will try to tighten one paragraph of the lead ( the fourth and final one). The original is:
    • The profitable success of The Care Bears Movie saved Nelvana from closing down, and was responsible for reviving theatrically released children's entertainment in the U.S. market. The project was cited as an example of licensed merchandise preceding a major motion picture's debut; as such, a spate of animated and live-action features based on toy lines succeeded it in the years ahead. It was followed by two more feature films, also from Nelvana—1986's A New Generation and 1987's Adventure in Wonderland—neither of which surpassed the original financially or critically. In the wake of the film's success, DIC Entertainment and Nelvana produced two television series with the characters, airing on ABC in the U.S., Global in Canada, and in syndication. After a 1988 Christmas special, the Toronto studio ceased further work on Care Bears material until 2004's Journey to Joke-a-lot.
    • The movie's success saved Nelvana from closing, helped revive films aimed at children in the U.S. market, and has been cited as inspiring a spate of toy-based animated and live-action features. Nelvana produced two sequels in the next two years—1986's A New Generation and 1987's Adventure in Wonderland—neither surpassed the original financially or critically. The Care Bears franchise continues, and has included television series and specials, videos and films.
  • When I read in the lead that Another Nelvana effort, Strawberry Shortcake Meets the Berrykins, played alongside the feature during its theatrical run. I expected there to be more about this in the body of the article.
  • Plot - room to tighten the prose here 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 died. could just be something like In the story, Care Bears Friend Bear and Secret Bear travel looking for people to cheer up and meet Kim and Jason, lonely orphaned children.
  • Cast - this was criticized as overly detailed in the GAR and I think it could be trimmed. There are five actors credited as Additional voices - why do these have to be included? Also since two people provide the voice (speaking and sing) for the Lion, could these somehow be combined?
  • When an abbreviation is introduced like TCFC, why not use it later in the article?
  • Watch out for statements that do not agree with each other and avoid needless repetition - for example in the Development section That same year [1981] ... American Greetings began to develop a feature-length film with those characters. is followed a few sentence later by Nelvana was the first company to propose a feature film based on the Care Bears, and wanted to do it after hearing it was in development;[40] DIC Entertainment also vied to produce it. By the way, wasn't AGC the first company to propose a feature film based on the Care Bears (not Nelvana)?
  • FAC reviewers like references at the end of sentences or at least after punctuation - something like hanks to the Strawberry Shortcake specials[35] and their experience on Rock & Rule,[10] Nelvana acquired the rights to the characters[33] and gained a contract from American Greetings[14] to helm the script.[10] might raise objections at FAC.
  • Would Crew and companies be better as Crew and financing? Or Producers and crew?
  • There are many places where the prose could be tightened, but here the word choice is odd - an opening date is set or fixed (not "underway"): By then, the production was falling behind schedule, and an opening date was already underway; ...
  • The budget is in a note - I would include the range in the body of the article.
  • Similarly I would include the fact that the 24 million spent to promote the film included was $4 million for advertising and the rest for promoting the Care Bears line.
  • Is there any information on how sales of the Care Bears and Cousins did after the movie? Did their sales go up?
  • The MOS says to introduce someone the first time with their full name (can do this in the lead and first mention in the body), then just use the last name afdter that (unless there are multiple people withthe same last name, or the person is better known by a single or first name). So Patrick Loubert should be just Loubert after first mention (and lots of other examples)
  • I would not give the ISBNs in the body of the article - put them in a note or perhaps a reference
  • In 1985 Germany used DM, not Euros, so the gross should be given in DM with Euro and USD conversions.
  • I am not sure what the crtieria are for including things in the Sources section. Usually people list books in such a section and other references in full in the References section below. However here the first ref is a book that is not listed in Sources, and Sources includes what looks like a newspaper article (Rabkin) but there are other newpaper articles in References.
  • Make sure all sources meet WP:RS
  • I am concerend that the article has four fair use images. The lead image of the movie poster is fine, and the alum cover is probably good too. Iam less convinced of the need for the other two images - how do they meet WP:NFCC? The two model animated film FAs have only one image from the film between them (in Fritz the Cat). There is a discussion of the film's visual style and the caption makes it clear how the image used illustrates this. I would say that the Spirit image is close to doing this (although the image is close to that at the bottom of the film poster).
  • Bottom line is this needs a copyedit to tighten the prose. WP:GOCE and WP:PR/V list copyeditors willing to help - I would look for someone who has FA experience.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 15:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

God of War III[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…this is a huge article, and since it is a B-class, I'm surprised nobody has requested a peer review; I think that just by cutting some stuff in the article down/out, it could become an everyday good article, and there are plenty of sources, and a little more work on the lead

Thanks, SCB '92 (talk) 20:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by User:Tintor2 Some things I have noted are:

  • The lead is very short, using small paragraphs. See WP:Lead.


  • Most of the gameplay section is unsourced.


  • The plot could be trimmed down considering that as far as I see in the section it "Kratos fight this" various times.
  • The reception section also needs organizing. It only says "IGN says (quote), GameSpot says (quote), etc." Paraprashing is required.


  • Some references need to have worked into to include parameters like publisher, author, date, etc. instead of bare urls.


  • There are a lot of one-sentece paragraphs and such things are not approved by the manual of style.


I recommend using GAs or FAs as an example to follow like Resident Evil 2, Terra Nova: Strike Force Centauri. Regards.Tintor2 (talk) 15:54, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

List of lighthouses in Israel[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to know what's required to make this a featured list, if at all it is possible. The list is complete and stable for some time now.

Thanks, Muhandes (talk) 09:06, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: This is a great idea for an article; one of the beauties of Wikipedia is that it hosts information like this, which you are unlikely to find in any other encyclopedia or information source, at least in this form. So well done in bringing this forward. I have a few suggextions for developing/improving it:-

  • I don't think that either the choices of column, or the column order, are the most the most logical. Because he cells tend to be large due to the images, you can get more information into a single cell; thus I believe that coordinates and sctivity status could be included in the first column together with the name.
  • I think you need a summary information to give details at presently lacking, e.g. when each lighthouse was built, its period of active life, etc.
  • At present, none of the information in the table is cited to a source. A "Ref" column would enable you to cite the information in each row directly to its source.
  • In my view the most logical column order would be:-
    • Name etc
    • Location
    • General information
    • Reference
    • Image
  • Do you really need links to two maps of coordinates, at the head of the article? If these are your sources for the coordinates they should be listed among your references.
  • I think the lead could be extended a little, to fulfil its required function as a summary of the contents of the article.

Please note that these are suggestions, which you are of course at liberty to ignore. As I am not able to watch peer reviews individually, plese contact my talk page if you have any issues arising from the review, or if you want me to look at the article again. Brianboulton (talk) 16:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the suggestions, they do make sense. I am going on vacation for about two weeks, and I am sure to use most of your advice when I'm back and contact you again. --Muhandes (talk) 18:49, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

List of violent spectator incidents in sports[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has been a failed Featured List candidate twice before, and I want to ensure it is up to standard now before attempting it a third time. I've tried cleaning up the citations (bare URLs, remove Youtube links, etc) and adding pics, which is part of FL criteria. Any other feedback would be appreciated.

Thanks, Chimino (talk) 21:23, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Resolute
  • I'll be honest, I am not sure this list is even featurable, simply due to its nature. The biggest concern for me is how one defines the scope. Right now, the list mostly focuses on in-stadium violence that features fans vs. athletes. I don't wonder if there isn't a better article title that more accurately reflects this. You would almost have to maintain such a limitation on scope, otherwise probably 100 riots would have to be added. I also wonder if it is feasible to state that the list is complete? However, for suggestions on improvements:
  • Addition of pictures is good, but without captions, there is no context. I would add short, simple captions. i.e. "Monica Seles was stabbed by a fan in 1993". Also, alt text will be required for accessibility reasons. It looks like you attempted to just list each athlete's name, but that part is not showing because you need the "thumb" modifier in the syntax. [[File:athlete.png|thumb|right|caption|alt=alt text]]
  • A lot of missing citations. Any contestable fact will need a cite. That includes the incident, penalties (if any), ramifications, if any. Make sure all citations are in a consistent format.
  • Several entries fail to properly indicate what league, or even what sport they are referring to. I know that the VFL means Victorian Football League, but you can't assume every reader will. The first mention of each league should be expanded, linked and followed by its abbreviation: American Hockey League (AHL) - after that, you can simplify down to just the abbreviation, unless you convert to a sortable table format as shown below.
  • Lack of details in many cases. There isn't space for super detailed explanations, but it would help to briefly mention the consequences when there are some. i.e.: "During a changeover in a tennis match in Hamburg, Germany, tennis star Monica Seles was stabbed in the back by Steffi Graf fan Günter Parche. Seles suffered x injury and missed y time; Parche was sentenced to z years in jail."
  • Sport scores should use endashes instead of dashes. 10–7 instead of 10-7.
  • Standardization. I would suggest either a consistent format for each entry or a table be created:
    • Year: In [League/sport], [team] [player] was attacked by [name], resulting in [consequence]. or:
Year Sport League Location Incident
1900 Australian Rules football AFL Melbourne John Doe was attacked by a fan who invaded the pitch. Doe suffered a minor injury while the fan was ejected.
1901 Baseball AL Washington, DC Washington Senators pitcher Jack Doe entered the stands to fight a fan who was heckling him. Doe was suspended six games for the incident.
  • I think there is still a lot of work to be done, but it would certainly be an interesting article to get featured. Good luck! Resolute 23:25, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for all the feedback.
For limitations, it appears to be meant for fan/player interaction only, not fan riots or player vs player violence. Agree more citation is needed (if I can't find such citations, should the event be deleted?). Good points on expansion (i.e. ramifications) and completeness. Regarding the pictures, I left off captions as they often would have meant the pics would not have fit within the section (year); is it acceptable to have the pictures bleed between sections? Agree alt-text is needed; I'll work on that.
Again, thanks for the feedback; I see this list indeed does need alot of work still.--Chimino (talk) 01:12, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
If you can't find any evidence of an incident happening, it should be removed, yes. Some of the sport projects may be able to help you find cites though. I know for North American entries, Google News Archive has a good selection of newspapers from the late 1800s to about 1987. You may be able to find stories on several incidents. I don't think image bleeding into other sections is that big of an issue, though if you retain the current format for the article, you would probably have to remove some images on recent years to avoid having them stray too far from their proper year. You can also reduce the number of sections by changing it to go by decade rather than year. Resolute 03:07, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

McMaster University[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have listed this article for a peer review as I hope to eventually take this article up from GA-status to FA-status. The article has recently been through a copy-edit and I would like to gain some feedback, criticisms and comments on how and where this article can be improved to eventually reach FA-status. I personally feel that the lead section of the article can use some improvement, although a general review of the article would be most welcomed. Thanks you, Leventio (talk) 08:42, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Is the article still under review? ResMar 16:25, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Yes.Leventio (talk) 18:18, 29 June 2011 (UTC)
Comments by Bradley0110

This was an informative article to read and was very interesting. There are some grammatical issues spread out over the article but, apart from one section, not many issues with the sections themselves. The layout is good and consistent with featured articles on educational establishments and there is a good use of images. I know it is just following conventions but some editors get quite picky over non-free coats of arms in infoboxes; you might want to be prepared to move File:Mcmaster coatofarms improved.png to the coat of arms section if the issue is raised at FAC.

  • General points
    • Unnecessary passive voice in parts, e.g. "The suggestion to move the university to Hamilton was first brought up by a student and Hamilton native in 1909, although the proposal was not seriously considered until two years later."
    • A lot of references come from the McMaster website. Are any other sources available?
  • Campus
    • "McMaster's campus buildings vary in age from Hamilton Hall, built in 1926—the oldest building located in its present-day campus—to its newest business facilities in Burlington, completed in 2010." Can this be recast so there are not so many offset points?
    • "are currently underway" Currently as of?
  • Housing and student facilities
    • "The university has a number of vegetarian options, with a completely vegetarian cafe known as Bridges Café." When I think of "vegetarian options" I think of a menu or a Quorn sausage or something small. Why not "The university has a number of vegetarian establishments, such as a completely vegetarian cafe known as Bridges Café and a farmers market stand."? The use of "with" here indicates a journalistic style, which comes up throughout the article. These should be recast for a more factual style.
  • Off-campus facilities
    • "McMaster University's DeGroote School of Business currently[...]" When is "currently"? Better to say "As of YYYY McMaster University's DeGroote School of Business operates..."
    • "McMaster University announced plans for construction of a new arts- and technology-intensive[...]" "plans to construct"?
    • "The four-story, 90,000-square-foot (8,400 m2) building is called the Ron Joyce Centre." This would sit better after the construction and completion dates.
    • "The Ron Joyce Centre is home to DeGroote's MBA program as well as[...]" Just "and" would sound smoother than "as well as", unless the business management course needs emphasis for some reason.
    • "Downtown Centre, located in downtown Hamilton[...]" Drop the second "downtown"; I doubt there are many Downtown Centres located in the suburbs.
    • "Subsequent to filling the positions, registrants to the class are offered a position[...]". "After filling the positions"? and can the second "position" be changed to something like "place" so there aren't two "position"s in close proximity?
    • "The offers given out by McMaster are binded to the assigned site." Is "binded" common in Canadian English? Otherwise shouldn't this be "bound"?
    • "(UNU-INWEH) is currently headquartered within the park. UNU-INWEH is currently[...]" As of as of.
  • Administration
    • "presently" at the end of the first paragraph should be dated.
    • "Patrick Deane is the seventh and current president of the university, serving the post since 1 July 2010." The "current" is redundant to the "since 1 July 2010".
  • Research
    • The BBC News citation for Einstein's preserved brain is 12 years old; is there anything more recent?
  • Student groups
    • centred around". "centred on"
  • Notes and references
    • Websites should not be italicised.
    • Further reading should be in its own section, not a sub-section of refs.

Regarding your specific point about the lead needing work, I think it's almost there as it is, though you should include information about McMaster's reputation and rankings (e.g. ACSSB recognition). Bradley0110 (talk) 19:27, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Leventio
  • Thank you for reviewing this article. I have made the changes suggested (especially in regards to dating). Moved further reading subsection into a section. I've also moved the logo to the category "Academic institution logos" if that is what you intended. I've also added a more recent reference regarding the location the portion of Einstien's brain at McMaster (published in 2008).
  • As far as I'm aware, there isn't any other (reputable) source which provides much of the information about the school other than McMaster's own website. I'll attempt to search for more third party sources for the McMaster links however.
  • I'm not entirely sure what you mean by the unnecessary passive voice existing in the article, so could you expand on that if possible?
  • I'm not sure which website has been italicised in the reference, or do you mean the titles themselves?

Toledo Walleye[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have made numerous improvements to the article since its automated review as a stub-class article. I would like to get a consensus on what class article this article would fall under. I would also like recommendations on what would need to be done to improve this article to Good Article and/or A-class article status.

Thanks, Rik (talk) 04:13, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

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

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow - there are several FAs at Category:FA-Class Ice Hockey articles whihc seem like possible model articles.
  • There is a toolbox on this PR page which finds one disambiguation link that will need to be fixed.
  • The same toolbox finds almost every external link is dead. The ones to newspaper articles do not need to be replaced because the newspaper exists outside the internet and so someone could look up the article at a library that had back issues ofthat paper. I would fix the references to remove or comment out the links. The links to web pages that are dead do need to be fixed in some way.
  • Biggest problem I see is a lack of references. This article needs more references, for example the whole Toledo Storm section has no (zero) refs and needs some.
  • The first paragraph of the Sale to Toledo Arena Sports section also has no refs and needs at least one. Leaders and Awards and honors sections also have no refs.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • 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.
  • To expand the lead, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. As two examples, the fact that this team just started in 2009 and is a successor to the Storm is not in the lead, but should be. Please see WP:LEAD
  • Why is there so much on the first season and nothing on the second season? See WP:WEIGHT
  • Much of the Inaugural season section is written as if the season were still in the future, instead of the past. The Walleye will play fifteen of their first twenty-one games at home.[8] Also the description of the playoffs does not mention that they lost 1-3 in the quarterfinals (the season table does).
  • The article has three fair use images which seems like too much - please see WP:FAIR USE and especially WP:NFCC
  • There are some free photos on Flickr - see this one of their first game ever. Others are here
  • Could also inlcude a photo of the outdie of the arena
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.) SOme of the first season stuff reads like copy and paste from press releases.

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 ><>°° 04:18, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

A bit more

I uploaded File:Toledo Walleye First Game.jpg to Commons as it seemed like the most useful of the free images at Flickr. Please ask on my talk page if you need help uploading more.

  • I am not sure that this should be its own article according to the Manual of Style. When a sports franchise changes names or even cities, it just has one article under the current name - see Los Angeles Dodgers for one example. So it may be that this should be merged with the Storm article. I would ask at the WikiProject Hockey talk page. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 13:32, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Beautiful People (Chris Brown song)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to GA status. Any comments and suggestions on how to improve the article would be great. Thanks, Ozurbanmusic (talk) 04:35, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Adabow (talk · contribs)
These are things I'd pull up in a GA review:


Background and composition

  • "It was released to iTunes Stores from March 11, 2011." → Are you sure that it was iTunes-exclusive? Check Amazon and 7digital etc, and rewrite as "digital download". Also mention the other release formats here
  • "and thought it was the most electro house song they've ever heard from Brown" - not really offering any criticism. "We like the song, though we don't see anything inherently 'Chris Brown' about this track — it really could have been recorded by anybody with similar results." is probably a better quote to sample, although try to paraphrase the second half.
  • One must be careful when writing about genres, as there is a difference between what genre(s) a song is, and what it is influenced by. Genres (per sources) are electro-house, dancehall and Europop, and it has influences of R&B.

Critical reception

  • "Ed Easton Jr. from 92.3 Now said that "Beautiful People" "is a softer and..." - rewrite so that you don't have two quote marks next to each other. Also "Ed Easton Jr. from 92.3 Now wrote that..."
  • "Joanne Dorken from MTV UK said" → wrote
  • "Robert Copsey from Digital Spy awarded the song five stars" - out of how many stars?

Chart performance

  • "becoming Brown and Benassi's first single to top the chart" → and became the first number-one single for both Brown and Benassi
  • You should mention the Bubbling Under performance in prose (unless it later appears on the Hot 100)
  • "It has since reached a new peak of number twenty-five." → It later peaked at number twenty-five, and spent x weeks on the chart.
  • "top-ten" should be used when describing a song (ie "top-ten single", "fifth top-ten UK hit"), but when a noun, it should be "top ten" (ie "reached the top ten")
  • "the song debuted at number fourteen, before peaking at number seven."
    • Not sure what you mean here but I've added its debut date. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 10:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Eventually, the song certified Platinum" - missing "was"

Music video

  • Name the director
    • I've searched for the director many times but theres nothing I could find. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 10:20, 3 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Is there a bit of a storyline in the video? Don't people ride scooters to the club or something?
    • No theres no storyline. Just random scenes of Chris' everyday life I guess (performing, studio, clubbing etc). Ozurbanmusic (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Live performances

  • Is there any critical response or further info on the DWTS performance? Eg what he wroe, how he performed etc
    • I've added information about what he and his backup dancers wore. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

General comments

  • Try to use the song's title a bit more rather than "the song" or "it"
  • Do another web search to see if you can pull up some more sources

I am watching this peer review, so reply here if you want any more comments or clarification. Enjoy! Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:51, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing Adabow! I think the article needs copy-edit and should there be a screenshot of the music video? Ozurbanmusic (talk) 00:27, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
I will take another look soon for prose/MoS issues. No, after watching the music video I can't see any screenshot passing WP:NFCC. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Second round


  • "Brown worked on the song in hopes of inspiring people with dance music, and for the world to come together as a whole and stop the negativity." - awkward grammar; rewrite. What is "the negativity"?
    • I've removed this sentence. Brown said he wanted the world to stop the negativity but didn't say what the negativity was. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Musically, "Beautiful People" is an uptempo song which derives genres from electro house, dancehall and Europop, and contains influences of R&B." - link [[tempo|uptempo]]. "derives genres from" → "draws from the genres of" or "is derived from the genres of"
  • "keep their heads up" is a bit colloquial; can you introduce a quote or rephrase?
  • "The song was generally well received by most music critics" - remove either 'generally' or 'most'
  • "managed to peak" → peaked/reached/topped

Background and composition

  • "Before the release of the album" - name the album
  • Em dashes should not be spaced
  • Link ransom note effect
  • "it is composed of pulsing synths that build under Benassi and Brown's staccato and auto-tuned melodies, as stated by James Dean Wells from AOL Radio Blog." - you either need to paraphrase this or add quote marks. 'According to' is better than 'as stated by'

Critical reception

  • Critics don't say, they write
  • "when he unites with Benassi "for the electronic throb of Beautiful People"" - enclose the title in inverted commas per WP:MOS#Quotation marks

Live performances

  • Linking to Tron: Legacy is a bit WP:EASTEREGG and WP:OR
  • Can you give one or two sentences about the domestic violence incident behind the unhappiness of Brown being on DWTS?


  • Don't state the country which the iTunes Store ref is from. "iTunes Store. Apple Inc." is sufficient

Adabow (talk · contribs) 05:38, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

 Done Ozurbanmusic (talk) 22:59, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Nice work. I believe that this article is now at or close to GA standards. Adabow (talk · contribs) 04:47, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Cool. Just one more thing, does a good article have to mention the video director? Because I've been searching for this song's director a million times and still nothing comes up. Ozurbanmusic (talk) 06:41, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
No, if the info's just not out there, it is unreasonable to expect it to be included, especially only at GA level. Adabow (talk · contribs) 07:17, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

List of common English usage misconceptions[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to nominate it as a Featured List. It may need some work: (1) is the inclusion criteria and other aspects of the lede sufficient? (2) Might some more images be welcome or are the ones present sufficient? (3) Are the categories comprehensive enough? (4) Are there any other issues that might prevent it from reaching Featured List status?

Thanks, Airborne84 (talk) 03:22, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: A most interesting idea for an article. Reading it through, I recognise several rules that I have always accepted as part of "good" English writing, and it is disconcerting to see them demolished. Oh, well, years of expensive education down the drain...Here are a few suggestions as to how the article might be improved:-

  • Title: You call it a list, but the page is not conventionally structured as a "list" in the WP sense. Consider removing the words "List of" from the title.
  • How comprehensive is this intended to be? Is it a listing of all the common usage English misconceptions, or just some the most common? Any limitations should be made clear in the lead.
  • The lead needs to be developed anyway, so as to become a proper summary of the article. At present the first sentence reads weakly; the reference to "a reliable source" is inappropriate since there is no universally accetped yardstick of source reliability. The second paragraph reads like an anecdote and is not within the main text of the article.
  • Lead image: has any source specifically cited this page of Stevenson's prose as evidence of the non-existence of assumed rules of English usage? If not, your choice of the page and your accompanying conclusions are OR and should not be included.
  • It is not always clear what are the sources of your misconceptions, or indeed whether they are "common" misconceptions. Those in the typography section are probably too arcane to be considered common.
  • How do the two charts (hyphen/dashes and quotation marks) help the reader?
  • On numerous occasions in the text you use direct quotations from sources. These need to be attributed in the text, not merely cited.
  • Is "semantics" the right heading for the two example that you give? The dispute concerning "irregardless" seems to be about the word's acceptability rather than meanings or changes in meaning. Likewise, questions surrounding "Xmas" are about origins rather than semantics.
  • Some of your "Notes" contain information that needs to be cited.
  • Your referencing style contains inconsistencies. For example, why is the short citation form not used for ref 7, when it is for all the others for O'Conner and Kellerman?. Also it is not necessary to give the full source details in both References and Bibliography.
  • Your link on the Greek letter Chi leads to a disambiguation page.

I have not carried out a detailed check on the propse, though I noticed sentences starting with "But..." and the odd contraction, maybe deliberately placed. I am not able to watch individual peer reviews, so if you have issues to raise concerning this review, please contact me via my talkpage. Brianboulton (talk) 22:27, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Tim riley comments

The article is half list and and half discourse. I feel short-changed by some of the discourse and should like explanation and illustration of some of the entries:

  • Passive voice: I don't know that it is generally regarded as incorrect – more as flabby, flocculent and flaccid, I'd say, from what I recall of Fowler, Gowers, Vallins and the Guardian and Economist style guides. You might also give a brief example in your text of when the passive is preferable (you can't expect your reader to plough through the works you link to). I don't, by the bye, see references to formal minutes of meetings, where passives are en regle.
  • Double negatives: again, you ought to say when they are acceptable. I can't think of any examples.

The real problem with the article, it seems to me, is that it is not nearly inclusive enough to be of any help to the user. For instance, what you say about "irregardless" is reasonable comment, but much the same could be said of "disassociate". Similarly, scrupulous writers are careful about using "hopefully" (in the sense of "I hope that"), "disinterested" for "uninterested" and vice versa, "historic" for "historical" ditto, "the Queen of England", "reach a crescendo", and so on; nobody would misunderstand them if they lapsed, but educated readers would be unimpressed.

Fowler has a whole section on "Popular misconceptions of which many writers need to disabuse themselves". It begins

  • That a devil's advocate, or advocatus diaboli, is a tempter of the good, or whitewasher of the bad, or the like.
  • That a percentage is a small part.
  • That a leading question is a searching one.

and contains other popular misconceptions such as:

  • That more honoured in the breach than the observance means more often broken than kept.
  • That King Canute thought he could stop the tide from flowing.
  • That many a mickle makes a muckle.
  • That ilk means clan or the like.
  • That an exception strengthens a rule.
  • That Frankenstein was a monster.

And many more. Lots of scope to flesh out your article. I think it would help if you consider what/whom the article is for, and then go through the major authorities (Fowler etc) and pick up all the examples relevant to your subject.

Finally, let me applaud what you say about paragraphs. The WP MoS, and some of the leading Wikipedians, should take note – bravo! – Tim riley (talk) 10:41, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Mets–Phillies rivalry[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I think the article requires serious revision since much of the info is original research. Also, there are many assumptions being made that aren't substantiated by sources. For example, the first section is Bunning's perfect game against the Mets in 1964. Since the article is on the supposed rivalry between Philadelphia and New York, this section should only be important if it contributes to the rivalry. However, none of the sources suggest it had any impact in creating a rivalry (in fact it seems Mets fans were delighted by it) so it seems to me that editors are assuming it was important, thus equating original research. I think a lot of the info is original research and would appreciate the review.

Thanks, Ultimahero (talk) 21:16, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

This article is at PR and GAR at the same time. 11:55, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
Is that a problem? If so, why?Ultimahero (talk) 18:59, 22 June 2011 (UTC)
It's not forbidden, but it can be a problem if both reviews take place concurrently and you get contradictory advice. It makes more sense to have PR, which is non-judgmental, before GAN which has a pass/fail outcome. Brianboulton (talk) 00:21, 24 June 2011 (UTC)
Speaking as a baseball fan, I can say this so-called rivalry has only cropped up in the past five years, when the two teams were vying for first place, and may have a slight geographic angle due to the proximity of the two cities. Otherwise, there is no true rivalry, and the lead paragraphs even state the two teams were never in contention together up until a few years ago. I think the Mets/Braves rivalry is more notable. Overall, a bit of a silly article, IMO.--Chimino (talk) 07:32, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Personally I feel the same way. I don't really think that there's much of a rivalry to speak of. That's why I dislike that the article alleges this long history between the two, even though the sources never verify that and in some cases outright contradict it. I think the article needs to be drastically overhauled, and possibly even deleted as the true rivalry is too recent a development to be deserving of a page.Ultimahero (talk) 07:53, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
Agree all the extra "history" smacks of administrator may have to weigh in on the subject at some point.
I've had the notifications up for a while but hardly anyone has commented, let alone admins.Ultimahero (talk) 03:20, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Peer review is a place for pointing out problems with articles that can be corrected, but is not usually the place where such problems are corrected. I agree that the article looks like it has some original research. Here are some more suggestions for improvement.

  • There is a toolbox on this page that includes an extermal link checker - this shows two dead links and some others that may be problematic. These should be fixed - note that links to newspapers or magazines or reliable print sources do not have to be removed if the link goes dead (as the physical copy could still be accessed in an archive or library, in theory).
  • Are there articles on the history of two teams playing each other? It seems to me that this could be such an article with some work, whether or not a true rivalry exists between the teams (or has only existed in recent years).
  • I do think that the first sentence really follows WP:LEAD which says in part The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject.
  • I checked a couple of references to see if they backed up what the article said. In both cases they did not do so exactly. The first sentence is The rivalry between the New York Mets and the Philadelphia Phillies of Major League Baseball is said to be among the "hottest" rivalries in the National League (NL).[3] However when I checked the ref, it was a 2008 newspaper story from a New York newspaper that said they "are now the hottest rivals in their division, and maybe in all of the National League."[2] In general extraordinary claims require extraordinary sources to back them up - I would feel much better if this were from a story in a Chicago or Los Angeles or national publication, and not in one NY paper. I also worry that the time sense is completely lacking from the sentence in the article. The writer clearly says that the Mets and Braves used to be great rivals, and as of 2008 the Mets and Phillies are.
  • The article should avoid vague time terms in general. The second sentence uses recently, but wortds like this are too vague and can become out of date - better to use actual years.
  • The other ref I checked was for this sentence "The Phold"[13] of 1964 is among the most notable collapses in sports history.[14] Ref 13 does call it the Phold, so that is fine. However, ref 14 says this After leading the league much of the season and owning a six and one-half game lead with 12 games to play, a seemingly certain pennant was snatched away as the Phillies lost 10 straight in late September. The collapse devastated the entire city.[3] Nothing about it being "among the most notable collapses in sports history".
  • By the way, refs usually go to the end of a sentence, or at least after punctuation.
  • So it seems clear that the article has some OR and NPOV issues, but I also think it is not comprehensive (which is a FAC criterion). For example there is no clear statement in the article that the Mets were founded in 1962, so that is why the "rivalry" only dates back that far (the first game between the teams is listed in the infobox, and there is a bit in a note in one reference).
  • The article also does not explicitly mention the introduction divsions in 1969
  • There are unreferenced places in the article for example a whole paragraph in the 2009–2010 section has no refs and needs one.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • There are also WP:WEIGHT and WP:RECENT issues - the closer in time the article gets to the present, the more text there is on those seasons.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 17:51, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

PS This article is not even mentioned at Major League Baseball rivalries that i could see - certainly not as its own section Ruhrfisch ><>°° 17:53, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Habeas Corpus Suspension Act 1863[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I might be missing things with regard to completeness, my citation styles might be wrong, and I can always use help when it comes to writing style.

Thanks, RJC TalkContribs 05:31, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

  • The prose looks great; didn't spot any glaring typos or grammar errors.
  • I would feel more comfortable with the "Provisions" section if it had a citation or citations to a plain-English summary of the bill, since legalese is hard to decipher for me (and I presume a good portion of the general public), not to mention 19th-century legalese.
  • The "Subsequent case law" section could also use a citation or two.
  • In general, it would be nice to include some online-available sources, or even book sources, as these will be more accessible to the general public.
  • That's just a few comments after a quick read. Let me know if you have any questions -RunningOnBrains(talk) 00:01, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I agree with all of the comments above. Thanks for you work on this interesting article, and here are some additional suggestions for improvement.

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many FAs at Category:FA-Class legal articles, some of which seem like they would be useful model articles for this one.
  • Biggest problem I see with this article is a lack of references and the fact that the references used are all essentially primary sources (from the 37th COngress that passed the act).
  • Article needs more references, for example the whole first paragraph of the Background section has no refs (but needs them) and the whole Subsequent case law section is also without refs. Presumably some standard histories of the Civil War would be useful here.
  • I would cite the Provisions section to the online text of the law itself.
  • I would avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs where possible, by combining them with others or perhaps expanding them. So Provisions could see several short paragraphs combined.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • References should wherever possible be from reliable independent thid-party sources. See WP:CITE and WP:V and WP:RS
  • I think for completeness there should be more examples of how the law was used. My recollection is that habeas corpus was suspended in Kentucky, for example.
  • The lead should be a complete summary of the whole article - the law no longer being in effect with the end of the war should be in there, for example.
  • I would try to include some free images in the article - there are many of Lincoln, for example.
  • WP:See also says in general not to repeat links in See also which are already linked in the article itself.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 16:12, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

Orchid (album)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to archive it on GA or FA. This article can to receive a GA or FA review? Thanks, T.R.Elven (talk) 00:41, 21 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110

Firstly, welcome to Wikipedia. In order to gauge whether this article is suitable to be promoted to Good Article or Featured Article, you should read the Good Article criteria and the Featured Article criteria, then decide whether this article meets those standards.

  • Lead
    • The lead states that the album was released "in Europe" on May 15, 1995 but the Release section states just the UK and Poland for this date. Was it a continent-wide release or just these two countries?
    • Why is "old" in quotation marks?
  • Background
    • Is there any info on why Petterssen left?
      • No, the only info that I found was that he later left the band after a show.
  • Recording and production
    • The language in this section feels a bit informal and bit wordy. For example, "The recording generally went smoothly. Most of the recording sessions had no problems, despite the band members still being slightly nervous about everything. The only major problem that occurred was not having enough time to record the acoustic piece, "Requiem", properly." could easily be compacted down to "Despite the nervousness of the band members, the recording sessions ran smoothly. However, the band regretted not having enough time to record the acoustic piece "Requiem".
  • Musical styles and lyrical themes
    • "Opeth sounded much different than the casual black or death metal bands at that time". Are there any examples of contemporaries of the band?
    • "Orchid is the album that best represented the Opeth's diverse influences and it is the rawest." You shoud state that this is an opinion of a writer on the Rocknworld website. On closer examination, s/he says it is arguably the rawest, not that it is. You should check all review sources to ensure the opinions of the writers are accurately presented in the article.
    • "Oath", as "The Twilight Is My Robe" used to be called, "is a satanic song. Like an oath to Satan." Who said this?
    • The high number of quotes in this section makes it difficult to read smoothly. Consider whether some of them can be paraphrased. For example, "He said also that "The Apostle in Triumph" "has a really nice melody" and lyrically, "it's a combination of nature and satanic worship"" can become "He also complimented the melody of "The Apostle in Triumph" and considered it to be lyrically "a combination of nature and satanic worship".
  • Release and reception
    • It's not clear where the 2000 Candlelight reissue was but it seems to imply the U.S. Can this be clarified?
    • "Some critics like Matt Smith of Maelstrom wrote that it is one of best Opeth albums". "Some critics" requires at least two opinions, otherwise it should just be "Critic Matt Smith of Maelstrom wrote that it is one of the best Opeth albums."
    • "Critical reaction to the album was mostly positive." Unnecessary repetition?
  • References
    • Ref 3 should have a page number if it is available.
      • This ref is from the main article: Opeth, and it doesn't have a page number.

Bradley0110 (talk) 20:32, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

I did some changes in the article, can you take a look on it? and thanks for your review. T.R.Elven (talk) 02:14, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Wheel of Fortune (U.S. game show)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm looking for suggestions to improve the article. I'm a big fan of the show (and should be getting the call to be a contestant any day now!), and I've been making improvements to it over time. There aren't any current game show articles even close to GA, so this is pretty much uncharted territory. I know there are a few pieces left to flesh out and source, but I'm seeking current advice on how it looks so far.

  • What does it need more information on, besides awards and accolades/critical reception? Does it need less information on anything?
  • What could flow better, if anything?
  • Frankie Blue and John Hoke composed the current theme, but I can't find any source for this besides the credits on the show's own website. Also, they used a theme by Steve Kaplan for a while, but I can't find anything to verify this. Does the lack of information on Steve Kaplan compromise the article in any way?
  • Is there anything else at all that could be better?

Ten Pound Hammer, his otters and a clue-bat • (Otters want attention) 04:09, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Thanks for your work on this article about a game show that I enjoy from time to time. This is not a complete line-by-line review but a partial list of suggestions for improvement.

  • I would consider moving "Gameplay" up to first place below the lead and rewriting it with a complete outsider in mind. (See "Gameplay" comments below.


  • "Wheel of Fortune is an American television game show created by Merv Griffin." - It might help to add the year Griffin created the show. Was it 1975?

Game history

  • "recalling long car trips as a child where he and his sister" - Maybe "during which" (a time) rather than "where" (a place)?
  • "After pitching the idea and being told that... " - Told by whom?

Broadcast history

  • "The current syndicated version premiered on September 19, 1983. When it debuted, the syndicated version offered a larger prize budget than its daytime counterpart, most notably in the addition of a $5,000 wedge to the Wheel." - What was the prize budget for the daytime show? What was the biggest possible prize in each case?
  • Prizes changed week to week, and the source doesn't get more specific than the $5,000 wedge.

Production staff

  • This subsection needs citations to reliable sources.


  • I'm familiar with the show and how the game is played, so your description makes sense to me. However, I doubt that someone who has never seen the show would be able to understand the game based solely on this description. For example, the first sentence of this section says, "Word puzzles, with blank spaces representing the letters in the puzzle, are presented with an appropriate category." The idea of "appropriate category" is too non-specific to mean much of anything to someone unfamiliar with the game. "Word puzzles" is also a bit too general. Something like "Wheel of Fortune contestants take turns guessing the meaning of a word or phrase that has been spelled out incompletely" might be a way to start. Perhaps just a clear explanation of the basic game would do, and the complications of the details of the rounds, Mystery Wedges, Free Play, and so on, could be omitted or at least compressed. It might help to move the puzzleboard image to this section and to use the idea of the puzzleboard in the game description. Would it be possible, for example, to say what "White Chocolate Mousse" looked like when the game started? Would it be possible to describe an actual game step by step?
  • I tried to re-describe it as best I could. Can you come up with a better description? Also, as for the category thing, I used the rulebook from the 1975 home game to show which categories they started out with as examples. I can't think of any ways to tighten up the writing here, particularly since the ol' Wheel has so many doodads now.

Sets and production information

  • A couple of the paragraphs in this section lack sources. Ditto for the first paragraph of "Puzzle boards" and all of "Merchandise".
  • That I know. I'm working on that. Some of the facts about the puzzle board have been discussed on-air, so things like the change from the 39-space board to 48-space can be cited to an episode. I know there's also at least one episode where Vanna demonstrates how the trilons work.


  • Sequences in all caps are normally changed to Wikipedia house style even if the source uses all caps. Citation 2 would read "Harry Friedman Named Producer of 'Wheel of Fortune'... ", for example.
  • The date formatting in the citations needs to be consistent throughout. Most are already M-D-Y, but citation 35, for example, uses D-M-Y.
  • What makes "" (citation 23) reliable?
  • It's been accepted before. The writer in question has been in the business for 14 years.


  • The word "current", meaning "now", appears in several places in the article. It's generally better to find a way to avoid words like "current", "now", and "today" since they identify no particular time. For example, "The current format uses multiple producers", which appears in the "Production staff" subsection, might say "In 2011, the format uses multiple producers." Or it might be possible to say something like "After X, the show involved multiple producers."
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 21:00, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

S&M (song)[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I want to know what to do to improve the article from GA to FA.

Thanks, Calvin999 11:06, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Have you started yet?? Calvin999 00:49, 16 July 2011 (UTC)
Comments by Bradley0110
  • Lead
    • "It was re-named "Come On" for BBC radio stations, however other stations played the original version." BBC Radio 1 is piped from "BBC radio stations", which is confusing. Was it renamed just for Radio 1 or for the whole network?  Done Calvin999
  • Background and composition
    • The Background and composition section should summarise exactly that. The info on the J Cole remix should be moved to the Remixes section so it doesn't detract from information on the origin of the song.  Done Calvin999
    • Prose is quite problematic; in some places, overly formal phrases are use which slows down the reading pace, e.g. With regard to the lyrical content, Rihanna explained in an interview with Spin that people should not take the lyrics too literally." The first clause is unnecessary; "Rihanna explained to Spin that people should not take the lyrical content too literally." has the same effect.  Done Calvin999
  • Remixes
    • "However, the most recognized remix of the song was with American singer Britney Spears." This needs a reliable citation.  Done Calvin999
    • Billboard also uses the phrase "just as provocative". Can you recast it to something different in the article?  Done Calvin999
    • Can the Remixes section be moved elsewhere? It felt unusal to read the critical reaction to the Spears remix before the reception to the original version.  Done Have moved the section, but I don't really get your point, because there is no critics response about the remix in the Critical reception section. Calvin999
Consider how the article was written before: Background to the original song, then info about the remix, then critical reaction to the remix, then critical reaction to the original. Reaction to the original should come before that to the remix, rather than sandwiching the remix info in the middle.
  • Critical reception
    • My advice to people re putting in quotes from critics is only to do so if what they are saying cannot in any way be recast or paraphrased. If you pick out the salient facts of a critical review, you can build a section that focuses on similar opinions and themes, instead of having a prose-ified list of quotes.
    • Watch for italicising some website-only publications like Digital Spy.  Done Calvin999
    • The last paragraph about the Radio 1 edit uses contradictory sources that potentially introduce factual inaccuracies to the article: "In the United Kingdom, BBC Radio 1 refused to play "S&M" before 7:00 PM due to the explicit nature of the lyrics. A spokesman for the radio station said "During daytime hours, as younger audiences are listening, we are playing the radio edit which is called Come On. However, we will continue to play the original track in specialist shows with an appropriate introduction... It is common practice to play radio edits of certain tracks in daytime." is cited to Metro. The article features the quote from the BBC spokesperson but makes no mention of Radio 1 refusing to play the original song.  Done Calvin999
    • "The song has since been re-edited and renamed "Come On" by the BBC, and features as such on the BBC's official chart show." This is cited to Radio 1's official chart page (the link to which is no longer helpful now that the song has fallen out of the top 40 - see if the page is cached on the Internet Archive from February) and to a Digital Spy article. The Metro and Digital Spy articles supply different information: Digital Spy uses quotes from Rihanna's Twitter to build an impression that the BBC edited the song (but doesn't explicitly state that) and Metro states that Def Jam distributed the cut version. Either way, neither of the cited sources state the BBC "refused" to play the original song.  Done Calvin999
  • Chart performance
    • ""S&M" made it's first chart appearance, following the album's release, in the United Kingdom[...]" Did it chart before the album was released? If so are there details? Not done No? How would it of charted before the albums release when it hadn't been released as a single yet?? Calvin999  Done Calvin999
"following the album's release" is nested in parenthetical commas, which causes the words to be presented as an aside. "S&M made it's first chart appearance, following the album's release,[...]" could easily have a corresponding sentence elsewhere in the article reading "S&M made it's first chart appearance, before the album's release[...]". Just lose the "following the album's release".
  • Music video
    • "However, the complete video premiered on Vevo[...]" Why the use of "However"? There is no indication that the full vid was expected to premiere on YouTube just because a half-minute clip did.  Done Re-worded Calvin999
    • "Next she is shown rolling on the floor with her hands and feet tied, a scene reminiscing the bondage theme." This is analysis that requires a third party citation.  Done Re-worded Calvin999
    • "Brad Wete of Entertainment Weekly commented that "with lyrics like ["Sticks and stones may break my bones/ But chains and whips excite me”], he was expecting "an equally risque video" and added that Rihanna delivered it." This is another instance where rephrasing a short quote can tighten up the flow, for example "Brad Wete of Entertainment Weekly's expectations that the video would be as risque as the song's lyrics were met." We've immediately lost the multiple quotation marks, the unsightly square brackets, and the clunky "commented that" and "and added that".  Done Calvin999
    • The reception subsection appears to be just a list of quotes. Many of the reviews talk about the costumes and the design, so try to recast the section around those.  Done Did some re-working Calvin999
  • Live performances
    • "[...] however she was informed to "tone down" her performance by the show's bosses, [...]" "show's bosses" is tabloid speak (as would be expected from the citation to the Daily Wail) and should be changed to "the show's producers".  Done Calvin999
  • References
    • Again you need to check the formating of citations to non-print websites, which should not be in italics. Not done Which ones? There can't be very many? Calvin999  Done Calvin999
    • You should also be consistent with whether you format publishers in or out of brackets (compare Refs 58 and 63). Not done They aren't in brackets? Calvin999  Done Calvin999
58 was presented thus: Trust, Gary (2010-12-04). "Canadian Hot 100: Week of December 4, 2010". Billboard. Prometheus Global Media. Retrieved 2011-01-29. (no brackets). 63 was presented thus: Concepcion, Mariel (2011-01-28). "Watch: Sneak Peek of Rihanna's 'S&M' Video". Billboard (Prometheus Global Media). Retrieved 2011-02-02. (brackets)
    • Refs 125-27 need access dates.  Done Calvin999

This article had three GA reviews within just under three weeks (two failed, one successful). Both of the failed reviews pulled up issues with the prose and sourcing. For the most part, the sourcing issues have been resolved (though a lot of citations are to the Daily Mail which is disgustingly biased) but prose issues still remain (see above). Satisfying criterion 1a of the FACR is very difficult, and it is not always easy to pull apart your own writing. Bradley0110 (talk) 14:27, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Have made some changes. One's I haven't addressed I have written a response to in bold. Thanks for reviewing. Calvin999 09:26, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
As far as my comments are concerned, this article is probably ready for FAC once the copyedit is finished. I don't know about A class though as I don't know what WP:SONG looks for in such an article. Bradley0110 (talk) 18:57, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay, I've done everything now. I am going to nominate it for A status, because there is no actual song article which is an A, just 2 video game theme tunes and 1 national anthem or something lol. Could you close this review now please? Thanks for reviewing! Calvin999 22:41, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Single Ladies (Put a Ring on It)[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it failed its FA nomination due to substandard prose and MoS issues; guidance in those areas would be especially helpful, but any comments would be warmly received.

Thanks, Adabow (talk · contribs) and JiveshTalk2Me 08:29, 3 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110

I think there's been some good copyediting done on this article since the FAC but more prose work needs doing.

  • Lead
    • "The song was named one of the best singles of 2008 by several media outlets; Rolling Stone ranked it number one on its list of the Best 100 Singles of 2008." If I see a plural, I always expect to see at least two examples. It would be better to lose the detail in this sentence and just have "The song was named one of the best singles of 2008 by several media outlets, including Rolling Stone, [publication 2], and [publication 3]".
    • "As of November 2009, "Single Ladies" has sold over 6.1 million copies worldwide." If there are no more up to date figures then "has" should become "had".
  • Composition
    • Brianboulton noted in the last FAC that this section contains critical reception comments, though I see they're being use to comment directly on the composition and themes.
    • "In the song Knowles offers support to women that have recently put a stop to a bad relationship;[38] Ann Powers of the Los Angeles Times saw the song's theme of female empowerment as an extension of that of "Irreplaceable" (2006)." The use of the semi-colon implies the two statements are linked but as they come from two separate reviews, this would be sythensis. If you change the semi-colon to a full stop and attribute the first sentence to Yahoo, this will be fine.
  • Critical reception
    • This section is where the most work needs to be done. At the moment it is just "So-and-so from some magazine said this, so-and-so from some newspaper said that" with various synonyms for "wrote" used exhaustively.
      • I have begun to organise the section by idea (ie production/danceability/lyrics). Do you think that it needs more material? —Andrewstalk 03:56, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
        • I like the direction you're going in now. Adding more material is up to you; if you can find more varied reaction to the different themes and aspects then definitely incorporate it but don't risk the reliability of the article by drawing in short reviews from random blogs or such. Bradley0110 (talk) 08:37, 21 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Live performances
    • "In July 2009 Knowles gave a concert at the Staples Center in Los Angeles where American actor Tom Cruise danced with her and her dancers as they performed the dance routine of "Single Ladies"." Can this be rephrased?
  • References
    • Ref 31: The Sunday Times is published by Times Newspapers.

Bradley0110 (talk) 20:18, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Girton College, Cambridge[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article should change radically over the next few weeks. We would like to know if our work is moving in the right direction towards WP:GOOD, and maybe WP:FAC.

Thanks, Randomblue (talk) 21:02, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

Note: The request for peer review is premature, given the current state of the article, with underconstruction banners etc. I will be happy to review it when it is developed further, but by your own statement the article is about to "change radically", so I will wait until you notify me that it had achieved stability. Brianboulton (talk) 23:55, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Wizardman: As Brian noted, if you're planing on radically changing this article than this is premature. As such there will be more of a skim review than a full one. However, here are a few comments that can still be implemented despite everything changing up:

  • All citation needed tags and the like have to be addressed, and make sure there's at least one citation per paragraph.
  • The history section will need to be expanded upon per the tag, but structure-wise it looks like it will be good.
  • For the mistresses section, adding a sentence or two on what they are and what they do would be beneficial.
  • The Main site section is actually in good shape, though the collections in the Lawrence room do not need to be bolded.
  • I'm not a fan of in popular culture sections, and very few are, so I'd just remove i.
  • The People's Portraits section doesn't lok like it needs much expanding.
  • The citation format is a bit confusing. Doing it that way for books is entirely fine, but I can't figure out which reference does to which website. Have the formatted references actually be the inline citations instead of adding an extra step.
  • If you're still unsure about some formatting, look through Category:FA-Class Universities articles for examples of good ways to structure this.

Wizardman Operation Big Bear 15:05, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Toyohara Chikanobu[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the high quality and current state of development in this article makes it ripe for commentary by a wider spectrum of reviewers.

Thanks, Tenmei (talk) 16:44, 1 July 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Comments (taking into account good article criteria): Looks like a decent article which suffers from some stylistic issues.

  • A major part of the article consists of lists and (beautiful!) image galleries of his works. Neither lists nor image galleries should go into a good article. You can solve this issue by moving those lists into a Works by Toyohara Chikanobu (or similarly named) article and only write a short summary about his works (in prose!) here.
In my opinion this is the main problem with the article. Some more minor issues:
  • The lead section needs to be expanded considerably. It should summarize the major points of the rest of the article.
  • References generally go to the end of a sentence (not inside a sentence).
  • If possible (i.e. if known) his non-artist bio could be expanded to include birth/death place, parents (names, professions,...), circumstances of death, childhood,...
  • Is the translation/romaji for "應需豊原周延筆" correct? Shouldn't it be Toyohara instead of Yōshū?
  • There are too many very short paragraphs. They should either be expanded or merged with others.
  • Japanese dates ("Meiji 8", "fourth and fifth months of 1886") are probably not necessary in an English language article.
  • "furumekashii/imamekashii" needs an explanation.
  • I'd reduce the amount of Kanji: only have Kanji where it is essential such as for Chikanobu's signatures or for Japanese names that don't have a wikipedia article yet (e.g. Yōsai Nobukazu (楊斎延一)). Don't put Kanji when there is a wikipedia article (e.g. Boshin War (Boshin sensō 戊辰戦争)).
  • In my opinion it is not a good idea to use "[1], [2],..." in different ways: once for references and once for publishers. Possibly something like <ref group="pub">Publisher one</ref> for the publishers could avoid this confusion.
  • Not sure what the guidelines for inline external links are (e.g. Victory at Asan). You might have to deal with them.
bamse (talk) 22:18, 1 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for these specific suggestions. As a small first step in the collaborative editing process, I did created a sub-article -- List of works by Toyohara Chikanobu. Looking forward, perhaps the investment of time in distinguishing what needs to be retained or restored in the main article will clarify some of the other good points you make? --Tenmei (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────Comments: I removed this article from the GA listing, since there is a simultaneous peer review. I thought I would list my suggestions here. Once the suggestions here have been dealt with, feel free to renominate the article for GA status. Below are some specific suggestions.

  • The lead section is too short, and should summarize the entire article; see WP:LEAD for more.
  • It's wonderful that there are so many PD images of this artist's work. However, there are simply too many pictures. One can visit commons to see a comprehensive list of all Chikanobu's works. Images should be used to demonstrate what is in text, but should not be extended galleries.
  • Many paragraphs are a line or two, or are a single sentence. A more flowing prose style would improve the article a great deal.
  • Since this is the English Wikipedia, Japanese is only required for names or proper nouns. A sentence like "This was his "art name" (作品名) sakuhinmei" is confusing for people who don't speak Japanese, as they may wonder whether sakuhinmei is his name, or a word for a name, or what. It would be better to simply say "This was his art-name."
  • The list of selected works should be translated into English, and, like the images themselves, they should be incorporated into text about the artist's periods and styles, rather than listed separately.
  • Footnote 1 lists the entire text of his obituary. Is this translation in the public domain, or is it copyrighted?
  • Footnotes should be complete sentences (see 11 and 12), and should be in English (see 3).
I hope these suggestions are helpful. – Quadell (talk) 13:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Thank you for resolving the unintended problem I caused when I listed this article for review in two venues.

Your specific comments and questions are gratefully acknowledged. In addition to suggesting directions for further development, your feedback offers an impression of the ways in which the current state of the article may have been construed by others. Again, thanks. --Tenmei (talk) 17:20, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

United States v. Wong Kim Ark[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get a good idea of what needs to be done to it in order to make it a Featured Article.

Thanks, Richwales (talk · contribs) 03:47, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I have looked to see what needs to be done to bring the article up to FA standard. I haven't checked out the prose in detail, but here are some matters for consideration:-

  • The lead needs to be more than a brief introduction to the article. It should briefly summarise all the main aspects covered in the text.
  • Currently, there are some problems with image placement. A relatively short article with a lengthy infobox often makes such placements problematic; here, we have much of the early text squeezed between the infobox and the left hand images. The later immages are very untidily arranged. I guess you will want to keep the infobox to have uniformity with other Supreme Court case articles, but maybe not all the images are necessary? In any event you need to consider better ways of organising them
  • As a general rule of thumb in referencing you should ensure that all paragraphs end with a citation; this is not the case at the moment. In some instances you may have put the citation in the wrong place, but in some cases statements lack citations. For example:-
    • "They thus reasoned that the majority opinion exactly contradicted the original intended meaning of the 14th Amendment."
    • The whole second paragraph, bar the first sentence, of the "Subsequent developments" paragraph
    • "Others refer to the Indian Citizenship Act of 1924, which followed Wong Kim Ark and clearly assumes that those affected were not previously legal citizens."
    • "H.R. 1868 and S.J.Res. 6 failed to reach the floor of either house of Congress and died when the 111th Congress adjourned on December 22, 2010. As of the end of 2010, no other proposal of this type has ever been enacted into law or ratified as an amendment to the Constitution."
  • Some of your "references" are not references, but are lengthy footnotes of uncited material. These notes are subject to the same citation requirements as the rest of the article. The length of some of these notes is also a matter of comcern; note 5 is around 150 words.
  • There are inconsistencies in your reference formats, e.g. you have "Retrieved" and "retrieved", different retrieval date formats, possibly others (I haven't checked thoroughly)
  • Some of the text is very off-putting for the general reader. For example, the Background section begins: "Wong Kim Ark[4] (黃金德; Toisanese: wong11 gim33 'ak3; Cantonese: wong4 gam1 dak1; Mandarin: huáng jīn dé)", and later we have: "Wong Yook Sue (黃郁賜, Toisanese: wong11 yuk3 ti33, Cantonese: wong4 yuk1 tsi3); Wong Yook Thue (黃沃修, Toisanese: wong11 yuk3 sliu33, Cantonese: wong4 yuk1 sau1); and Wong Yook Jim (黃沃沾, Toisanese: wong11 yuk3 zim33, Cantonese: wong4 yuk1 zim1). A fourth son—his eldest, Wong Yoke Fun (黃毓煥, Toisanese: wong11 yuk3 von22, Cantonese: wong4 yuk1 wun6)—was rejected by U.S. officials..." These formulations may be of help to a tiny minority of potential readers, but will drive the majority away in droves.

I hope these comments are helpful. As I am not able to watch individual peer review pages, please contact my talkpage if you have questions arising from this review, or if you want me to look again. Brianboulton (talk) 23:21, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Blair Waldorf[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like an opinion on whether to nominate this page for Featured Article status or Good Article status. I've recently expanded the "Novel" section, the "Reception" section, and other areas. Any advice would be appreciated.

Thanks, -- James26 (talk) 09:39, 16 July 2011 (UTC)

Ernie Fletcher[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article is presently GA class, and I would like some idea of its chances of becoming FA class. I typically write about historical (mostly dead) politicians whose lives and careers have been the subject of at least some historical analysis. Fletcher is too recent to have had much in the way of this kind of analysis. I've built the article almost entirely from contemporary newspaper articles accessed via Newsbank. I'm not sure how effective a job I have done of assembling that information concisely and coherently. Any suggestions to improve the article are appreciated.

Thanks, Acdixon (talk contribs count) 19:32, 22 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I think that this could be a FA without too much more work, here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC. Thanks for your work on the article.

  • My main concerns are some places where the language could be improved, some places where more context is needed for the average reader, and the hope that a bit more can be added on his personal life and life after leaving office.
  • There is one dead external link here
    • Oh boy. Looks like the NGA updated their website, which probably broke this link for all of the Kentucky Governor articles I've worked on. Should be fun changing all of those!
  • Second sentence uses verb + ing twice, which a lot of FAC reviewers do not like. I think it also should indicate in some way how long he served as governor. So Beginning in 1999, he was elected to three consecutive terms in the United States House of Representatives, resigning in 2003 after being elected the 60th governor of Kentucky. could be something like In 1999 he was elected to the first of three consecutive terms in the United States House of Representatives; he resigned in 2003 after being elected the 60th governor of Kentucky and served in that office until 2007.
    • Done.
  • Watch "being" (was) and "following" (after) in just the first paragraph of the lead too - I will not point out other examples, but look for them please.
    • I wasn't aware that these were frowned upon. I use "following" a lot. Fixed here.
      • I think a few "following"s are OK.
  • Following his term as governor, he returned to the practice of medicine. - I am not sure I would call being CEO of a company the "practice of medicine".
    • I've changed this to "the medical field".
  • I think to achieve makes it sound like he became an astronaut, perhaps use "to pursue" in Fletcher graduated from the University of Kentucky and joined the United States Air Force to achieve his dream of becoming an astronaut.
    • Much better. Not sure what I was thinking when I wrote that.
  • Article says it happened in the reverse order (got MD and then eyesight was too bad) - which is it? Lead has When poor eyesight derailed those plans, he earned a degree in medicine, hoping to earn a spot as a civilian on a space mission.
    • Had to re-check the sources to be sure, but it is consistent now.
  • Lead says He soon became one of President George W. Bush's advisors regarding health care legislation, particularly the Patients' Bill of Rights. but the article body only mentions Bush once and does not really say this - only talks about Bush lobbying for a bill...
    • Hmm. Thought one of the sources had a stronger statement about this, but I can't find it now. I've reworded to say he was a top advisor to the House Republican caucus on such legislation. I think the article at least supports that.
  • Tighten Fletcher issued pardons for anyone on his staff implicated in the investigation, but did not extend the pardon to himself.
    • Done.
  • I think the lead should probably mention that he is married and a father, and also what he did on leaving the governor's office.
    • Got the post-governorship info in there, but not sure how to work in the family bit, as none of his immediate family seems all that notable.
      • How about something like After his term as governor, Fletcher, who is married and has two grown children, returned to the medical field as founder and CEO of Alton Heathcare.?
Early life
  • Most governor's wives are profiled at some point in the news - is there really nothing more that can be said about his wife and family?
    • I'm sure there is something out there about Glenna Fletcher, but I'm not sure how much of it is relevant to an article about Governor Fletcher. Typically, I've only mentioned the spouse's name unless there was something notable about them. Exceptions would be Martha Wilkinson (wife of Wallace), Judi Patton (wife of Paul), and Phyllis George (ex-wife of John Y. Brown, Jr.).
      • OK, I know first ladies of the US often have pet projects and thought if she had also had one, that could be mentioned here. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Spell out ROTC?
    • Sure. Wasn't sure how common this abbreviation was.
      • There are a lot of non-US readers out there who would not know it, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I assume he was a pilot and flew Phnatoms in the Air Force - if so, should probably say so
    • I thought that was implicit in being a commander of an aircraft, but maybe not. That isn't really my area of expertise. If it isn't, how do you think is best to work that in?
      • I read the talk page discussion - how about adding one word (flight) to After [flight] training in Oklahoma, he was stationed in Alaska where ...?
  • What kind of commission did he have for the six years he served? In 1980, as budget cutbacks were reducing his squadron's flying time, Fletcher turned down a regular commission in the Air Force.[9] Did he have to serve 6 years to pay back his ROTC scholarships? If so, say so
    • I'm really out of my element on this one. You can see a discussion I had regarding Fletcher's military service here.
      • I think what is in the article now is OK. If it is an issue at FAC, it can be tweaked then. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Give year - Fletcher enrolled in the University of Kentucky College of Medicine ... (assume 1980)
    • I would give it if I had it.
  • In 1984, he [was] graduated [from] medical school with a Doctor of Medicine degree.
    • I've always found the "was graduated from" construct strange. Is the way it is now considered patently incorrect?
      • It is actually more old school - a personal quirk - again don't change just for me (though to my ear "graduated from medical school" sounds better than "graduated medical school")
  • Most MDs have to do a residency of a year or two before going into practice - did he really go into practice the same year he got his MD?
    • I didn't find anything specific here. Cross says "He became a medical doctor in 1984 and established a family practice in Lexington." I always assumed residency was part of medical school, but hey, I got my degree in Computer Science! It could be that Cross is saying that he finished his residency and everything in 1984, or he might be saying that he finished his degree in 1984 and sometime later (presumably 1987, as documented by Mead), opened a family practice. It seems ambiguous to me. I could just delete the sentence that says "In 1984, he opened a family medical practice in Lexington.", leaving it open to the reader whether he began practice in 1984 or began residency that year and picking up with his founding of South Lexington Family Physicians in 1987.
      • Since it is referenced, I would leave it as is. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Spell out CEO, also can there be any explanation of what the Foundation did / was for that can be added here? For two years, he concurrently held the title of CEO of the Saint Joseph Medical Foundation.[8]
    • Done. Apparently, the foundation is a fundraising arm of the medical center per this.
Legislative career
  • I would explain that Fayette County and Lexington are coextensive in or shortly after Through his ministry, Fletcher became acquainted with a group of religious social conservatives that gained control of the Fayette County Republican Party in 1990.[9]
    • I've added some clarification. Do you think the added sentence requires a source?
      • No
  • What party was Leslie Trapp in? (Assume Democrat)
    • The sources didn't say, but a quick Google search says Democrat. Added.
  • Say where the 78th district is (was)?
    • Seems like it would have to have been somewhere in Lexington, but the sources don't say. Today it is Campbell, Harrison, Pendleton, and Robertson counties, which is Northern Kentucky. Seems unlikely that it was those counties at the time, though, because Fletcher never lived there, as far as I can tell, and because I'm pretty sure the Republican Party has largely controlled Northern Kentucky for years. Not the kind of place where Fletcher would be defeating an incumbent Democrat or where a group of social conservatives would have to take over the party.
  • Say Baesler was a Democrat?
    • Sure, no problem.
  • It might help to make it clearer here that he was now in Congress / Washington Within months of taking office, Fletcher was selected as the leadership liaison for the 17-member freshman class of Republican legislators.[12]
    • How's it look now?
  • Spell out HMO?
    • Again, I assumed this was a common expression, but I have no problem spelling it out.
2003 gubernatorial election
  • I would say what party Steve Nunn was a member of on first mention (primary challenger, not general election)
    • Done.
Governor of Kentucky
  • First paragraph has three sentences in arow that start with "He"
    • Fixed.
2004 state budget dispute
  • Tighten? Consequently, Fletcher had difficulty getting legislation passed through the General Assembly.
    • Done.
Other matters of 2004 and legislative session of 2005
  • I think this header should be tighter, not sure how though
    • What about "Legislative interim and 2005 legislative session"?
      • OK by me
  • Missing word Eventually, four slogans were chosen to be voted [on] online as well as at interstate travel centers.[32] In
    • Fixed.
Merit system investigation
  • Is there a detailed case / example that could be cited here - was there a merit system abuses "poster child", as it were? I just did not have a clear idea of what exactly they did / were accused of doing? Looking at the Stumbo article, it discusses his appointments to the boards of universities (too may Republicans, not enough Democrats)
    • I don't think the university boards issue was central to this case. In fact, I think that may have even happened after this case, as Stumbo continued to try and crucify Fletcher's career. Doerting would have been the "poster boy", I suppose, since he was the whistleblower, but the general idea was that political ideology was considered when Fletcher hired some government employees who were supposed to be hired on merit only and that he fired or transferred incumbent employees whose affiliations ran counter to his own.
  • I would say that Stumbo was a candidate for lt gov in the 2007 Dem. primary after Stumbo denied any plans to run for governor in 2007.[41]
    • Done.
  • Typo? may for many in On August 29, Fletcher granted pardons to the nine indicted administration officials and issued a blanket pardon for "any and all persons who have committed, or many be accused of committing, any offense" with regard to the investigation.[43]
    • Yep. Fixed.
  • Needs a ref On September 17, GOP leaders voted to retain Brock as state party leader.
    • I didn't add this bit; I'll have to do some searching.
2006 legislative session
  • Don't need to say 2006 twice in the first sentence.
    • Ick. I should have caught that earlier.
  • Slightly unclear A right-to-work law and a repeal of the state's prevailing wage law – both advocated by Fletcher – failed early in the session, but both were considered unlikely to pass before the session started.[51] could the end be something like ... failed early in the session; before the session started both had been considered unlikely to pass.[51]
    • How about the less drastic edit I've just made?
      • Fine
Merit system investigation concludes
  • Could this just be called "Investigation concludes"?
    • Probably. I wanted to err on the side of specificity. Done.
  • Tweak Fletcher opined that the allegations in the report were inconsistent with his settlement with Stumbo, which acknowledged that Fletcher's administration acted "without malice."[63]
    • Yes, better.
2007 gubernatorial election
  • I would say something about Northrup's % of the vote (or give the actual numbers)
    • Done.
  • Can any more be said here Following his defeat, Fletcher became CEO of Alton Heathcare near Cincinnati, Ohio.[75] Where exactly - assume northern Ky? What does Alton Healthcare do exactly - is it a hospital? Is it an insurance company?
    • Not sure why I never looked this up before. It's apparently a consulting firm that helps physicians better integrate technology into their practices. Updated.
      • I would still include that the company is headquartered in Cinicinnati (says os on their web page)
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 05:06, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the extensive review. I was afraid this was going to close with no comments. Acdixon (talk contribs count) 16:03, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Looks good to me - I answered above in places, where I did not I thought it was fine without an answer. Please let me know when this is at FAC. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:16, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Man Down (song)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I want to know what else is needed for GA, as it is only a small article compared to other articles by Rihanna.

Thanks, Calvin999 16:14, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

It needs some copy-edit work, which I can help with for now. Also, I wonder if there is more to the Controversy section which could be added. Just a thought.--Chimino (talk) 21:42, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
Okay, thanks for replying. I'm not sure if there is anymore about the video, it didn't receive or attract the backlash that S&M managed to create. Calvin999 22:01, 4 July 2011 (UTC)
I did a bit of copy-edit to the article, and added another source of criticism (choosing to shoot in Jamaica) which is what I originally had in mind when I mentioned it. As for what else it might need for GA-status, someone with more experience should probably weigh in...--Chimino (talk) 02:51, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • You need to write about the song's composition. What are its musical features? What genre(s) does it fall under? What instruments does it use? What is its lyrical theme? Adabow (talk · contribs) 10:18, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
    I can't find any info about the chord prograssion, bpm, vocal range, instruments etc. It hasn't been published on which is where that info would be. I've added a composition section but it is only 2 sentences long. There simply isn't any info about it, at least none that is viable for use on wikipedia. Calvin999 22:22, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
    Can someone continue this please? Calvin999 22:04, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by —Andrewstalk

  • File:Man Down Rihanna.jpg needs a source
  • File:Rihanna - Man Down.ogg needs a tighter rationale. Why is it used? How does it meet WP:NFCC. See WP:FUR.
  • Use first release date in infobox (May 3, 2011)
  • Link radio formats
  • "The song is also included" - why 'also'?
  • gangsta is a dablink
  • MOS:QUOTE try to avoid linking inside quotes
  • "In the US, "Man Down" was released to the US rhythmic and urban radio on May 3, 2011" - not supported by source. Use Allaccess archives (urban rhythmic)
  • When using archived webpages (such as Digital Spy), include the original as well. Use parameters url=, archiveurl= and archivedate=
  • " focuses heavily on the musical genre of electro-reggae" - reword. Maybe, 'draws heavily from the music genre of electro-reggae'?
  • ""Man Down" received generally positive reviews from critics, with Jon Pareles of The New York Times said that" - grammar error
  • " the rum-pa-pum ragga "Man Down" burrows neck-deep in island rhythms" is copied directly from the source. paraphrase this.
  • Ref names should be as the source gives them. Use the exact same title, and only italicise if the source does so.
  • iTunes refs need proper formatting, eg France: {{cite web |url= |title=Man Down – Single |publisher=iTunes Store. Apple Inc |language=French |accessdate=July 23, 2011}}
  • The music video section needs copy-editing for clarity. "The video begins on a dramatic note when Rihanna shoots a man making his way through a busy train station" is awkward
  • 'Chart performance' should be placed directly after 'Critical reception' and should cover most/all charts in prose. The table section should be renamed 'Charts'

Andrewstalk 00:07, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Done. Thank you :). Have closed the review. Calvin999 13:56, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Smells Like Children[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take it to GA status. All feedback will be very well received.

Thanks, Ls883 (talk) 13:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Review closed: only one nomination allowed in a single day. Brianboulton (talk) 22:22, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Latin Grammy Award for Best Pop Vocal Album[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take it to GA status. All the feedback will be very well received.

Thanks, Jaespinoza (talk) 20:12, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110
  • At 377 words, this would be an extremely short Good Article (not that length is anything to go by; I seem to recall 100-word articles passing through).
  • Is any other information about why the award was discontinued after just one outing available? Any behind-the-scenes comments about merging it with the Male/Female categories?
  • The article states Miguel won this award and Album of the Year but later says he won three - what was the third prize?
  • For a GA target, I would suggest you make the prose a little more concise as there is redundancy in the text.
  • Ref 4: is a repository of articles. The actual source is Billboard.

Bradley0110 (talk) 22:14, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

United States Senate Democratic primary election in Pennsylvania, 2010[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have nominated this for PR because I hope to eventually bring it to FAC. I believe it is thorough and comprehensive, but if the reviewer feels it is lacking, I'd appreciate it if they could identify areas for me where they feel there is a need for improvement. Also, of course, a good look at the prose would be appreciated. (If I've nominated this in the wrong category, my apologies, feel free to move it.) Thanks! — Hunter Kahn 15:40, 10 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110
  • Chris Matthews speculation
    • Given that he ultimately did not stand, is it worth having such a large section for Matthews? The first and second paragraphs could be squeezed a little.
  • Arlen Specter party switch
    • Some redundancies can be dropped in this section, e.g. drop "the Senator" in sentence two
    • "Some high-profile Democrats began encouraging Specter to join the Democratic Party, including Vice President Joe Biden and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, who publicly offered to help Specter raise money if he switched." change to "Some high-profile Democrats, including Vice President Joe Biden and Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, encouraged Specter to join the Democratic Party by publicly offering to help Specter raise money if he switched." for flow.
    • MOS:PERCENT advises the use of the % symbol "in articles where many percentages are reported", which I would consider this article to be given the number of opinion polls reported throughout. However, they're fairly spaced out so it's your call on whether you want to use it or spell out percent.
    • "Although Specter said his decision was made primarily based on principle, he also admitted it was partially due to his poor chances at winning the Republican primary:" There's something about the first clause that doesn't sit right. I think it's "made primarily based on principle". How about "Although Specter said he primarily based his decision on principle..." or "Although Specter said the primary basis of his decision was principle..."?
    • "Many major Democrats praised Specter's decision and promised to campaign for him, including President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid." I think Specter's switch needs to be foregrounded as much as possible, particularly as this is the top of a paragraph. How about "Specter's decision was praised by many major Democrats, including President Barack Obama and Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, who promised to campaign for him."?
    • "Specter defended his position by arguing the Republican party had[...]" Capital P on Party.
  • Joe Sestak declares candidacy
    • "U.S Representative Joe Sestak, a former United States Navy admiral and second-term Congressman[...]". Since Representatives are colloquially the "Congressman" this seems redundant. Why not just "Second-term U.S. Representative Jo Sestak, a former United States [or just "U.S." again] navy admiral, began[...]"?
    • "Sestak insisted he would not make a final decision for several months, but on May 4 met with Andy Stern, president of the Service Employees International Union, which fueled speculation that he was seeking labor support for a campaign." The "but" conjunction doesn't really work; Sestak's meeting wasn't a final decision, it was a meeting that "fueled speculation". Put a full stop after "months" and start the meeting as a new sentence?
    • "On May 27, the website Talking Points Memo posted a handwritten letter by Sestak to candidates declaring he intended to run for Senate." > "declaring his intent[ion] to".
  • Candidates: Is there any info on when the other two candidates entered the race; it seems strange to only have their dropout dates.
  • Campaign
    • "Both candidates started the campaign relatively well-funded, although Arlen Specter maintained the strongest financial advantage." Relative to what or who?
    • "The New York Times suggested [...]" Better to say "[author] of NYT..."; referring to the publication as a single entity is best used only when citing editorials.
    • The whole Early months section reads like a bitch fight. Rather than presenting it chronologically, it might be better to organise the attacks by side, or just summarise the opponents' key topics.
    • The first sentence of the Toomey/Obama section appears to end before it ends. Is something missing?
    • "Sestak argued a change in leadership was necessary and claimed his military background as a United States Navy admiral gave him the necessary qualifications." "experience" would be better than "qualifications" given how the source refers to the debate.
    • "Also in September, Barack Obama appeared in a 30-second television ad for Specter, praising him for his support of the President's economic recovery initiatives." The "also" makes this sound like it was shoehorned in. Can it go anywhere else or does it have to stay at all?
    • "On September 15, Obama attended a Philadelphia fundraising dinner for Specter, an unusually public declaration of support so early in the primary season, when the President typically maintains a more neutral position until the final outcome becomes clearer." The LAT article just states that Obama had the option of staying neutral.
    • Television advertisements: Did the Sestak camp remove the adverts?
  • Sestak gains in closing weeks
    • Suppose I've been living under a rock; who is Sarah Palin?
    • "The Pittsburgh Post-Gazette also endorsed Specter, focusing more on the fact that Specter stands the best chance of defeated Pat Toomey in a general election challenge." "stood the best chance of defeating".

Bradley0110 (talk) 21:40, 26 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Thanks very much for the review! — Hunter Kahn 17:01, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

List of number-one albums from the 2000s (UK)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have been working on this article for the past month now, and would like to see if I can get it up to FL status. My main areas of concern are the quality and length of the prose, and whether the lead contains too many wikilinks. I'm also concerned about the "Certification" column - does it work, or is it just a bit much? Also, is the Christmas number ones section entirely needed? I also welcome any other ways in which the article could be imrpoved. Thanks very much in advance. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 12:06, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: This looks pretty good to me - I did a copyedit on the lead, mostly as the language could be tightened in some places - please revert if I made things worse. I have a few quibbles and suggestions for improvement.

  • A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. WHile there are no UK number-one album FLs, there are several for number-ne UK singles by decade - see for example List of number-one singles from the 2000s (UK)
  • I don't think the first sentence follows WP:LEAD, which says in part The article should begin with a declarative sentence telling the nonspecialist reader what (or who) is the subject. The current first sentence is about the UK albums chart, but does not mention number-ones or the decade (and yes I now see the model I suggested does the same thing). I still think this should mention number-ones and the 2000s.
    Changed per your suggestion below.
  • I also found "week-end album sales" in the first sentence confusing - makes it sound as if the chart is based on sales only on the weekend and not the whole week. The model uses The chart week runs from Sunday to Saturday... if that helps.
  • I would add the decade here In total, 275 different albums by 171 artists reached number one. In fact of this were added to the first sentence (perhaps after a semicolon and with "in the 2000s added" at the end) I think that would be a better first sentence.
  • I think this sentence is problematic Following its birth in the early 21st century, reality television began to have a significant impact on the British music industry. The article on reality television says it has been around since the earliest days of television and rose to prominence in the 1990s. Perhaps something like Following its greatly increased popularity in the early 21st century, reality television began to have a significant impact on the British music industry. Not great but you get the idea.
  • Need to explain in the key what "re" means in the list / table itself.
  • Certification does not sort properly.
    I'll do that, but it might take a while.
    Done. Didn't actually take too long after all... A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 19:12, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Seems very odd to me that an album could be number one in the whole UK for a week and still not sell even 60,000 copies.
    Yeah, that seemed odd to me too, but the BPI's website doesn't list those albums as having achieved any certifications at all, so I felt that the article should reflect that. It seemed like anything else would be original research.
  • Captions seem fine but things not in the chart(s) need refs - so the Vera Lynn caption needs one, for exmaple (oldest person ever)
  • For the number-one albums by artist table, could the weeks at the top for each album be given (perhaps after the year)?
  • I would wite it as "Sing When You're Winning (2000, 2001)" (no need for two lines that say the album name twice here)
    No, they are actually two completely different albums, albeit with extremely similar titles.
  • Why not just add a symbol to the table for the 10 Christmas number-ones? That would eliminate the need for the table, though I would still include some explanatory text similar to what is there now.
    That's an idea...
  • Facebook does not seem to me to be a RS. Even if it is, how do we know the same group of artists was under contract to Columbia over the course of the whole decade.
    I'd have thought that Facebook would be okay in this context, as it's an official page maintained by the label itself. But I'll try to find a more reliable source.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 03:30, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the review and the copy-edit, Ruhrfisch! It's been very useful! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 17:59, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

C. Rajagopalachari[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… The reviewer at the WP:GAN had insisted on another peer-review of the article. I shall not be able to edit this article for a couple of weeks as I shall not be active during the period. Hence, I request you to implement the changes you deem necessary (as much as possible); as for the rest, I'll implement them once I am able to be active again on Wikipedia. Thanks, The EnforcerOffice of the secret service 12:56, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Views by MikeLynch

I don't see any problems with the content of the article as such, but I cleaned up the grammar of the lead, and I feel that the writing style has to be improved a bit more. It is not very easy to read in the present form; some sentences have to be joined. I think it'll take just a bit of work, and it'll be good for a GA. Lynch7 18:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Redtigerxyz's suggestions
  • Criticism sections are generally recommended to be avoided (don't remember policy link). Try merging Criticism in other sections or write a "Evaluation/assessment" section with both praise as well as criticism. May be merge Legacy and criticism
  • The small Family section seems a little out of place. maybe it can be merged with Early life
  • The opening sentence is very misleading IMO. His primary claim to fame is First and only Indian Governor-General of Free lndia/the last Governor-General of India, which in IMO should be stated first. Compare with Manmohan Singh opening sentence, "Manmohan Singh is the 13th and current Prime Minister of India." It does not say that he was a RBI governor, finance minister and PM at various times in the opening sentence (the chronolical order).
  • "Inspired by Bal Gangadhar Tilak" A world audience may not know who Tilak is. So I suggest adding description "Inspired by Indian independence activist Bal Gangadhar Tilak" or similar to add some context as done in "Indian freedom fighter P. Varadarajulu Naidu". Similar description is needed for V. O. Chidambaram Pillai et al
  • "and was afterwards imprisoned by the British." year? ambiguous
  • "He also introduced prohibition ... ": I observed some paras start with pronoun, which adds ambiguaity. Always start with a noun
  • Also I notice there are many small sections of 1 para like Governor of West Bengal 1947–1948, In Nehru's Cabinet, 1965 Anti-Hindi agitations in Madras, 1967 elections etc. I suggest merging sections to have longer sections to avoid a long TOC
  • I noticed criticise as well as criticize is used. Stick to one kind of English. Indian English will be most suitable IMO.
  • The sudden appearance of "His son, C. R. Narasimhan, at his bedside at death" is out of order. The article does not even say before that Rajaji married. Similarly, Indian Independence Movement says nothing an imprisonment in 1921, but "Contributions to literature and music" tells about the prison sentence
  • Move "He wrote a Tamil re-telling of the Sanskrit epic Ramayana which appeared as a serial in the Tamil magazine Kalki from May 23, 1954 to November 6, 1955.[63] The episodes were later collected and published as Chakravarthi Thirumagan, a book which won Rajaji the 1958 Sahitya Academy award in Tamil language." from "Breakup with the Congress" to "Contributions to literature and music". Do not state it twice.
  • "On his death, condolences poured in from all corners of the country." may be more suitable in the death section. Also something about his funeral needs to be added.

--Redtigerxyz Talk 17:36, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Calgary Stampede[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have also nominated this as a good article, but the end goal is featured article status in the hopes that it might appear on the main page for the Stampede's centennial in July 2012. Prose quality and article flow are two things I am most interested in; Most articles I have written work in straight chronological order, so I am interested in knowing how well this article reads given each section is a different topic that does not necessarily flow from the previous. Also, I am interested in what should be added: For anyone who knows of the Calgary Stampede, am I missing anything? And for people who don't, is there anything that you would be looking for that I haven't thought of? Thanks! Resolute 01:55, 19 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I think this looks pretty good and thought the organization was good - thanks for your work on it. Here are some nitpicky suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC.

  • Two dead links and an access date needed here
  • In the lead, some reviewers like to have references for direct quotes and extraordinary claims - "The Greatest Outdoor Show on Earth" and other direct quotes may need refs in the lead, as well as the world's largest rodeo.
  • Language - perhaps "The Stampede's roots go back to 1886" or something similar in The Stampede's roots are traced to 1886 when the Calgary and District Agricultural Society held its first fair.
  • Missing word? Big Four, as they came to be known, viewed the Stampede as a final celebration [of?] their life as cattlemen.[7]
  • Tighten? In 1922, it approached Weadick in the hopes he would join his Stampede with the fair and hold both in conjunction.
  • I think that a film exposes people to its subject, not the other way around The 1925 silent movie The Calgary Stampede used footage from the rodeo and exposed the event to people across North America. so perhaps something like The 1925 silent movie The Calgary Stampede used footage from the rodeo and exposed people across North America to the event.
  • Perhaps During the war Toronto's Canadian National Exhibition ceased operations, but the Stampede remained active and offered the public an escape. instead of While Toronto's Canadian National Exhibition ceased operations during the war, the Stampede remained active and offered the public an escape from the war.
  • I think both here implies they were there together, perhaps each is meant (they were each a marshal, but separately) in Bob Hope and Bing Crosby both served as parade marshals during the 1950s,[13] ... (so "...each served as a parade marshal during the 1950's...")
  • Would it help to say Leduc was/is an oil well? Also not sure if it would be better to split this into two sentences? The discovery of Leduc No. 1 in 1946 along with major oil reserves in the Turner Valley area ushered in a period of great growth and prosperity[.] as Calgary was transformed from an agricultural community into the oil and gas capital of Canada.
  • Perhaps make clear that the Stampeders played at/in the Stampede grounds? The board of directors operated the Calgary Stampeders hockey team, which won the Western Hockey League championship in 1954 and helped establish the Corral as the centre of Calgary's sporting world.[20]
  • Does this need a "the" (or is that standard for Canadian English?) During [the?] Stampede, acts such as...
  • "each" instead of "during the"? ...and was converted into a 24-sheet curling facility during the [each?] winter.[22]
  • "recent" can become out of date quickly, although here the year for the attendance figure helps date it. Attendance plateued around 1.2 million in recent years, with the current record of 1,262,518 set in 2006.[25]
  • First paragraph of Stampede Park section needs at least one ref. I also wonder if the image could be a little larger.
  • I think this sentence is combining two idea that don't really belong together The park is serviced by Calgary Transit's light rail system as well as neighboring property owners who rent parking spaces during the 10 days of the festival. light rail can service a park, but I do not see who property owners renting their yards for parking is service in the same sense. I also think transport and parking need a better connector - perhaps something like The park is serviced by Calgary Transit's light rail system; limited parking on site is supplemented by neighboring property owners who rent parking spaces during the 10 days of the festival.
  • It was not clear to me what exactly Victoria Park was - assume it was a park, but was it a neighborhood?
  • In Events - I think it would help to say somewhere (here?) when the Stampede usually takes place - is it always the seoncd week in July?
  • Might help to add the year or some time indicator here - assume it has not always had exactly 170 floats The event features dozens of marching bands, 170 floats and hundreds of horses with entrants from around the world,[31][33] and combines western themes with modern.
  • MOS says to provide metric and English units - since Canada is officially metric (SI), that should go first. The {{convert}} template is useful. All livestock for the rodeo events come from the 22,000 acre Stampede Ranch located near the town of Hanna.[42]
  • How is the first tarp advertisement different from the first tarp auction? The first advertisement on the tarp cover of a chuckwagon was made in 1941, Lloyd Nelson became the last person to win the Rangeland Derby without a sponsored wagon in 1956 and the first tarp auction was held in 1979.[53]
  • Tighten? Indian Affairs again unsuccessfully sought to ban native participation in 1925,[73] but they have otherwise remained an important part of the event since. Not sure if the last bit needs a ref
  • I would explain earlier what the Young Canadians do/did performing (sing and dance?)
  • Contradiction within the article In 1986 and 2002, for instance, six horses were killed as a result of crashes.[92] but later the article says Following a particularly deadly Stampede in 1986 where nine horses died in chuckwagon racing incidents alone – including five horses in one spectacular crash ... Which is it?
  • I think technically she is now "Catherine Duchess" of something or other Several groups petitioned Prince William and Catherine Middleton to cancel their planned attendance during their 2011 tour of Canada.[98][99]
  • Did the 9 horses pushed into the Bow River die? If so, might want to say so
  • Tighten While the Calgary Herald simply stated a refusal to run the ad, ... to something like While the Calgary Herald simply refused to run the ad,
  • I am not really sure what this means Civic leaders have consistently supported the Stampede's impact on the city.
  • I would move the Rangeland Derby image up one paragraph so it overlaps the next section less.
  • The end of the article needs more images. Looking on commons there are many - I was particularly struck by File:Bull-Riding2-Szmurlo.jpg and File:Blacksmith.JPG and think I owuld try to add them or other striking images to the article. Bull riding is sometimes criticized as animal cruelty so perhaps it oculd go in that section. The blacksmith image might go in the section where the balcksmiths are mentioned if there is room, or perhaps it could go in the end (Caption could be something like "Tourists who come to see the blacksmith competition and other aspects of the Stampede spend millions each year"
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 04:48, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for the review! I suspect I will implement pretty much every prose-related suggestion you have made. I agree on the need for more images. I wasn't aware of the blacksmith competition image, and definitely will add it. I am also heading to the grounds during this week's Stampede for more pictures - specifically one from Native Village, a better midway image and hopefully an anti-rodeo protest, if one is happening when I am downtown. If I cannot get such an image, your suggestion on the bull riding image has potential. Thanks again! Resolute 22:59, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I found some images on Flickr of chuckwagon races. File:Calgary Stampede.jpg is my favorite, especially if it were cropped a bit, but there are also File:Calgary Stampede 2.jpg and File:Calgary Stampede 3.jpg Ruhrfisch ><>°° 01:41, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
Those images aren't bad, but I already have an image of the Chuckwagon races. And while I may be biased since it is my photo, I like the current one best. I also have plans to add more images that show a variety of events at the Stampede. I added a protest pic to the Animal Welfare section and an image of Indian Village from my travels today. I expect to head back down for a few more tomorrow or during the week, which should result in a good balance of images throughout the article. But thanks for the suggestions! Resolute 00:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
I like the photos of the tipis and protesters (and the blacksmiths) - thanks very much. The photos I found were just suggestions - my thought was that most of the Animal welfare section was on the chuckwagon races and the first image I found on Flickr seemed to show some of their speed and perhaps danger. Since bull riding is mentioned in the article but not shown in a photo, perhaps it could be another photo in the Animal welfare section (since it has been criticized too). File:Bull-Riding-Szmurlo.jpg is another striking image I found on Commons and is from the Stampede too. Please let me know when this is at FAC. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:15, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
I shall try to remember, and thanks for your suggestions. A tie down/calf roping image would probably be better, if one can be had, as that is the other rodeo sport that most upsets animal welfare groups. Resolute 04:38, 10 July 2011 (UTC)
Yes, from reading the article that (tie down photo) seems best - since the balcksmiths photo is used in its section, perhaps a bullriding image could be used in the city relations section. Ruhrfisch ><>°° 03:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Brief comments from Nikkimaria
  • Tie down roping or tie-down roping? chuckwagon or Chuckwagon racing? Stampede or the Stampede? Check for consistency
    • Thanks for the reminder. Between my taking over a year to writes this, and others making changes of their own, I should have thought to check for this.
  • Spell out "%" in article text
  • Include both authors for Dixon refs?
    • Ahh, yes, I should fix that too.
  • Need page numbers for newspaper articles without weblinks (ex. ref 29)
  • Check for consistency in citation formatting
    • As with above, thanks for the reminder
  • Is the event criticized for any reason unrelated to animal welfare? Nikkimaria (talk) 21:26, 9 July 2011 (UTC)
    • I have been looking for articles that document the minority of Calgarians who criticize the Stampede for a variety of reasons (cost, hate the Cowboy culture, etc), but have come up empty thus far. This is something I want to add before an FA run though. Thanks for the suggestions! Resolute 00:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)


Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

This article recently passed its GA nomination. Since then, I've contributed to slight expansion of the article's "Production" section, and tried to clarify everything else in its entirety. I hope to nominate Wishology to the FAC eventually, but perhaps a second peer review should be done first by someone out there.

Thank you. 89119 (talk) 20:02, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your willingness to take this article to FAC. It's a noble endeavor. I'll review this article from a nit picky standpoint and try and pull out issues that may come up at FAC.


  • Is the "The" in "The Darkness" a proper noun? Should it be capitalized? The "The" in "the Eliminators" is not capitalized so consistency is important as well.
    • Eliminated "the" in "the Eliminators". As for "The Darkness", the capitalized "The" was followed from the character's description on the list page (link). 89119 (talk) 22:56, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Is The Lord of the Rings considered part of the science fiction genre? The rest of the films are but IMO it would be more fantasy than sci fi. Just a thought.
  • Use parenthetical references sparingly. It isn't good prose and I've found it frowned upon by FAC delegates.
    • Reduced it as much as I can for now. 89119 (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Robots known as Eliminators appear in Timmy's hometown, Dimmsdale, to destroy the "chosen one", Timmy himself." I don't think "himself" is necessary.
    • I will consult the GOCE on that one. 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "...who serve as protectors of the white wand, the first of the three wands Timmy must possess." Duplicative information, you already said that in the previous paragraph.
    • Fixed. 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


  • Is "poof" a technical term? Seems a bit childish but I don't really have a suggestion for a better word to use. Thoughts?
    • Replaced "poof" with "take". 89119 (talk) 23:09, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "No one has any memory of him, but an Eliminator appears after he exclaims his own name." When I read this I was unsure who the "he" pronoun is referring to. Is it the Eliminator or Timmy or Jorgen? I'm not sure.
    • Fixed. 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Why did Timmy board the Death Pod with his enemies? There doesn't seem to be a logical link here. Who are Timmy's enemies? This isn't clear and they haven't been introduced until now. I believe you are assuming prior knowledge about the show. I don't advocate for long plot sections but a little more detail here wouldn't hurt.
    • Reworded and clarified. 89119 (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • How is the audience introduced to Turbo Thunder?
    • The lead contains a brief description of him, so he doesn't need to be described again in the plot section. But I did add this sentence for better clarity: "A celebration follows at Fairy World, where Turbo Thunder appears and takes the white wand from Timmy." 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "...where the rock guardian grants Timmy the second wand." I don't think "grant" is the right word here, perhaps "give".
    • How is "give" a better word choice for "grant"? Before Timmy got the second wand, he had to pass the rock guardian's "chosen test". I think the word "grant" implies that possessing the wand requires some effort. But I'll ask the GOCE for this as well.
  • Another use of the verb "poof" combined with a character named "Poof" is a bit odd. Can you find another verb to replace "poof"?
    • Done. 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "The M.E.R.F. launches an array of military weapons at the Eliminator..." I recommend changing "The M.E.R.F." to "M.E.R.F agents launch..."
    • Done. 89119 (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "The M.E.R.F. launches an array of military weapons at the Eliminator, only to be absorbed by him and transform him into a more powerful version of himself, the Destructinator, whom solidifies the entire Earth in a steel casing which also transforms the M.E.R.F. agents into his henchmen." The writing here isn't very good. I recommend redoing it like this, "M.E.R.F. agents launch an array of military weapons at the Eliminator, but he absorbs the ordinance turning him into the Destructinator. He surrounds the Earth in a steel casing, which transforms the M.E.R.F. agents into his henchmen."
    • Applied verbatim. 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "The Destructinator's henchmen plant explosives inside Earth that, upon activation of a detonator remote, will blow it up." It's implied that explosives will blow up when detonated. The trick here is to introduce the detonator. Perhaps this is a possible rewrite, "The Destructinator's henchmen plant explosives inside Earth and give the Destructinator a detonation device."
    • Applied verbatim. 89119 (talk) 17:59, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • How did Timmy steal the detonator? This wasn't spelled out. The last we heard the henchmen had planted the explosives and had the detonator. How did Timmy get it?
    • Added the sentence beforehand: " Timmy heads into space with the Destructinator following him, and the Destructinator attacks him which sends him back down to the Earth, at its north polar region." 89119 (talk) 20:24, 23 July 2011 (UTC)


  • You switch from past to present tense. Be consistent with the tense and I suggest past tense.
    • Only found one present tense verb in the "Production" section, which I fixed ("is"→"was"). diff (All verbs are intended to be in past tense throughout that section.) 89119 (talk) 18:08, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The voice talent should be linked in the cast section first and not in the production section. Per WP:LINK the first time a name or term is used it should be linked.
    • An IP editor added a separate "Cast" section in bullet points. I removed it because I was under the impression that prose is more favored by FA standards. But I created a separate sub-level heading for the "Cast" within the "Production" section, because voice-talent is part of how an episode/film is made. Another reason: modeling after Family Guy FA Road to the Multiverse, which lists guest stars in its last paragraph of its "Production" section. 89119 (talk) 23:03, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Along those lines you already linked Timmy, Jorgen and KISS in the plot section, no need to link here again per WP:OVERLINK.
  • "Hartman and Fellows pitched in the idea of a rock band in the storyline, where the band guards the white wand that Timmy seeks." I think it's just pitched w/o the "in".
    • Fixed. 89119 (talk) 18:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Nevertheless, they asked and received permission from Gene Simmons to feature Kiss, drawn as animated two-dimensional figures to blend in with the series' customary appearance, and a performance of one of their songs "Rock and Roll All Nite", which is played towards the end of "The Big Beginning", during a concert party at Fairy World." This is a run-on sentence. Consider breaking into two and keeping the subject separated.
    • Separated the sentence into two sentences. 89119 (talk) 18:06, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "At last-minute notice, however, as of April 27, 2009 Nickelodeon decided to consolidate the premieres into one weekend. In accordance with the plan change, Wishology aired every night from 8:00 p.m. to 9:00 p.m., from Friday to Sunday, May 1–3, 2009. "The Big Beginning" premiered on May 1, "The Exciting Middle Part" on May 2, and "The Final Ending" on May 3." Not good writing here. Consider a rewrite, "At the last minute N decided to premier the film over a weekend. Wishology aired from 8:00 to 9:00 pm Friday to Sunday night May 1-3." The rest of the information is repetitive.
    • Applied it verbatim. 89119 (talk) 23:09, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Is it necessary to have 9 references for two sentences regarding the broadcast? Seems a bit much. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 22:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)

Cultural references

  • "During the three parts of Timmy's trilogy wish at the beginning..." What is a trilogy wish? At the beginning of what? Maybe I'm confused because I'm not familiar with the cartoon but this doesn't make sense to me.
    • Clarified, turned "trilogy wish" to "trilogy movie". Any more details about Timmy's "trilogy movie" are covered in the "Plot" section above. 89119 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "At Dimmsdale, when he tries to figure out the chosen one riddle in order to find the white wand, Timmy becomes chased down by the police for allegedly becoming a quarter thief and smashing a statue at the Dimmsdale museum." Change becomes → is.
    • Done. 89119 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "like a Guitar Hero controller that imitates a real guitar instrument." A guitar is an instrument so you don't need to call it a guitar instrument.
    • Done. 89119 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "When Mark's space pod plunges into the Earth and destroys an Eliminator disguised as Mark, the Eliminator's feet curl up in a way similar to the Wicked Witch does." Not good writing here. You need to clarify for readers not familiar with the cultural allusion: "the Eliminator's feet curl up in a way reminiscent of the Wicked Witch of the East from the Wizard of Oz."
    • Applied the sentence you suggested. 89119 (talk) 23:22, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Is it necessary to list every cultural reference? It gets a little tiresome. I'm not familiar enough to animated FAs to say for sure but it seems to go beyond summary style to give every cultural reference in the trilogy. But if that's the norm then I guess you have to do it.
    • It seems to be the norm for most animated articles. As long as any cultural reference is clearly soruced, why not? :) 89119 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Don't link terms in common English useage like hotel and palm trees.
    • Done. Removed those links. 89119 (talk) 23:20, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


  • "However, "The Exciting Middle Part" did not attain as much viewers..." Change much → many.
    • Done. 89119 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The parenthetical reference to Sonny with a chance and Hannah Montana is unnecessary detail and I recommend you remove it. "In terms of viewership" is implied and can be removed as well.
    • Done. 89119 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "However, she also criticized the role of Turbo Thunder in the episode." You overuse the term "in the episode". Once is enough in the previous sentence. The reader knows Turbo is "in the episode" so you don't need to keep restating it.
    • Removed the second "in the episode". (I only saw two via the CTRL+F.) 89119 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The single sentence stub paragraph at the end should either be expanded or combined with another paragraph. Stub paras are not good. It's also an odd way to end the article.
    • Merged that stub paragraph into the top paragraph about the ratings. 89119 (talk) 23:27, 20 July 2011 (UTC)


  • Refs look ok, watch out for blogs, those will be red flags that they FAC delegates will look at. I did, and they seemed ok but usually blogs are not seen as credible sources.


  • The writing needs improvement. As it stands it would not pass FAC. I tried to fix some minor errors and suggested some sentence rewrites. I would focus on unnecessary words. From a prose perspective FACs fail frequently because they are full of verbage that doesn't need to be there. Words like "very" "also" and most adverbs can be eliminated. You'll need to take a critical look at the writing and make some cuts. You may want to seek an editor from the Animation or similar project who can do a 3rd party copy edit. If all else fails the Guild of Copy Editors may be able to help.
  • The lead is good, I don't see any glaring MOS issues, refs are fine, images are appropriate. It'll really come down to writing. I hope that helps, if you have questions you can contact me on my talk page as I don't watch review pages. Please consider doing a review here or at WP:GAC. There's always a need for more reviewers. Thanks and good luck. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 22:58, 20 July 2011 (UTC)
    • Thanks for your very detailed and thorough comments! I fixed them to the best of my ability and will plan to find a copy-editor as you suggested. 89119 (talk) 18:11, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

K-Ci & JoJo discography[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want it to become a FL. The main problem that I think the article has is the lead. It seems redundant, but I'm not sure entirely how I could make that better. Other comments as well would be appreciated!

Thanks, Michael Jester (talk) 07:13, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Review started[edit]

Review started.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:11, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


  1. Links check has numerous problems, see here.
I noticed that. When I click on the links though, they seem to be working correctly.
I would WebCite/archive as many of these as possible to prevent link rot. I'll check each of these ref links later when I get to the References section.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


  1. Check singles total, it should not include those As featured artist. Lead will need to be adjusted too.



  1. Run a spell checker? I've found fourty, feautring. Others may exist.
  2. three times > three times Note: wikicode has non-breakable space between words that should be kept together. Other instances include number five and Top 40
  1. As a summary of the discography, the Lead gives unnecessarily detailed information on peak positions. It also becomes difficult to read with the phrase peaked at number repeated some 19×. I suggest cutting down on specific chart peaks when they lie beyond the top 20. Provide some sort of generalised collective, e.g. when talking about Love Always on international charts, try something like reached the top 50 on the Swiss and ARIA Charts, and appeared on the UK and Swedish Albums Chart. Its certification(s) should be in a new sentence.
  2. A lot of piped (hidden) wikilinks are linked again after their first mention in the Lead, e.g. New Zealand Top 40 Albums in ¶1 and New Zealand Top 40 Albums in ¶2. De-link second and subsequent appearances in the Lead. By the way, replace the underscore line from any wikilink codes with a space.
  1. The album produced five singles, including the number-one Billboard song, "All My Life" Wikilink Billboard song to Billboard Hot 100. Furthermore, this sentence ignores its number-one status on other national charts which should be included.
  2. In New Zealand, all five singles reached the top 30. This is important enough to be mentioned in the Lead.
  3. K-Ci & JoJo released their second studio album, It's Real, in 1999. > In 1999, K-Ci & JoJo released their second studio album, It's Real.
  4. In the United States, It's Real peaked at > It's Real peaked at By this stage we know that Billboard 200 is in the US. The phrase In the United States, can be removed where it is obvious.
  5. The album consisted of four singles, > The album spawned four singles, or similar.
  6. with the earlier peaking at > with the former peaking at
  7. If linked earlier (according to my advice at #5), then de-link Billboard Hot 100 at end of ¶2.
  8. Quantify series of compilation albums, e.g. three compilation albums
  9. A space is missing after compilations albums: in ¶3.
  10. Neither album charted in any country. Verify or modify. e.g. Neither album charted in Japan or the US.


More to follow.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:54, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

I really appreciate all these comments. Thanks! I do have one question, though. Do you think this would have a chance to pass FL without an image?
Michael Jester (talk) 07:29, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
See Criterion 5b. It would be more likely to pass with a suitable image, many FL reviewers would expect such an image to be available for a recently charting group.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
Oh ok. I tried a flickr and google image search. But no luck. Is there any other place that I could get a picture from?
Have you read Wikipedia:Finding images tutorial? Ultimately the FL reviewer(s) will determine whether such an image is readily available or not. If images are not readily available then this alone should not prevent FL.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Note: some reviewers will be annoyed by striking through their comments. Also, other interested editors may not be able to read the struck through sections. A simple Done per section is sufficient.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
I did not know that. I wont do it anymore.

More Lead: Is it thirteen or fourteen music videos? Check infobox.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 05:50, 25 July 2011 (UTC)


  1. Fix piped wikilinks to avoid redirects. e.g. [[Australian Albums Chart|AUS]] > [[ARIA Charts|AUS]]
  2. For US R&B fix ref tab order.
  3. In Studio albums, what is the format for Love?
    1. I don't think the format is correct.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  4. ARIA Platinum for "All My Life", see here.
    1. Put Certifications in alphabetical order (Studio albums).shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

More to follow.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 08:44, 24 July 2011 (UTC) Done

  1. In Singles table, is "If You Think You're Lonely Now" a solo release by K-Ci when he was still a member of Jodeci? If not, it becomes K-Ci & JoJo's debut single? While there de-link any albums previously linked in the Albums section.
  2. As featured artist and Music videos, "From The Ground Up" > "From the Ground Up"
  3. For Music videos: use Director(s) as heading and have content left aligned.

More to follow.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 22:28, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


  1. For Reflist choose a width suitable for the majority of references. On my browser (Safari), Reflist|3 looks too narrow, I suggest you try something like Reflist|30em or Reflist|25em.
  2. For Allmusic refs use the Allmusic template. Simplify the title e.g. K-Ci & JoJo > Discography > Main Albums as the Allmusic is in the work part.
  3. De-link second, or subsequent, wikilinks that appear in the References section. e.g. Allmusic and Rovi Corporation were already linked in the General subsection so don't need to be linked again in Specific subsection. As before trim the title & use the template.
  4. In terms of title: what's the difference between ref [2] and [3]?
  5. Ref[4]: check date & use most recent entry: when did it get 3× Plat?
  6. For Hung Median-related refs check the work and title. e.g. Ref[5] title includes which is covered by Swiss Music Charts in work. The language should be wikilinked to the appropriate article first time it appears in the References.
    1. I didn't make myself clear. For the Medien-related refs, title=Discographie K-Ci – | publisher=Hung Medien | work=''Swiss Charts Portal'' | accessdate=July 8, 2011 | language=German > title=Discographie K-Ci | publisher=Hung Medien | work=</i>Swiss Charts Portal<i> | accessdate=July 8, 2011 | language=[[German language|German]] Only wikilink language first time in References.
  7. For ref[6]
    1. ARIA supplies the information but is not the work nor publisher at Hung Medien, in this case the work is Australian Charts Portal (unlinked).
    2. Consider combining all the Australian Charts Portal refs with Discography K-Ci. This does albums and singles.
    3. Australian Charts Portal only show peaks in 1–50. Meanwhile ARIA Charts positions 1–100 are archived here and require more work to find peak positions.
  8. According Wikipedia:Record charts, "Since Chart Stats is an anonymous archive, its use has been challenged in the past."
  9. For ref[9] consider Discography K-Ci for all New Zealand Charts Portal albums and singles. If you need specific RIANZ charts, then according to WP:Record charts, "To link to an individual chart, enter with XXXX as a chart number and Y and the kind of chart (S=singles, A=albums, D=DVDs, C=compilations, H=radio airplay)"

More to follow.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 06:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Wow. I did not know this much was wrong with it. I'm pretty sure I got everything you mentioned. I might have missed a thing or two though. I tried looking for an image using that link you showed me and the only image I found was a promotional flyer. I'm not sure if that would be suitable or what.
Once again, thank you for all the comments.
Michael Jester (talk) 07:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

That's one of the big advantages of Peer Review, some-one else can often see mistakes that you are blind to. As for image searching, some people obtain an email from the artist, their management or promo group to get permission for wikipedia to use an image. (I've never done it).shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  1. I see a problem with all 14 of the Vevo refs. I get a message:


Sorry! The page you are looking for is not available in your region.

VEVO is working hard to make sure all of our videos are available worldwide. In the meantime, watch and enjoy your favorite videos through VEVO on YouTube."
I don't know what you can do about this: its the first time I've seen this message. The problem may be transitory. Perhaps the FL reviewer can check the refs if they're based in an accepted region. (I'm in Australia). In any case Vevo should only be wikilinked once in References section. As insurance you might have to find as much of the information as possible in alternate reliable sources.

Michael, I've finished my review, I hope it all goes well with your FLC.shaidar cuebiyar (talk) 20:49, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

I appreciate all that you have done for this article! I will try to find different sources for the directors. I wish you well!
Michael Jester (talk) 21:03, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Cartoon Network[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this may be reached to GA or FA. It is television network that was launched in 1992. However, I need a feedback for the peer review on the network.

Thank for your time. Regards, JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 17:58, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by H1nkles

I commend you for your work on this article, I will look at it from a GA criteria perspective. You'll want to come back for an FAC review once it passes GAC.


  • Your writing has a lot of adverbs like "originally" "primarily" "mainly", these aren't necessary. Sometimes they have a place but they also clutter up the prose and many of them can be removed.
  • Third cable channel behind disney and nick. Third in what? Kids' programming? It's not clear.
  • Overall in the lead the writing is choppy and needs to be streamlined. Here's an example:
  • "Since 2009, it began airing a small amount of live-action programming, specifically movies from Warner Bros. and New Line Cinema, both of which are also owned by Time Warner." Rewrite like this, "In 2009 it started airing live-action programming, including movies from Warner Bros. and New Line Cinema." No one cares that they're owned by Time Warner.
I've fix the issue. Some movie were carried from 20th Century Fox, Paramount Pictures and Walt Disney Pictures which are not owned by Time Warner. JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 00:03, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
  • See WP:LEAD for instructions on what should be in a good lead. The lead should be a summary of the entire article and this lead should be enhanced to include every subject within the article (written in a summary style).


  • The clean up banner is legitimate and should be addressed. Usually clean up banners should be handled before the article is listed at WP:PR. I can see a number of [citation needed] templates in the following sections. These should be addressed and the sourcing improved.
  • As a general rule every paragraph should have at least one source, and more if there are multiple assertions.
  • See WP:INCITE for reference anchor placement. They don't go in the middle of the sentence but rather at the end unless the assertion is very controversial.
  • The parenthetical reference in the first sentence is too detailed. Give a few examples of what was acquired and leave it at that.
  • Watch out for one sentence paragraphs. These stubs are not acceptable at GAC. Consider combining or expanding.
  • Make sure titles are always italicized even when not linked.
  • What is meant by the "Powerhouse era"? What is powerhouse music?


  • This is a section with no prose. Not good. Sections with just a tophat are unnecessary. Either add some prose or remove the section. I think you fold in most of the programming info in the previous section.

Related projects

  • Here is a section "Cartoon Network Universe: FusionFall" see above.


  • The key to references is consistency. Make sure every website ref has at least the title, url, publisher, and accessdate.
  • You probably want to use templates like {{cite web}} to help with consistency.
  • Deviantart appears to be a blog or discussion forum. This is not a credible reference. See WP:CITE and WP:VERIFY for instructions on credible references. Avoid blogs, forums, chat rooms, social networking sites etc.


  • As stated above the article needs a lot more referencing. This will be a major sticking point if you want it to pass GAC. * I would also seek out someone who can do a thorough copy edit.
  • There isn't much about the financing of the channel, advertising revenue, demographics that sort of thing. It would be nice to see some more information on these topics.
  • This concludes my review. Please contact me on my talk page if you have specific questions. Best of luck to you. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 22:23, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

List of Christmas number one albums (UK)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to see if I can get it up to FL status. I've compared it to List of Christmas number one singles (UK) article (currently a FL), and I feel that it is just about at a similar quality. My main areas of concern are the length and quality of the prose, and whether there are too many redlinks (there are currently three). I also welcome any other advice on how this article could be improved. Thanks very much in advance. A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 16:39, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Bradley0110

Structurally, the lead is good; there's an explanation of the topic, a short history, and the most frequently charting albums and artists. There are some issues with prose and weasel words though:


  • "when Christmas Day falls on a Sunday itself, the official number one is considered to be the one announced on that day's chart." You need to state who considers this.
  • "The album chart was first officially published by Record Mirror in 1956." Was it unofficially published before 1956?
  • "The record at number one on 25 December that year was the original soundtrack to the 1956 film The King and I, which is considered to be the first ever UK Christmas number one album". You need to state who considers it to be this.
  • "Despite being seen to be less significant than the equivalent number one single," It doesn't seem appropriate to use an anonymous writer on everyhit as a source for such a definitive statement, particularly given that the source has a "chatty" style of writing. This statement is immediately followed by another that says the industry doe consider it to be prestigious. So this sentence can be read as "Some bloke on some website says it isn't as important as the number one single, but the industry says it is (but what do they know?)". This needs some work.
    Haha, thanks, I'll work on that section.

Number ones

  • The table is set out very well and complemented well by the photos.
  • In terms of the three redlinks, do you think those articles will ever be created? As they're just compilations, the only notability I can think they'd have is being Christmas number one (and two), which might not cut it. I don't think there's any harm in keeping them but it might look tidier if they went.
    Completely remove the red wikilinks altogether? Okay, done.


  • "These releases, sometimes referred to as "Christmas number twos". The Digital Spy ref only makes reference to the number two single, not the number two album, which this sentence implies it does. You need to either find a source that makes reference to the number two album or remove this.
    You've really got me thinking now... I've had a brief look, but there don't seem to be third-party sources that talk about Christmas number-two albums. Hmm... Maybe that entire section should just be removed. I'll have another look first though.
  • Again, the table is well formatted but you need a third-party source to indicate the importance of the number two album.


  • Check publishers match dates; The Independent started being published by Independent Print in 2010 after Lebedev bought it; between 1999 and 2009 it was published by Independent News & Media.
    Done. Thanks for bringing this to my attention.
  • Location is given for some sources but not others. This should be consistent (I'd remove it).
  • The Official Charts Company is linked within the article body, so there's no need to link it every time in the refs.
  • Refs 18 through 68 should have archive date (e.g. for 18 have "Top 40 Official UK Albums Archive: 31st December 1960". The Official Charts Company. Retrieved 4 June 2011.)

Bradley0110 (talk) 10:21, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks a lot for the review, Bradley! A Thousand Doors (talk | contribs) 13:29, 11 July 2011 (UTC)


Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like fresh eyes on what needs to be done to improve it further, along the FA criteria. The main problem I can see right now is the length, it goes beyond the recommended limit. Advice on where to cut would be appreciated, should some subsections be summarised and merged with others or the main text, or perhaps some sections just need less information? Any other advice would of course also be very welcome.

Thanks, Chipmunkdavis (talk) 20:53, 11 June 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this - it looks much better than it did the last time I peer reviewed it. Here are some suggestions for improvement with an eye to FAC - I will comment as I read through.

  • Tool box on this PR page finds two dab links that will need to be fixed.
  • No dead ELs, but several need access dates added (looked like mostly google books links)
  • I used the article size tool and it said: Prose size (text only): 51 kB (8145 words) "readable prose size" This is big, but not too bad, especially for such a large and diverse country.
  • Two sentences in a row starting with "it" probably would be commented on at FAC - could probably combine the two It consists of thirteen states and three federal territories and has a total landmass of 329,847 square kilometres (127,350 sq mi) separated by the South China Sea into two regions, Peninsular Malaysia and Malaysian Borneo.
  • 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 two bridges to Singapore is only in the lead (and is too much detail for the lead anyway).
  • My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way, even if it is only a word or phrase. I am not sure this is true here - I do not see any mention of the etymology / name in the lead, for example.
  • Problem sentence The population is over 27.5 million. - first off, the sentence should give the date of the population. Second, it seems odd to just say "over" a number.
  • Make it cleaer this is an annual figure Since independence, Malaysia has had one of the best economic records in Asia, with GDP growing an average 6.5% for almost 50 years.
  • I think of Malaysia as one of the biggest countries in terms of Islamic population, but except for it being in OIC, there is no mention of Islam in the lead.
  • In general when there are things that can change with time, I would give some sort of indication of the date. As of 2011 works, or since YEAR works. Avoid vague time terms like now or currently as they can become out of date quickly
  • What does the Tamil word mean?
  • Why the out of chronological order discussion of names (English 1850 followed by French 1831, then the next paragraph is vague as to time too At that time, it was thought that the inhabitants of this region could be designated by the encompassing term "Malay"... Which time?
  • I expected Langkasuka to be mentioned in the history - if they considered naminmg the current nation after this kingdome, seems like it might be important enough to mention in History.
  • Watch WP:OVERLINKing - Malay Peninsula is linked twice in two sections
  • Think about antecedents - look at this example Traders and settlers from India and China arrived as early as the 1st century AD, establishing trading ports and towns in the 2nd and 3rd centuries. which is fillowed by Both had a strong influence on the local culture. What does Both refer to - traders and settlers? India and China? trading ports and towns? Even the 2nd and 3rd centuries?
  • History goes from 40,000 years ago to the 13th century in 5 sentences - might want a bit more detail.
  • History is fairly long - would subsections help?
  • Most difficult FA criterion for most articles to meet is 1a, a professional level of ENglish. Avoid passive voice where possible - for example the phrase ...with the lease of the island of Penang to the British East India Company by the sultan of Kedah... could be flipped to active pretty easily and tightened a bit in the bargain ... when the sultan of Kedah leased the island of Penang to the British East India Company... (is it important that Penang is an island?)
  • Most places have refs, but this does not not and needs one Sabah was governed as the crown colony of British North Borneo. In 1842, Sarawak was ceded by the Sultan of Brunei to James Brooke, whose successors ruled as the White Rajahs over an independent kingdom until 1946, when it became a British colony.
  • The whole History section seems to have gaps to me
  • I would say who the current Yang di-Pertuan Agong is (had to copy and paste that name!)
  • Between is for two, among is for more than two - see By informal agreement the position is systematically rotated between the nine.
  • Aren'tthe members elected to terms (and not the House itself)? The 222-member House of Representatives is elected for a maximum term of five years ...
  • Haven't clearly defined who/what the sultan is (and need to be consistent on capitalization in the whole article) . In each of the states with a hereditary ruler, the Chief Minister is required to be a Malay, appointed by the Sultan upon the recommendation of the Prime Minister.[50]
  • Awkward Federal elections are held concurrently with the elections of every state except Sarawak.[47]
  • I know he is shown in the picture, but I would say how long the current PM has served (PM since YEAR)
  • I would briefly define Bumiputera - I know it is linked, but I think it needs to be made clearer in the article too.
Foreign relations and military
  • Malaysia's foreign policy is based on the principle of neutrality and maintaining peaceful relations with all countries - but later it says except Israel (which it has no relation with)
  • Abbreviations should follow the full name on first use for ASEAN, etc.
  • More between confusion It involves joint military exercises held between the five countries.
  • Could the names of the three federal territories be shwon explicily on the wikilinked map?
  • I would list the four states that have governors
  • Vague For some, the other areas of Malaysia are considered foreign countries under immigration laws.[88] Who are these people?
  • The infobox has an exact population as of the 2010 Census - I owuld use this throughout the article
  • Make sure sources used are reliable - what makes "Travel Times" a RS, for example?
  • I also see that Travel Times might have an author's name at the bottom of this article LEOW CHEAH WEI - if this is the author or editor (apologies if I misunderstood) then that name should be included in the ref.
  • I was surprised there was not more on Brunei being completely surrounded by Sarawak in this section.
Flora and fauna
  • Link endemism?
  • Awful sentence (and the previous sentence already said it was megadiverse): Its wildlife are some of the most diverse on earth,[93] and it being a Megadiverse country,[108] and the country includes some of the most biodiverse areas on the planet.
  • Copyedit needed Over 620 species of birds have been recorded just on the Peninsular.[109] Many are endemic to the mountains of the peninsular, and Bornean forests show high levels of endemism among bird species[93] with 38 species found nowhere else. Capitalization of Peninsular (and is it OK by itself) is an issue too
  • I assume this means the forests have covered what is now Malaysia for the past 130 million years (since no plants or animals are anywhere near that old). About two thirds of Malaysia is covered in forest[97] which is believed to be 130 million years old.[110]
  • I am only going to point out the worst problems from now on in the review. This needs a copyedit and some careful thought as to organization.
  • I really am not sure what this whoile sentence means or which years it refers to In 2007, the economy of Malaysia was the 3rd largest economy in Southeast Asia and 29th largest economy in the world by purchasing power parity with gross domestic product for 2008 of $222 billion,[123] with a growth rate of 5% to 7% since 2007.[124]
  • Does the article really need two images of the Petronas Towers?
  • The figure at the top of this section is huge (spans the whole column) but adds nothing that is not already in the text. I owuld at least make it a much smaller table and perhaps remove it
  • MOS says not to start a sentence with numbers as in 0.8% reported having no religion, and the remaining 1.5% practised another religion or did not provide any information. There are several sentences with this problem throughout the article
  • WHat does this mean / why is this sentence here? The 1998 Commonwealth Games were the first time the torch relay went through more nations than just England and the host.[212] How is this related to Maylasia?
  • I am out of gas on this article - hope this helps
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Nikkimaria
  • Image captions should meet same standards for prose and verifiability as article text. Captions that aren't complete sentences shouldn't end in periods
  • File:Coat_of_arms_of_Malaysia.svg: FUR and licensing needs to be amended, as this isn't a logo
  • File:Location_Malaysia_ASEAN.svg: on what map or data source is this based?
  • WP:OVERLINK: don't link very common terms and don't link the same term multiple times, particularly not in close proximity
  • Did some copy-editing, feel free to revert. Suggest reading through the article looking for potential awkward or unclear phrases
  • Spell out "%" in article text
  • When was it taken by the Dutch?
  • Words like "sacking" and "rocked" are too colloquial - strive for an encyclopedic tone
  • Geography should appear earlier in the article, and you might consider making Flora and fauna a subsection of it
  • "The members of the 222-member" - repetitive phrasing, check for others
  • Overuse of "with + -ing" constructions
  • "While it improved the economic position of Bumiputras" - what is "it"?
  • ASEAN or the ASEAN? Bumiputras or bumiputras? Check for internal consistency
  • "Malaysia is made up of 13 states and 3 federal territories. These are divided between two regions, with 11 states and two federal territories on..." - why the variation in whether small numbers are spelled out?
  • Need more information on climate
  • "In 2010 the GDP per capita (PPP) was $414.400;&nbspbillion, the 3rd largest economy in ASEAN and 29th largest economy in the world."
  • Need more hyphens - see WP:HYPHEN. Also check dash use
  • Make sure you use the right word: for example, compulsory and compulsive are not the same thing
  • Make sure text is accessible to someone not familiar with Malaysian (or British) norms - for example, what is Year Six or Form Three?
  • Watch for overlap between sections. For example, you discuss life expectancy in both the main Demographics section and the Health care subsection
  • "It has been dominant in badminton, and the games were hosted in Kuala Lumpur in 1998" - these two clauses are not closely related, and shouldn't be in the same sentence
  • Citation formatting needs cleaning up. Make sure citations are formatted consistently and include all required information. Web citations need publishers and access dates, print citations and multi-page PDFs usually need page numbers, books need publishers and ISBNs where available.
  • Be consistent in whether you provide publisher locations
  • Publications should generally be italicized
  • FN 24: what kind of source is this?
  • Try to minimize your use of tertiary sources (like encyclopedias) and primary sources (like the constitution)
  • Make sure all sources are considered reliable. Nikkimaria (talk) 16:43, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Stephen Sondheim[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because he is the one of the most influencial musical theatre composers, and I'm curious what work this page needs.

Thank You, Phaeton23 (talk) 18:58, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

Tim riley comments
  • Lead
    • "his famous scores include … as well as the lyrics for…" Some confusion in construction here: his famous scores ipso facto don't include the lyrics for the shows he didn't compose.
    • "silver screen" – a bit florid for an encyclopaedia article, perhaps?
    • "He is also the only living composer with a quarterly journal published in his name" – I didn't spot a repetition of (or more to the point a citation for) this in the main article.
  • Early years
    • "Herbert, his father" – you've told us that already in the previous line
    • "While living in New York, Stephen Sondheim" – why add his given name here?
    • "Sondheim recalls … Sondheim said" – in consecutive sentences; avoid the repetition, or at least standardise on present/past tense
  • Career
    • "George School" – why repeat the blue link? (see WP:OVERLINK)
  • Broadway lyricist
    • Remove blue link from London (see WP:OVERLINK)
    • "with the new songs due in 2009" – 2009 happened some time ago: update needed
    • "stating they don't always fit" – contraction a touch informal for an encyclopaedia article, wouldn't you say?
    • "and that Bernstein’s co-lyricist" – not clear about this: do you mean Sondheim's co-lyricist? Did Bernstein write any of the lyrics?
    • "the lyrics for yet another show" – yet another after only one?
    • "Hammerstein" – remove otiose blue link
    • "Leonard Bernstein" – ditto
  • Collaborations with Hal Prince (1970–1981)
    • "Hal or Harold? Be consistent
    • "Since then" – since when?
    • "concept musical" – needs an explanation
    • "aficionados" – remove blue link to "fan" or use a less pretentious term
    • "ambiguity" – blue link needed?
    • "Company" – lose repeated blue link
    • "Further success was accorded" – citation needed for this sentence
    • "…his songs are frequently performed and recorded by cabaret artists and theatre singers in their solo careers." – and for this one
    • "17 performances and 40 previews" – why put the previews after the performances?
    • "Sondheim-Prince" – the MoS requires an en-dash rather than a hyphen here
    • "(Frank Sinatra and Carly Simon each recorded a different song from the show)." – citation needed
    • "a long-in-the-works musical comedy" – what does this mean? Unclear to an English reader.
  • Collaborations with James Lapine (1984–1994)
    • "after Merrily - until the" – en dash needed here
    • "It is one of only nine musicals to receive this prestigious award." – citation needed
    • "Sondheim-Lapine" – en dash needed
  • Conversation with Frank Rich
    • "The first four paragraphs could be rolled into one, to the advantage of the article
  • Unfinished/canceled works
    • "America - when" – en dash needed
    • Too many short, stubby paragraphs in this sub-section, several of which could be merged.
  • Honors and awards
    • "Jonathan Tunick" – this is his first mention in the whole article. Ought he not to be mentioned rather earlier?
  • Image: under WP rules you are perfectly entitled to upload a non-free image of Sondheim to put at the top of the article, with a suitable non-free-use rationale, and I think you ought to do so.
  • WP links: Please redirect the links for Alexander Hanson, Ben Wright, Reds, Road show, and Score from disambiguation pages to the pages to which you wish the reader to be directed. (Do you need a link for the last at all, I wonder?)

That's all I can spot at the moment. I'll try to make time for another read-through later. Hope these few minor comments help. Tim riley (talk) 11:37, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Thank you for combing through this entire article. Hopefully it was educationally rewarding.
    • Lead
      • "his famous scores include … as well as the lyrics for…" Some confusion in construction here: his famous scores ipso facto don't include the lyrics for the shows he didn't compose. <-- I'm confused by your wording, but scores usually refer to music only. Gypsy and West Side Story are considered classics, so that is why they would be mentioned.
      • "Sondheim recalls … Sondheim said" – in consecutive sentences; avoid the repetition, or at least standardise on present/past tense <-- could not find this.
    • Broadway lyricist
      • "and that Bernstein’s co-lyricist" – not clear about this: do you mean Sondheim's co-lyricist? Did Bernstein write any of the lyrics? <-- West Side Story (music by Bernstein and lyrics by Sondheim), but Bernstein's name was no longer listed as a co-lyricist during tryouts because Sondheim had done so much uncredited work on the musical score.
    • Collaborations with Hal Prince (1970–1981)
      • "Hal or Harold? Be consistent <-- His official birth name is Harold, but he referred to Hal just about everywhere I have seen
    • Unfinished/canceled works
      • Too many short, stubby paragraphs in this sub-section, several of which could be merged. <-- I personally love this section, as I am a huge fan of Sondheim and I am curious to see what things he might have written or been offered. The reason most of the are so short is because a lot of them never got very far.
    • Honors and awards
      • "Jonathan Tunick" – this is his first mention in the whole article. Ought he not to be mentioned rather earlier <-- he was the orchestrator/musical director and I have not read much of his contributions or relationship with Sondheim.
    • Image: under WP rules you are perfectly entitled to upload a non-free image of Sondheim to put at the top of the article, with a suitable non-free-use rationale, and I think you ought to do so. <-- if you could go step by step with me on this, mostly which media form for the photo do I choose.

Thank you very much again, and I have made most of the changes you suggested. :) Phaeton23 (talk) 18:50, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Advance Wars[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…I think the development and reception sections are written very well, with working citations and sufficient references, and the article should be at least a C-Class by now.

Thanks, SCB '92 (talk) 07:24, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

  • Plot needs expansion. Gameplay needs sourcing and maybe rewriting. Development is very weird with two HUGE paragraphs. You should make sure that the sources really cover it all. If it does, add some wikilinks to make it look better. Reception is likely lacking. Blake (Talk·Edits) 03:16, 28 June 2011 (UTC)
    • I found an interview, so I threw it up in the Development section. The long unwieldy paragraphs are all sourced by the single source. - New Age Retro Hippie (talk) (contributions) 05:59, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Wizardman:

  • I'm trying to figure out what style of English this is. I would assume this would be in American English, but I see both that and British English; make sure that's fixed.
  • Only one game screenshot is really necessary, any more would violate non-free criteria.
  • The gameplay section is unsourced. IIRC, the instruction manual can be cited for all that.
  • Of course, citation needed tags have to be addressed.
  • Bare URLs have to be fleshed out; for references, have titles, publishers, dates, accessdates, etc.
  • The plot and development sections need to be wikified.
  • Blake's concerns are definitely worth addressing.
  • Lastly, keep an eye on some current video game FAs to get an idea of how this can be better structured.

Those are basic things to get you started. Here are some specifics as well:

  • "The Head CO of the Orange Star army" What does CO stand for? I assume commanding officer, and if that's the case that should be noted as ".. Commanding Officer (CO).." (I see in a later section you do in fact have this; move it up to the plot section so we know from the get go)
  • There are several quotes in the development section that are uncited.
  • The reception section varies between present and past tense. (i.e. "Electric Playground called the game" vs "Allgame states"; modify to stated)
  • The article as a whole isn't badly written, but it could use some prose fine-tuning once the other issues are fixed.
  • The lead needs some fine-tuning as well; add a bit about the development, as it's mostly release and reception right now.

C-class sounds about right for this article. It has some good points in it, such as the reception section being well-referenced and the plot section being relatively easy to understand for someone who has not played the game, but improvement will definitely be needed on its path to GA/FA. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 22:06, 6 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Ok, I've done some editing: I changed many words to American English, eg. favorite, colors; i resolved the citation needed tags; i fleshed out the urls, mostly on the reception section; i guess I wikified the plot and development sections; i fixed the "CO" uses; i cited the quotes in the development section; the tense in the reception section is fixed at past; i hope i fine-tuned it; i put some samples of the development section into the lead; and i'm sure i made the article consists of prose

the only problems are that i really don't know which screenshot to get rid of: the screenshot of the gameplay, or the action when the units are attacking each other; and also the big problem of me not having the game manual for the game to cite sources for the gameplay sectionSCB '92 (talk) 22:02, 7 July 2011 (UTC)

Dennis Elwell (astrologer)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… although not a long article it has been extensively added to by editors since the beginning of June. Through a request for intercession I eventually major copyedited and restructured the whole article to alleviate some contention that surrounded it. I would like a review of my major edit (although it has been added to by others in minor fashion since) and the article as it stands now, regarding all aspects, particularly sources. I understand this subject might not quite fit under this particular review section, but it is difficult for me to know where astrology does fit. Thanks, Acabashi (talk) 17:09, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Comment: The article is insufficiently developed to warrant a full peer review which, as WP:PR makes clear, "is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work...". The same page states that articles for PR "must be free of major cleanup banners". I would suggest that you give attention to the lead, which ought to be a summary of the whole article rather than an introduction to Elwell. You should also develop the text so that the article becomes less a series of lists. You need to format your online references more consistently; each such reference needs minimally a title, publisher and retrieval date. There is a disambiguation link on Kilroy. Brianboulton (talk) 23:04, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

List of table tennis players[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because my idea is to propose it soon as Featured List. In particular, I would know if you agree in the criteria I have defined to be included in the list. I'am planning to extend the list to players with medals in African, Oceanina and Latin/North American Championships. But this will require a big effort. Let me know your idea.

Thanks, Cialo (talk) 15:45, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by H1nkles

  • Good job on this list, I like the addition of pictures of gold medal winners. I made a minor word order change but other than that I've left the list as is.
  • In the lead there are two sentence in smaller font. Why is that? It doesn't seem necessary. Especially the sentence about the main reference for this list.
You are right. I have removed small fonts.
  • Why are the five events the only ones considered? What is the basis for this decision? It may be wise to add rationale to the lead so that people don't think it was just an arbitrary decision.
The final target is to include the three major world competitions (olympics, world championships and world cup), and the continental champioships of each continent. However, till now, only asian and european champioships have been considered since those continents have the major tradition in table tennis. I have created a section listing the "considered competitions" where to explain this point.
I'm not sure it's legitimate to eliminate other continental championships simply because they don't have a "major tradition in table tennis". That seems a bit subjective to me. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 19:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
I fully agree with you. So... I'll extend the list, however this is a big effort and will require some time.

--Cialo (talk) 07:32, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

  • I'm not sure if citing a search page is sufficient. I'm not as familiar with the mindset of the delegates at FLC as I am with the FAC process so it may be fine but it's something to consider.
what is FLC ?
FLC is Featured List Candidates - it's the page used to determine whether a list should be a featured list. If you have more questions please at least ping me on my talk page so that I can answer them. I just happened to be reviewing my review and saw your question, I don't watch review pages and wouldn't normally get your question. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 19:33, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Some of the entries are a name others specify what they won. You may want to specify what each person acheived even if it wasn't a gold medal.
  • The introduction says, "The players are listed with their achievements in the single event of the considered competitions." Some of the players don't have their achievements listed. Why? Does "single event" mean one player vs. another player (as opposed to a doubles event)? If so why specify only single event why not include the achievements of those who won in a doubles event? Perhaps I'm just confused.
It is to keep the list as clean as possible. Achievement in double and team events are available in the wikipage of each player.
  • When talking about Olympic medals traditionally it is refered to as Olympic gold medal rather than gold Olympic medal.
ok... I'll change it
  • Picture captions usually do not have punctuation.
since here we have pictures of players I guess using ":" after the name is acceptable
  • Some of your images have a copyright tag that allows its use as long as the author is given credit, but the author is not given credit. I recommend either trying to find the author or a free-use image of the subject or removing the image. You can leave it as is and take your chances at FLC but this may come up as an issue.
this is a quite stressing point... I'll check it asap
  • Why do some players have multiple flags next to their names? This should be explained in the introduction.
explained in the new section "other icluded information"
  • References should have as a minimum the title, publisher and accessdate. You should add the publisher and accessdate for each ref.
ok... I'll change it
  • Overall it's a tidy list. I hope this review has been helpful in giving you some feedback and pointing you in the right direction. If you have any questions please contact me on my talk page as I do not watch review pages. Best of luck to you and please consider reviewing an article/list here or at WP:GAC. There is always a need for more reviewers. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 17:17, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your comments... I found it very useful and I'll update the list following your suggestios. --Cialo (talk) 09:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Passengers of the RMS Titanic[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to re-submit it for a featured article, and because I've worked on it for several years. I've finally completed all three lists, fixed errors in the text, adding the proper locations and linked/unlinked where necessary. After noticing that it failed two previous featured article attempts, I've spent the last couple days expanding the article, adding more sources and giving more information about the passengers, rather than this just being an article with passenger lists. I'd really like some critiquing and constructive criticism on what can be fixed and where wording may be choppy or difficult to understand, or really anything else that would help the article be up to standard. I'm particularly concerned about the opening heading of the article, I think it needs to be reworded but I'm not sure where to start with that.

Thanks, Morhange (talk) 09:03, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

By North8000 One small suggestion.. I think that you indicated the ticket price only for the middle class passengers. That was a nice piece of info, would be nice to see it on all three classes. Sincerely, North8000 (talk) 11:14, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by H1nkles

I see that you want to take this article to FAC, which is a noble endeavor. I would suggest running it through GAC as an intermediary step. A lot of good can come from the GA review. I'll make suggestions to move the article forward. I'm not sure if it is ready for the very nitpicky review necessary to pass FAC yet. If so I'll get my fine tooth comb out, if not then I'll give broad strokes and areas for improvement.

One thing I'm a little confused about: in your intro you talk about it failing at FAC twice yet when I look at the archives it says it failed at FLC. Are you wanting this to be reviewed as a list or an article? The prose is quite long to be a list. FLC and FAC are very different though the delegates will review the writing in a similar light. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 04:34, 7 July 2011 (UTC)


  • You indicate that there were over 1,300 men, women and children on the Titanic, and in the next sentence over 1,500 people died when it sunk. Usually the first number would be higher than the second number. I think in an article about the passengers of the Titanic you should give the exact number (if it exists) in the lead.
  • Military personnel were considered the wealthiest passengers? I'm surprised by that. Perhaps high-ranking military officers but military personnel in general don't strike me as being particularly wealthy.
  • See WP:LINK, usually country names do not need to be linked.
  • See WP:LEAD. The lead is a summary of the entire article. This lead should be beefed up to include every subject covered in the body of the article. When I finish the lead I should have a skeletal outline of the article in my head.


  • I made a few copy edits to the first paragraph in the First class section. I thorough copy edit is needed. Some things to keep in mind:
  • Remove superfluous words. Don't say in 5 words what you can say in 3. This is a big sticking point for FAC delegates.
Example: "...who were returning to the United States so their child could be born there." Change to "...who were returning to the United States for the birth of their child." One less word but it also eliminates the "there" at the end of the sentence, which is important given that the next sentence starts with another "There". It's awkward to have two "theres" in a row.
Another example: "...was the last remaining survivor of the Titanic disaster." I removed "remaining". Isn't necessary. This is nitpicky but the article will fail at FAC for these "little" things.
  • Watch tense and number agreement - if the subject of the sentence in singular then this should be reflected throughout the sentence.
  • Mind peacock words. These are words like "extraordinary". Not really necessary in an encyclopedia article.
  • Remove adverbs like "generally" and "usually" as these are unnecessary.
  • Look at WP:ACCESS for thoughts on image placement. It's usually bad form to have images side by side (Astor and Brown pics are example). This messes with the formatting of the article and creates a large blank space between paragraphs. Consider moving one of the pictures down into another section.
  • I'm not sure you need to list all of the various luminaries that traveled on this ship in this section. It gets a little tedious especially since they are all listed in the embedded lists later on. Some of the more notable people like Astor and Brown and Guggenheim are fine but perhaps some of the others could be removed and the section streamlined a bit.
  • You may want to include the detail that the ship was owned/operated by the White Star Line. This is sort of assumed in the writing and for the novice it may be a good piece of information to add in the lead.
  • Again good pictures in both second and third class sections, their placement may violate WP:ACCESS so I would check that before nominating at FAC.
  • The first and second class passengers were homogeneous? How so?
  • I like the personal stories of some of the passengers (I'm into the second class section) but again at some point I question what the purpose is?
  • You'll want to find a source for Milvina Dean being the last survivor of the Titanic to die.
  • Terms like "a far cry" are not very formal and usually frowned upon at FAC.
  • "The single men and women were separated, women in the stern, the men in the bow, usually in four berth rooms that were often shared with strangers, while families were placed in central cabins that had room for up to eight people." End the sentence after "strangers" and start a new one with Families. This is a separate subject and will eliminate the run-on sentence that is its current state.
  • "There were even two public bathtubs provided (one for the women, one for the men) so the passengers could wash themselves." "Even" = unnecessary word. Readers should know what the bathtubs were used for.
  • "Despite the separations, the passengers often gathered in the third class common room (complete with a piano) where they could play chess or cards, or the poop deck, where they could enjoy the fresh sea air." Unnecessary info. Watch parenthetic references, these are frowned upon at FAC. Try to include them in the writing without the parentheses. Change the first "or" to an "and", it reads better given the following "or the poop deck".
  • "Ship's regulations were designed to separate third class passengers from the first and second class cabins." Very wordy sentence, consider rewriting, "Third class passengers were separated from the rest of the ship by grilles. More to come. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 23:54, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks, this helps a lot! Will definitely be going through the article a little later tonight and fixing some of the things you suggested! Morhange (talk) 18:03, 7 July 2011 (UTC)
Oh, and the previous version of the article was just the passenger list, but if I remember correctly, someone mentioned that lists aren't generally featured articles, so I figured I would expand the page to a full article. Morhange (talk) 04:39, 8 July 2011 (UTC)
I don't have time with computer access at the moment to finish up the review properly, but I will wrap it up on the 11th. Sorry for the delay. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 15:46, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Survivors and victims

  • The first paragraph is unsourced this should be remedied.
  • "At 2:20 am, it also sank." This little sentence is unclear. What also sank? The Titanic? If so that is not easily understood from the context.
  • "By 8:30 am, she picked up the last lifeboat with survivors and left the area at 08:50..." "She" being the Carpathia? I would change it to "The crew", it's a little more clear that way. Also I would move ref 20 to the end of the sentence. No need to have it in the middle of a sentence see WP:INCITE for more info on this.
  • I'm reading the paragraph about the decision to preserve first-class passengers and bury the rest. At the beginning of the para the captain (Larnder) and the undertakers decide to preserve the first-class passengers. Later in the para it says that there were complaints about this decision made by the families and the undertakers. Weren't the undertakers part of the decision in the first place? This is confusing.
  • "Relatives from across North America came to identify and claim the bodies of their relatives." We know who they were claiming.
  • Refs in the sentence about the number of unclaimed bodies buried in cemetaries should be at the end of the sentence not in the middle.

Passenger list

  • Why are the names of survivors italicized when the color of their entry denotes whether they survived or not? Seems duplicative and unnecessary unless you are specifying survivors who died enroute on the Carpathia, in which case this should be specified in the introductory paragraph in this section.


  • The key to references is consistency. Make sure all refs are the same with at least the title, publisher and accessdates.
  • Your refs aren't consistent and formatting issues abound. See the following examples (not exhaustive list though)
  • Ref 5, appears to be a magazine article, no work, publisher, date, volume, accessdate etc.
  • Ref 10, first appearance of Encyclopedia Titanica, Refs 25-27 also references Encyclopedia Titanica but in a different format.
  • Ref 11, book refs should have publisher location
  • Ref 14 has a "{" at the beginning and a "[" at the end.
  • Try to use templates like {{cite web}} and {{cite book}} to help with consistency.
  • Usually notes like refs 40-42 should be listed under a notes section using foot notes. Listing them in references gives the impression in the article that the ref anchor is an actual reference when it is not. This can be misleading.
  • Is there a single reference for the passenger lists? I'm not seeing one and this would be a vital thing to add to the article. Perhaps I just missed it.


  • The article is making progress from its original state. I've listed some concerns both nit picky and big picture. Before moving this article to FAC I would have it reviewed at GAC. You should also make sure and decide if this is going to be a list or an article. If you want to keep it as a list then remove some of the prose.
  • The article should be better referenced in some locations. This is one area of concern.
  • The lead needs to be improved.
  • Remove the superfluous language and make sure the pictures are MOS-compliant.
  • You're off to a good start and I hope this review helps you move in the right direction. If you have specific questions please contact me on my talk page as I do not watch review pages. Best of luck to you. H1nkles (talk) citius altius fortius 16:51, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks much. I've just finished my summer classes & exams so now I can go through your review and make the necessary corrections. I was planning to go for the Good article status before Featured, so hopefully this will help out with getting it promoted there first, then I'll work on improving it further for featured. My only conflicting thought is with having to removing some of pictures, since I think they're good images of passengers and I can't necessarily fit them into the lists but I'm not sure where else to put them--perhaps a link to the commons where one can find other related images instead. At any rate, thank you for all your help! Morhange (talk) 16:24, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

King Charles Spaniel[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review as I feel the level of information avaliable places it between the average Good Article (which it currently is graded as) and the only dog breed Featured Article at Beagle. Having unsuccessfully nominated articles twice now for FA, I'm seeking advice on what needs to be done before I take it there.

Thanks, Miyagawa (talk) 11:57, 28 June 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: A very informative article which made interesting reading. The main problem is with the prose; I have identified some of the points which need improving and made some suggestions, but if it is possible I would advise a full copyedit from another editor.

  • Opening of the article is a bit clunky, with "spaniel" occuring eightb times in the first two lines. I'm not sure that all the bolding is within MOS guidelines, or is necessary.
  • "...seen in Europe in Italy" - odd phrasing; why not just "in Italy"?
  • "in order to" is unnecessarily wordy and can be shortened to "to" (this occurs a couple more times in the main text).
  • Nickname "Charlie" needs to be specified before use
  • "Historically they..." As this is a new paragraph, "they" needs to be specified. There should be a comma after "Historically"
  • I'd be a bit more general than "Today...", for example "In the modern era..." or something similar
  • "It is thought that..." You need to specify by whom
  • This opening sentence is too long, too much information crammed in, and in need of some rephrasing. Suggest "...primarily in Japan, where the dogs were often given as presents to European royalty." Full stop after royalty, then "They may share..." etc
  • "red and white type" needs to be "types" to be consistent with the verb
  • "it was more pointed..." - not clear whethet "it" refers to head or nose.
  • "During" is one of the words which tends to be overused. I recommend that when you can avoid it, do. Thus: "The earliest recorded appearance of a toy spaniel in England in the period prior to Charles II..." And, of course, Charles II was a man, not a period, so perhaps "prior to the reign of Charles II"
  • I query the date of the Philip and Mary painting, given as 1552. Mary wasn't queen until July 1553; and the couple did not meet until 1554. Image file says 1558 which is probably correct.
  • Since John Caius was English, what language was his book written in, that required translation? The title Of Englishe Dogges suggests English (Oh, I see now it was Latin. Perhaps mention that earlier, though it's a very small point)
  • The sudden jump to Perry in the mid-19th century, at the end of this section, is strange, since you have a later section dealing with the 19C.
Charles II and the 17th century
  • "these dogs" - New section, you need to specify.
  • This first paragraph needs a little polishing. As well as "these dogs" the phrase "these types of dogs" occurs twicw in quick succession
  • Can you explain "tricolor" in the context of this paragraph?
  • "...each family having its favourite"? That sounds as though every family in Europe possessed a spaniel.
  • "One example of an entry in his diary regarding these dogs is from 1 September 1666..." Much to longwinded; could easily be "His diary entry for 1 September 1666, concerning a council meeting, reads:" etc.
  • Delete second "that" from final sentence of section.
18th and 19th centuries
  • The explanation of how Blenheim spaniels got their name needs to precede discussion of the breed
  • "goes on to explain" is verbose; "explains" will do just as well
  • "the toy spaniels are able to hunt" should be "toy spaniels are able to hunt"
  • Again the pronoun "they" at the start of a paragraph.
  • Paragraphs are normlly held together by some overall theme. The sentence dealing with the cost of a dog in 1860 and the current equivalent value looks oddly placed, having no connection with the other information in the paragraph.
  • The "poisoning" story doesn't really fit in to a factual, encyclopedic article and adds nothing to our knowledge of these dogs. I recommend you omit this.
  • If you are giving current values for the price paid in 1860, why not the same for Bismarck's $1,000?
Conformation showing and the 20th century
  • "tricolour" in first line; elsewhere in the article you have "tricolor". Consistency required - my own view is that in an article about an English breed of dog, English spelling should be used (you already appear to be using English dmy date formats). There are other Americanisms such as "traveled".
  • What does "no stop" mean?
  • Need to harmonise between "it" and "they"
  • "Although tolerant of and able bond well with children..." Word missing

I hope you will find these comments helpful. As I am not able to watch individual peer reviews, please contact my talkpage if you have queries arising from this review. Brianboulton (talk) 22:31, 9 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review, I appreciate it. Miyagawa (talk) 11:59, 18 July 2011 (UTC)

Messiah (Handel)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.

Handel's Messiah is one of the most popular and most frequently performed works in the English choral tradition, and it deserves the best possible article. For the past few weeks users Tim riley, Gerda Arendt and I have been trying to achieve this; the article has been extensively overhauled and expanded, and is now ready for some community input. Please be gracious but unsparing in your comments, as we want to improve the article in every way we can. Thanks. Brianboulton (talk) 10:38, 12 July 2011 (UTC)

Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Wikipedia:Peer review/Messiah (Handel)/archive1.

Dreaming of You (album)[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the last one did not received a review because I had too many open. I would like this article to be a "FA" status

Thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 20:34, 27 June 2011 (UTC)

{{doing}} Ruhrfisch ><>°° 12:36, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

  • One circular redirect (need to remove the link to the song, since it is just a redirect to this article). See here
  • Notes Will get on it, once your review has been done. Thanks, AJona1992 (talk) 15:48, 11 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks as always for your work on Selena related articles. Here are some suggestions for improvement - I think this article still has a long way to go before it would stand a chance at FAC.

  • At FAC, all of the i's have to be dotted and all of the t's have to be crossed. Let's look at the first sentence of the the lead to start. It is:
    Dreaming of You is the sixth and final studio album and second posthumous album by Mexican American Tejano pop singer Selena, released on July 18, 1995, by EMI Records and EMI Latin.
  • According to WP:LEAD the lead is a summary of the whole article and nothing should be in the lead only. However, I cannot find any statements in the body of the article that say this was her sixth and final studio album, or that it was her second posthumous album. I do note that there is the {{Selena}} template at the bottom, but it shows this is her fifth (not sixth) studio album from a major label (and her 12th if her 7 independent studio albums are counted). The template also lists an upcoming untitled Selena studio album, so is it even her "last" such album?
  • Please also note that as a summary the lead does not need to have references except for direct quotations and as cites for extraordinary claims (as everything in the lead should be in the body of the article and cited there). It is OK to have refs in the lead, just not required in most cases.
  • Second sentence of the lead is the album's re-release. My preference would be to put the most important things in the first paragraph of the lead and to also keep the lead somewhat chronological - this does not seem that important to me (why have it in the first paragraph at all) and chronologically it seems like it would be a better fit much latyer in the lead.
  • Third sentence is Dreaming of You is known as a double album with previously unreleased English and Spanish language tracks and previously released tracks that were given a Caribbean remix with dance hall and reggae.[1] First, "is known as" makes no sense - the album is either a double album or it isn't (and I would link double album). Second, and I noted this in the earlier PR I did, the bit about dance hall and reggae is just awkward at the end of the sentence (yes, I know it was changed slightly from "like dance hall and reggae" before to "with dance hall and reggae now, but it is still not grammatical. FAs need a professional level of ENglish - see WP:WIAFA 1a.
  • I still do not understand this Dreaming of You made the second-highest chart debut after Michael Jackson's HIStory: Past, Present and Future, Book I.[2][3] Since they both debuted at number one, how can one be higher than the other? This needs to be clarified and reworded.
  • The second and third paragraphs of the lead just seem to be a lot of it did really well when it was released and set this record and this other very slightly different record and this third record, and it sold this much in this time period and this much in a different period and and and... Agh. Pick the best sales stats and give those. Say that sales may have been underestimated because of the kinds of stores it was sold in. Pick the best one or two records and say those - again the lead is supposed to be an inviting and accessible overview of the whole article - this is too much detail. Were she alive, even Selena might get bored reading these paragraphs (was it also the top selling album for artists with only e and a in their one word names? ;-) )
  • At the same time, the lead does not mention a lot of headers from table of contents. I saw nothing on the planned tour, or the artwork, or composition, to name a few points that should be in the lead.
  • My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
Production and development
  • The article needs to tell its story in a clear and easy to follow manner, especially for people who do not already know a lot (or even a little) about Selena and her career. I always try to keep Providing context to the reader (PCR) in mind when writing. Although I know a lot about a topic (having done the research), I have to assume the average reader will know little or nothing about the topic.
  • I think the story in the beginning of this section is that Selena was a Spanish language artist who wanted to record in English as well. All seven of her indie label albums had been in Spanish and when she signed with EMI, they wanted her to keep making Spanish records. She however wanted to cross-over and record in English. That said, I think the article needs to focus clearly on this album and the history of its development. I fail to see how knowing what festical Selena was singing at when she was signed to EMI helps provide context to the reader, nor am I clear why we have to know what Behar used to do before he was able to sign her for EMI. Plus I really do not understand how Behar, who is described as head of Sony stuff, is able to sign her for EMI (which as far as I know is not Sony). Was he really head of both a Sony branch and an EMI branch at the same time??
  • Lots of problem sentences, let's look at one here: Behar immediately wanted to sign Selena to Capitol/EMI that same year, while Sony Music Latin was offering double the amount to Abraham Quintanilla Jr, for Selena.[8] Using both "immediately" and "that same year" is needlessly repetitive - only one needs to be in the sentence (I vote for immediately). Second, and more importantly, the article does not identify who Abraham is and needs to do so. I know from repeated exposure that he is Selena's father and manager, but a casual reader will not and should nbot have to click on a link to find that out.
  • Give the year (and month) of release in Following the release of Amor Prohibido, she stated ...
  • The article uses a block quote here but the MOS says to use that when there are about 4 or more lines of text in the block quote - here it is less than 1 full line on my monitor.
  • Huh??? moment - the story is set in 1994, after the reelease of Amor Prohibido, when Selena cannot get a deal to do an English language record despite her successes. Then this sentence appears Selena was signed, less than twenty-four hours in Los Angeles, with SBK Records, a sub-division of EMI Group, in November 1993[12] to begin recording her first major English language album. First it has the nonsense phrase "less than 24 hrs in LA" (assume this means she was signed less than a day after she arrived there or something similar, but it is unclear now what it means). More importantly, it is the year before everything else that has been going on in the paragraph. Why was she so worried in 1994 when she was isgned in 1993 to do an English record? Seems to at least contradict itself.
  • I think this sectionm needs to do a better job of explaining exactly what songs were finished before Selena's tragic death, which were finished after her death, and which were remixes of exisiting songs used to finish the album. I think the Amy Grant song that was never finished could also be added - giving the material a structure and telling a story would help.
  • The song Only Love is not even included on this albuim, so it is difficult to see how a fair use sample of it can be included in this article.
General comments
  • Watch WP:Overlinking - link once in the lead and once in the body (first time for each) at most (plus links in refs, captions, infobox)
  • Similarly avoid linking common terms that add little to the reader's understanding - save links for important things for this article. Does the reader really need a link for "spoken word" to understand that?
  • The language is really rough in a lot of places. I do not have time to do a copyedit or even to point them all out. One thing to try is printing the article out and reading it out loud slowly - sometimes that lets you hear problems you miss just reading online.
  • Avoid needless repetition. Just in Produiction and development there are the following sentences
    • EMI relented and the recording sessions began.[8]
    • During late 1994, Selena began recording the first song for the album, "I Could Fall in Love".
    • Recording sessions for the album took place during 1994 to 1995 at several recording studios...
    • Selena recorded four songs by January 20, 1995, she began recording songs in late 1994.[16]
  • Similarly the track listings for the original album, Japanese edition, and 20 Years of Music edition are all identical for the first 13 tracks - does the article really need to repeat these 13 tracks three times? Why just add a sentence saying the Japanese edition had the same 13 first tracks plus a bonus 14th track and give info on that? or the 20 Years could just add that the spoken liner notes and video were added as bonus tracks (like the lead already does).
  • This may be a comprehensiveness issue, but it seems odd that according to the tables it did not chart in any other countries outside of the US (its gold status in Canada is mentioned)
  • Or Release history has two big tables, but the release dates are all the same, so each table could be reduced to one sentence saying something like the album was released on DATE in [list of countries with refs]
  • Make sure the sources used meet WP:RS. Are all the Amazons really reliable sources for release dates?
  • Refs need to be super consistent - just looking at the current refs why is Billboard sometimes italicized and sometimes not, sometimes wikilinked and sometimes not, sometimes given with its publisher and sometimes not? This is checked carefully at FAC.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 19:28, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for reviewing. Will get on all the issues shortly. AJona1992 (talk) 00:08, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Like a Prayer (song)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have developed this article from scratch, on one of the most revered and widely accepted songs of all time. I want reviewers to give their opinion on the overall structure, the alignments and of course, the bad boy, prose of the article. Be as brutal as you want with it, I want to eventually make it a Featured Article.

Another thing, no offense, but I don't want anybody from the music section articles of Wikipedia to come and review it. I want a completely different opinion.

Thanks, — Legolas (talk2me) 15:44, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Will look at it. I have never really read or written any of our pop (or other) music stuff at Wiki. Also, I don't mean to be "brutal". But I pretty much try to really get into stuff and give a lot of feedback. Think you will be getting a good outside (even outside Wiki) perspective. TCO (reviews needed) 18:39, 10 July 2011 (UTC)

Will be much appreciated TCO. Thanks a lot for taking the time to look at it. — Legolas (talk2me) 04:55, 11 July 2011 (UTC)
Nice work, Legolas. My thoughts on talk page. Main advice is to cut it a bit (will read better), especially in lead. I did not do a detailed prose edit (it is pretty decent and I like your writing style), but I did point out a few errors and it will still need that. Thanks for an interesting contribution!TCO (reviews needed) 21:51, 12 July 2011 (UTC)
Thak you TCO for the wonderful comments. I will surely take them into consideration and make changes accordingly. — Legolas (talk2me) 15:55, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Rogers Hornsby[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because, after passing GA, I saw that the primary writer had left, and decided to get this prepared for FAC. I've went through the article and made many different modifications. That being said, having a couple eyes on it from any non-baseball experts would be quite beneficial, as things that I see as entirely fine may be problematic for others.

Thanks, Wizardman Operation Big Bear 23:30, 4 July 2011 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Thanks for your work on this interesting article about a famous baseball player. The article generally reads well. Here are some specific suggestions as well as a couple of general comments.

  • I've seen a couple of sports articles founder at FAC because they mainly consisted of long sections that simply recounted statistics, year-by-year. I was reminded of this concern by the second paragraph of the lead, which in part says: "After the season, he was traded to the New York Giants. He spent one season with them before getting traded to the Boston Braves, and he spent one season with the Braves before getting traded to the Chicago Cubs. He played with the Cubs until they released him in 1932. He then re-signed with the Cardinals in 1933, but he was claimed off waivers by the St. Louis Browns during the season. He remained with the Browns until his final season in 1937." No doubt this is all true and grammatically correct, but it's a bit dull and repetitive. Anything you can do to compress these kinds of things and to add something lively to the mix will improve your chances at FAC. It's not that the article is generally dull; you break the stats up here and there with the brother's death by gunshot, the affair and divorce, the gambling, and other tidbits. That's the kind of stuff that will keep readers going. Add more, if you have any, to any places that seem to plod, and compress the plodding parts that can't be left out.


  • The existing lead doesn't include any summary of Hornsby's life outside of baseball even though the main text has quite a bit of personal information. I think some mention of the main points of "Early life" and "Personal Life" would help turn the lead into a true summary. If you need a fourth paragraph to do this, I think that would be fine since this is a long article.

Early life

  • "He took a job with Swift and Company team as a messenger boy when he was ten years old... " - Delete "team"? I think this means "messenger boy" for the company rather than the team, but I can't be sure.
  • "and he also served as a substitute infielder on their baseball team" - Maybe "its baseball team" rather than "their baseball team"?
  • "for several semipro teams" - Maybe "semi-professional" rather than "semipro"?

Minor league career

  • "The Scouts folded a third of the way through the season" - Maybe "went out of business" rather than "folded"?


  • "despite the fact that his only professional baseball experience was in Class D" - Maybe tighten to "although his only professional baseball experience had been in Class D"?
  • "Hornsby's status changed to Class 1 during the year... " - Change to "military draft status" for clarity?
  • "but the end of the war meant that Hornsby did not miss any playing time as a result of military service" - Maybe "but the war ended later that year, and Hornsby did not miss any playing time because of military service"?
  • "He started off slow behind the plate, but his average began improving by June" - Maybe "His batting average was low at the beginning of the season but improved by June"?


  • "the Baseball Writers Association of America finally made up for Ryder's decision" - Delete "finally"?
  • "Following the season, Hornsby was due for a new contract, and he demanded a three-year, $50,000 contract" - Recast to avoid repeating "contract"? Also, does this mean $50,000 per year or $50,000 total? It's pretty clear from context that it means "per year", but it wouldn't hurt to clarify.

New York Giants

  • "However, Hornsby's gambling problems... " - What gambling problems? This is interesting, and it might be worth adding more detail here (even though you add more later).

Later baseball career

  • "After two mediocre seasons with the club, the Reds announced that Hornsby would not return for 1954." - Misplaced modifier. Maybe "After Hornsby completed two mediocre seasons with the club, the Reds announced that he would not return for 1954"?


  • File:Rogers Hornsby 1928.jpg overlaps two sections and displaces a section head. The "Boston Braves" section is too short to accommodate an image, but it will probably fit elsewhere.
  • File:Rogers Hornsby.jpg has a dead link on its license page. It's the link to the original postcard, apparently. Fix this if you can.
  • File:1929 R315 Hornsby.PNG also seems to have a dead source link. The source site might just be temporarily down, but I could not connect when I tried.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 23:49, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks for the review; I'll add what is noted above, since I don't see anything I have questions on. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 04:27, 19 July 2011 (UTC)

Chester A. Arthur[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've just completed a total rewrite and want another editor's opinion on how it reads now.

Thanks, Coemgenus (talk) 14:22, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

Cmguy777's review[edit]

The Chester A. Arthur article has been extensively rewritten and thoroughly researched. My potential concerns include the following:

  • President Garfield's Sec. Hunt and President Arthur's Sec. Chandler need to share responsibility for reforming the Navy. According to Doenecke Sec. Hunt started the process of reform and Pres. Arthur appointed Sec. Chandler to administer and continue Naval reform.
  • Arthur's father needs to be mentioned as an abolitionist since he started an abolitionist group in New York. Arthur's move to the Kansas prairies in an attempt to protect abolitionists needs to be mentioned.
    • Added the father's abolitionism. CAA's trip to Kansas was already mentioned. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:23, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Arthur's lifestyle and fashion needs to be mentioned; particularly his remodeling of the White House to fit his egalitarian tastes.
    • I added some stuff about the Tiffany screen. I don't want too too much about his style -- his clothes, his hats, etc. -- because that level of detail goes a bit beyond an encyclopedia article, but the tiffany bit is certainly worth mentioning. --Coemgenus (talk) 14:40, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • These are my present concerns, so far. Cmguy777 (talk) 21:48, 22 July 2011 (UTC)
The changes look good.Cmguy777 (talk) 15:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Other concerns:

  • As far as Arthur practicing law in Kansas, was he in fact an abolitionst or how did he represent abolitionists?Cmguy777 (talk) 15:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • Historians don't really know what Arthur did in Kansas, probably a result of him having all his papers burned before his death. Reeves says CAA and Gardiner went west to "purchase land and perhaps settle permanently." (p. 16) He doesn't mention what they did there, only that they returned to NY after "about three or four months". (p. 18) Howe gives one sentence on the Kansas trip (p. 15) and describes only a failed law practice, not abolitionism. Karabell says CAA was anti-slavery (p. 13) but mentions no client or activity in Kansas. --Coemgenus (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • An issued concering the Star Routes is that President Garfield started the investigations and President Arthur continued the prosecutions. I believe that needs to be mentioned in the article. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • I clarified it a bit. --Coemgenus (talk) 16:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • In terms of foriegn policy I believe the War of the Pacific needs to be addressed. Was Sec. Blaine attempting to get America involved in the War? Why the peace commissions failed would be another issue that could be addressed. Cmguy777 (talk) 15:51, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • I expanded a bit. Blaine wasn't (I don't think) trying to get into the war, but CAA and Frelinghuysen feared that would be the result. --Coemgenus (talk) 16:37, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Would there be any objection to putting Arthur was a man of high fashion?
    • I added a bit about his style to the section that talks about his large income as Collector. --Coemgenus (talk) 16:44, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Concerns etc. I will try to wrap up my concerns with the article. Cmguy777 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Concerning Mormons Aurthur appointed a five man commission under the Edmunds Act. The Mormon polygamists were driven underground. If there was anything that got Arthur flustered I believe that would be polygamy in Utah. Maybe a sentence on how the Mormon's were driven from office by Arthur. Cmguy777 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • It already says that CAA signed the Edmunds Act "barring polygamists from public office". --Coemgenus (talk) 17:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Should the Indian Policy be a seperate section in terms of the Dawes Act and Sitting Bull? Cmguy777 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • I don't think there's enough there to fill a separate section. I already mention the Dawes Act, and CAA had little to do with Sitting Bull, who surrendered in July 1881. CAA's biographers don't mention him. --Coemgenus (talk) 17:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • One title segment states "Garfield's cabinet". I believe that sounds as if Pres. Garfield is still alive. Maybe something like "Arthur's initial cabinet". Cmguy777 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • That's awkward. How about "Cabinet" --Coemgenus (talk) 17:57, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Does Arthur need a legacy section at the end of the CAA article? Cmguy777 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Maybe there can be information on who acted as first Lady or possibly a photo of her if there is one. Cmguy777 (talk) 17:33, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
    • I added a sentence and a link about his sister, but there's no room for a pic without conflicting with the MOS. --Coemgenus (talk) 18:00, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
Thanks for your modifications, input, and edits Coemgenus over my concerns in the article. On the Mormon issue the Edmunds Act law is mentioned, however, I was refering to the result, Mormon's going underground to avoid being prosecuted. That is fine concerning the Legacy section. Just "Cabinet" sounds good in the Presidency section and would avoid any confusion. This article is on its way to GA and I hope can get to FA status. Cmguy777 (talk) 19:47, 23 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I was thinking that there is no connection in the article between Arthur's spoilsman conversion to his reform Presidency. That link, I believe is Pres. Garfield's assassination. Arthur was severly disturbed by Garfield being shot. Arthur was also disturbed that Guiteau connected his name with Garfield's assassination. "I am a Stalwart of Stalwarts, Arthur is President now." Maybe this can be mentioned in the article. Cmguy777 (talk) 02:04, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Wehwalt[edit]

Seems to be the month for Republican Presidents at peer review! Very worthy article.
  • Lede
The year of Arthur's appointment as Collector by Grant and removal by Hayes would probably be a good idea. I would also say "new" rather than "succeeding" president.
Some brief mention of how Arthur balanced the ticket would be a good idea in the lede.
Wasn't it as important as the enforcement of the Pendleton Act was that Arthur fought for it? I would include the word "advocacy" or similar before enforcement.
The White House. Do you really want to use this phrase given that it was not officially called the White House until the Teddy Roosevelt administration?
"federal funds excessively " excess federal funds
He failed to alleviate a surplus? Some might view surpluses as a good thing, especially right now, so a few words about what his opponents expected of him would be a good thing.
A few words about why he was not involved in the 1884 Presidential race?
I've made these fixes.--Coemgenus (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Early life
"fought for the Continental Army" in, not for. Fought for the Union, fought in the Union Army.
As Lower Canada only made up a part of what is today Quebec, I would say "in" present day Quebec.
To avoid possible reader confusion, I would name their first child. It took me two minutes of puzzled cogitation to ensure it wasn't Chester.
You might want to explain why Arthur would have been ineligible (actually, might), with the Natural Born Citizen clause and the 12th Amendment. I guess this paragraph is OK here, though it is a bit awkward.
How did Arthur pursue an education in the law prior to his enrollment in law school? On his own? Very Lincolnesque. You might want to insert this as a pipe, read law?
I've made these fixes. I may move that section about his eligibility. I wasn't sure that was the spot, either. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:39, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Early career
I would mention that Jay was the grandson of the chief justice, just to avoid confusion.
Can you mention anything, specifically, of what Arthur did in Lemmon? Seems a contradition to Dred Scott to me!
"after being she was denied a seat". Ahem. You might also want to mention what race she was.
I take it he returned to the same law firm after finding bleeding Kansas too hot?
Why was Arthur appointed to the governor's military staff? I see no indication of military interest on his part prior to then. Was it a patronage thing?
" faced with raising" "faced with the task of raising"
Why is quartermaster general capitalized and inspector general not?
When was he elected colonel?
Was the visit to Fredericksburg during the Peninsula campaign?
" figuring highly" Rephrase. Also throw in a pipe to Second inauguration of Abraham Lincoln.
Fixed these. The sources don't say what CAA did in Lemmon, only that he was involved in some way. He was the junior man in the office, and there were several firms involved, so probably not much. There's no date on his colonelcy in the source, only "early in the war", which I put. Probably 1861, but I can't prove that. As to capitalization, I don't pretend to understand WP:job titles, but I tried to standardize them, at least. --Coemgenus (talk) 21:57, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • New York politician
Any word on where Arthur stood on Reconstruction?
You might want to mention that Seward continued in office under President Johnson as a means of noting the change at the top. Some mention of Lincoln's assassination wouldn't hurt either.
You mention Conkling without any description, and then suddenly we have "Conkling's machine." It seems to me a little information is missing.
Delink Seymour, you just mentioned him 3 paragraphs previously.
You should specify if you mean Seymour carried NY City or NY State. Or both. It's confusing.
"Arthur's salary was $6,500". This sentence needs to be split somewhere.
"That same year," Strike "same" (perhaps "In that year"?) In any event, somewhere in that sentence should be a pipe to United States presidential election, 1872.
Was the Collector appointed for a term of years, or was it at the pleasure of the President (subject of course to the Tenure of Office Act)?
If this is the same John Jay as before, some mention of the connection should surely be made.
You are inconsistent "Custom House" "Custom house". I'd do a search to ensure consistency.
You should mention the Tenure of Office Act if it is why Hayes had to do these convoluted firings. I recall that it is.
" the Republican ticket" It's insufficiently clear that you refer to the Governorship and other statewide offices.
Fixed these. As to Reconstruction, CAA's biographers have little idea of his political views after he joined Conkling's machine, partly as a result of CAA having burned his papers, partly because the machine men had few principles except re-election. --Coemgenus (talk) 22:21, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Election of 1880
You might want to mention that Arthur's electioneering conduct was not unusual as candidates did not do a lot of what we would recognize as campaigning today.
Done. --Coemgenus (talk) 22:24, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Vice Presidency
"to be Secretary of State." better, "as Secretary of State".
"Indiana" Some context would be helpful here. Was this a pivotal state in the way Florida was in 2000 and Illinois in 1960 and 1968?
"fairly estranged " Perhaps just "estranged".
"no remaining duties" I would strike the word "remaining".
Were the Senators reelected?
Guiteau: You only say in a rather convoluted way that Guiteau was a disappointed office seeker who thought in his crazed way that if he got rid of Garfield, Arthur would appoint him to office. I'd make it clear here and now and later clean up the reference to Guiteau as a "spoilsman". Say then that the assassination gave a burst of life to the legislation. There's no question about it, so why make it murky? It's one thing for (was it Grant?) to joke that when he appointed anyone to office he created fifteen enemies and one ingrate, but when you start losing Presidents to that madness, it's time to do something (not that the Pendleton Act helped THAT much in that department, but at least they stopped killing Presidents over it).
Fixed these. I had treid to avoid the phrase "disappointed office-seeker," but I guess there's no help for it.  :) --Coemgenus (talk) 22:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Presidency
Moving into the White House. Again, a mention it was then officially known as the Executive Mansion would not be astray. Also did he need to allow time for Mrs. Garfield to move out? Also, Arthur had two adolescent children while in the White House. Is there anything to be said about the family life? Who cared for them? Was there public interest in them?
"when they did so" I think Congress is more usually an "it" per standard US practice.
" for the rest of Arthur's term." I would say "entirety". Also, at the start of the sentence, I would substitute for the opening phrase, "Of the Cabinet members Arthur had inherited from Garfield". That way, the picky reader need not wonder if there were any Garfield appointees which were not original, you get the idea.
Made these fixes. Not sure about Mrs. Garfield, but I'll give the sources another look. --Coemgenus (talk) 10:23, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Civil Service Reform
I would start out with the facts of the Star Route investigation, and THEN say that there was concern that Arthur would not continue it.
I'm betting that Brady was "Second Assistant Postmaster General" (caps when used as a title, please).
"Garfield's Attorney General, MacVeagh," As you just mentioned him, I would shorten to "MacVeagh".
"knew of the fraud". This is only significant if his knowledge was illicit, in which case you need to make that clearer.
Note: During the election of 1880, Stephen W. Dorsey, later indicted in the scandal, had donated money with Arthur's knowledge to the campaign. The question is whether Arthur knew this money came illicitly from the Star Route profiteering. Coemgenus has pointed out that Arthur burned his papers before he died. Why did Arthur burn his private papers? Maybe there were things that Arthur did not want posterity to know. In other words, I do not think that it can be proved Arthur had illicit knowledge in the Star Route frauds without a paper trail. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Then I would say something along the lines that his possible involvement can't be ascertained because of the burning, if you can find a source for same!--Wehwalt (talk) 18:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Reeves may say something on the paper burning. I suppose the reader can make up their own minds why Arthur burned his personal papers. My guess is that he was attempting to keep any politically damaging information from being publisized. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
"set aside the verdicts" I assume you mean the guilty verdicts, so say so. Hung juries are not verdicts, necessarily, as it was that which they failed to reach. I guess there's an obvious question: Why would defendants bribe jurors to reach a guilty verdict?
Did Arthur really succeed in putting a stop to the frauds? Or was it Garfield? Or even Hayes? If Arthur inherited the scandal, the bad guys must already have been running for cover.
Note:I would say yes, both Garfield and Arthur stopped the scandal. The persons involved in the scandal were removed or resigned from office by both Garfield and Arthur prior to the trials. Both Garfield and Arthur were pro active in their pursuit to stop the profiteering, meaning the investigators and/or prosecutors had full support from both Garfield and Arthur. Garfield started the investigations and the Arthur Administration continued the investigations, got indictments, and two highly publisized trials. Hayes had stopped further awarding of the Star Route contracts in an effort of reform. The bad guys were doing everthing they could to escape a guilty verdict. Congress can be given credit for stopping the Star Route frauds, since there was a Congressional investigation in April, 1880. Even though Arthur and Dorsey were friends, Arthur showed no favortism or protectionism. Cmguy777 (talk) 01:35, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Fair enough.--Wehwalt (talk) 18:43, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Arthur made reforms in the postal service to ensure that the Postal profiteering would not return. Cmguy777 (talk) 20:10, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
Delete the word spoilsman wherever you've used it. It doesn't convey anything to a 21st century audience. "office seeker" or "successful office seeker" says enough.
I think you should devote about a paragraph somewhere around here describing the pre-1883 civil service and how politics could affect it.
" first annual Presidential address to Congress in 1881," His State of the Union address, right? I know they didn't do it in person then, but you need a pipe.
You are not consistent in "President" versus "president". Cycle through and check.
Your use of phrases like "unrepentant spoilsman" makes me fear you may be sticking too close to language in your sources.
Just hold on a minute. If Arthur signed the Pendleton Act in January 1883, then it wasn't the Congress elected in 1882 that did it, but the one elected in 1880. So it's the old Congress. You need to clear that one up. They did it during their lame duck session.
"Act" should be lower case per MOS.
"reformers doubted Arthur's commitment to reform." Rephrase to avoid double use of "reform". Perhaps "proponents"?
"customs service" Caps here, and a pipe to the name of the present federal agency if you haven't already done that in the article.
" 20 and 25%." I'm not sure that is the proper way of expressing this per MOS, please check.
"Congress quickly passed the bill again, overriding Arthur's veto." I have technical problems with this it would be tedious to explain. I suggest changing it to "Despite Arthur's objections, Congress overrode his veto, enacting the bill into law."
I think I've cleared up the star route thing. As to capitalization, again, WP:job titles confuses me because it's at odds with every style guide I've ever used. "Unrepentant spoilsman" is, sadly, my own words, which is why Ealdgyth accused me (accurately) of using Victorian language when Ruddy Hayes was up for FA the first time. I'll try to dumb it down for 21st-century readers. Good catch on the lame duck thing: I just flubbed that. The percentages section of the MOS is permissive, but I rephrased to avoid ambiguity. And I get your objection to the veto language: finding the right phrasing is tough, but I think your suggestion works. --Coemgenus (talk) 22:46, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Foreign affairs
"While Garfield was president", suggest "During the Garfield administration" with a pipe to Presidency of James Garfield. I think you should hang Presidency of Chester Arthur in a {{main}} template in this article, by the way.
"an existing reciprocity treaty with the Kingdom of Hawaii was allowed to expire" To allow for the coincidence of "existing" and "expire" suggest changing the latter to "lapse".
There are articles Chinese Exclusion and Chinese Exclusion Act which might be useful links.
"Congress passed a Chinese Exclusion Act " Technically, it did not pass, as it was vetoed and not overridden. Rephrase, say "both houses of Congress"
Fixed these, except for the last. I think the way Article I, §7 is written, when both houses pass a bill it is passed, although it may not become law. Clause 3 uses "repassed" when describing overriding a veto, which suggests that a vetoed bill passed once already. --Coemgenus (talk) 12:25, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Naval
" not far-flung shores" An unexpectedly flowery phrase which makes me wonder if it could have made its way from a somewhat elderly source.
"desuetude" too expensive a word. Suggest "poor state of"
"his replacement". "his successor" is better, I think.
Have you checked with someone in Milhist to ensure the way you list the ships is proper (i.e., without U.S.S.)?
"once employed Chandler". As Chandler has not made much of an impression on the article as yet, suggest "once employed Secretary Chandler".
"the four new ships". Well, the problem is, you've mentioned eight ships, and to be more confusing, they fall in two sets of four. Please clarify.
It would be nice to finish up this section with a mention that these vessels played a significant role in the Spanish American War, if they did.
I made these changes. "Desuetude" is a bit rich -- you may recognize it from your first-year property course. I'll check about the "U.S.S." --Coemgenus (talk) 16:18, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I'm a ship editor. Without the USS is fine, but we typically drop the "the" from before ship names. It might be interesting to note that the four monitors were not Civil War-era; those had been in such poor condition that they were secretly scrapped and built new. See Amphitrite class monitor for more information and possible references. Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 16:59, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I thought it might be too confusing to explain that, but it is an interesting story. I'll see if I can work it in. thanks for your edits and the new pic, btw. --Coemgenus (talk) 17:01, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
You're welcome. Even if you don't include the story, you might want to change this article so it is accurate. ;-) Ed [talk] [majestic titan] 17:03, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
I linked Amphitrite class monitor and changed "since the Civil War" to "since 1877". --Coemgenus (talk) 17:05, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Civil rights
" John Mercer Langston, the ambassador to Haiti, endorsed the Readjuster movement "heart and soul"." I fail to see the relevance of this sentence to Arthur.
" the movement had begun to collapse even in that state" suggest "the Readjuster movement began to collapse". No need to respecify Virginia, it is understood.
"in Utah". Better, "in Utah Territory."
"which they did" "which it did". Again, Congress is not a plural noun.
"sold at low prices" Perhaps, "resold at low prices" if the source justifies it.
"National Park system. You pipe to National Park Service. I suggest piping to "History of the National Park Service". The NPS was not established until 1916, parks were generally run by the Army (I can just imagine!).
Somewhere in the last sentence of the Health section, pipe to United States presidential election, 1884.
Final sentence of judicial appointments needs a cite.
I've made these fixes. --Coemgenus (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Retirement and death
I'm a bit confused on the timing of him being asked to run for Senate. As I see that the Senate election took place in January 1885, it should be mentioned that this approach took place before Arthur left office (Arthur died before the 1887 Senate election).
"as of counsel". Not certain, but I think I would strike the "as".
Done. --Coemgenus (talk) 16:32, 27 July 2011 (UTC)
A good effort. Easily of GA quality, but I would recommend a copyedit and check for MOS compliance before attempting FAC. If you want me to stop back, leave a note on my talk, I am not watchlisting.--Wehwalt (talk) 20:13, 24 July 2011 (UTC)


  • As always, feel free to revert my copyediting. Please check the edit summaries.
  • "... Arthur (and Gardiner) returned to New York City and his fiancée.": Sounds like some wild times in the Arthur household.
  • Other than that, I'm not finding much to fix, just the occasional odd word and some punctuation. Good job. I stopped at New York politician. - Dank (push to talk) 03:05, 3 August 2011 (UTC)

Far Eastern Party[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I'll be taking it to FAC in the next few weeks, and am interested in some outside input beforehand. Thanks, Apterygial talk 03:41, 21 July 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: This is good stuff. My comments are mainly quibbles about prose; I'm only at the halfway point and will post more comments later.


You need briefly to mention that Mawson became ill before you refer to "Mawson's related illness"

  • "Battling katabatic winds sweeping down from the Antarctic Plateau, the hut was erected..." Beginning sentences with the "ing" verb form should be done cautiously, especially with another "ing" closely following. Also, it wasn't the hut that battled the winds. Recommend a reword: "Battling katabatic winds that swept down from the Antarctic Plateau, the shore party erected their hut and began preparations..." etc
  • There is rather a lot of passive voice in this paragraph: rations etc were prepared, caches of supplied deployed, etc. Perhaps find a more active voice.
  • Section title maybe a little cryptic? Why not "Journey eastwards" or similar?
  • "10 November": best give a year as we are in a new section
  • "arranged the sledges": do you mean "rearranged", or "reorganised", rather than "arranged"?
  • "remaining ... remaining" in same sentence
  • What glaciers? We need an introductory sentence so we know where we are.
  • "causing the dogs to slip..." Grammatically this needs to be "that caused the dogs to slip..."
  • In the context given, the word "repectively" is probably superfluous
  • Why capitalise Huskies?
  • What is meant by the "lid"?
  • "one of them, Shackleton, tore open their food bag..." To what/whom does "their" refer?
  • Link "hoosh"
  • I'm a little confused by "the party reached the eastern limit of the glacier and began the ascent". Ascent of what?

Brianboulton (talk) 23:39, 22 July 2011 (UTC)

  • Thanks. These are the changes made in response so far. Apterygial talk 03:28, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

Later: Only a few scattered comments:-

Death of Ninnis
  • Section needs more precise date information. We have "That evening" and later, "By noon next day", but you have to refer to the previous section to work out what the date is.
  • "2 miles" → "two miles" (MOS) Also note later instances of "5 miles" for adjustment
  • The MOS also argues for consistency in comparable quantities. I interpret this as meaning that if I use the numeral figure for longer distances next to that for shorter distances, the numeral figure should be used for the shorter distance. Further, it would seem inconsistent to use words later for a same distance I've used numerals for earlier. This is very minor stuff, so I'm not overly concerned about it, but that's my reasoning. Apterygial talk 05:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Upon Mawson's return, the Aurora was recalled" - how was this done? What form of contact did they have?
  • "Greenland Dogs" - capital D?
  • Some confusion in use of "this", e.g. "This [excessive Vitamin A] is found..." and "While this [hypervitaminosis A] is generally cosidered..."
  • "Generally onsidered" by whom? Is it a generally accepted medical view?
  • "it has its detractors" - identity of "it" uncertain

One further point occurs to me, looking at the article as a whole. It is a highly competent piece of work, definitely FA-worthy, but I wonder if the full scope of the Australasian Antarctic Expedition ought not to be referred to somewhere? In addition to the activities based at Cape Denison there was the Macquarie Island sideshow and, more significantly, Frank Wild's Western Party. I'm not suggesting anything more than a strategically placed contextual sentence. Brianboulton (talk) 23:43, 23 July 2011 (UTC)

I believe I've responded to each of your points. A couple of sentences of appraisal of the expedition have been added to the Aftermath section. Apterygial talk 05:54, 25 July 2011 (UTC)

Maple syrup[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it's a GA and I'm looking for suggestions for further improvement, with an eye to potentially going to FAC at an as-yet-unspecified future time. It needs a bit of work to get there, and any help would be greatly appreciated. Thanks, Nikkimaria (talk) 02:40, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments by Dana Boomer

It's awesome to see this article being improved. My family makes maple syrup (a small-scale commercial operation), so I have access to lots of different aspects of it if you find a need for specific pictures.

  • Lead could stand to be expanded. I would focus particularly on the second paragraph, and expand the summary of the history a bit.
  • Lead, "Syrups must be at least 66 percent sugar to qualify as "maple syrup" in Canada; in the US, any syrup not made almost entirely from maple sap cannot be labeled as "maple"." I'm a little confused on this sentence - the first clause seems to be discussion brix (sugar content), while the second is apparently discussing sap contents - two separate things.
  • What I'm trying to do is distinguish between the criteria applied for the label "maple syrup" in Canada vs the US - Canada requires Brix, whereas the US focus is sap content.
  • Native Americans, "There are no authenticated accounts of maple syrup production and consumption among early aboriginal groups." As the previous sentence just said their was archaeological evidence of syrup making, how are these two sentences not mutually exclusive?
  • Authenticated accounts as in written or oral accounts, as distinct from archaeology. Attempted to clarify.
  • Europeans, "During the 17th and 18th centuries, processed maple sap was a source of concentrated sugar, in both liquid and crystallized-solid form." Isn't it still a source of concentrated sugar?
  • Yes, but that element is not as important now - now we mostly like it 'cause it tastes good, not because we don't have real sugar
  • Processing, "Maple syrup was made by boiling between 20 to 50 litres (5.3 to 13 US gal) of sap (depending on its concentration) over an open fire until one liter of syrup was obtained." Has this changed ("was made")?
  • May want to mention that some producers also do a fall tapping, although this tends to be much more hit-or-miss because of the more variable weather.
  • Cool, I'd never heard of that. Would you happen to have a good source on that? Nikkimaria (talk) 16:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)
  • This pamphlet mentions that you can, but I'm not having any luck with online searches. Gah. It's just one of those things you know, but nobody bothers to write down... I'll take a look at my dad's reference material tomorrow and see if I can come up with anything there. Dana boomer (talk) 02:02, 15 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Production, "Sap is not tapped at night because the temperature drop inhibits sap flow". True in the sense that the sap stops flowing when it freezes at night. However, producers don't go out and untap and retap the trees every day; I can see some readers gaining this misconception with the current sentence wording. (I shudder to think how much work that would be even in our small bush!)
  • Perhaps mention something about "sugar sand", which are minerals (?) that, if not filtered out of the syrup, settle to the bottom of jars as an off-white sandy substance.
  • Perhaps mention something about other maple syrup products: Maple syrup cream, maple syrup candies, etc.
  • Commerce, "Canada exports more than 29,000 tonnes (64,000,000 lb)" Since all of the previous data was in litres/gallons, it's a bit of a jump to switch to tonnes/lbs. IIRC, syrup is around 11 lbs/gal, so this would be around (very approx) 5.8 million gallons, but an official source is always better than my off-the-top calculations :)
  • The only source I could find with litres gives a very different number, but I suppose that'll do
  • Commerce, "Maple syrup has been produced on a small scale in some other countries, notably Japan and South Korea." How did syrup get to these nations? Was it transferred there from N. America, or did it arise there independently?
  • Not sure. AFAIK it arose independently, but I haven't seen anything that explicitly says that
  • Grades - why all of the italicizing?
  • Mostly because I prefer that for naming rather than a lot of quotation marks
  • Grades, "for farm sales in that province only." Does this mean "if made by farms in this province" or "for on-farm sales in this province"?
  • Neither. Attempted to clarify
  • Grades, "Grade B is darker than Grade A Dark Amber." Um, duh? This just seems like a really obvious statement...
  • Grades, "slightly higher standard of product density." What does this mean? Brix?
  • Grades, "The dark grades of syrup are primarily used for cooking and baking." Perhaps mention, however, that some consumers (especially in niche syrup markets (ie not Mrs. Butterworth)) prefer darker syrup for table use because of the additional flavor?
  • Imitation maple syrup, "must be made almost entirely from maple sap" What is "almost entirely"? A certain percentage?
  • Don't know, regulation just says "almost exclusively maple sap"
  • Imitation, "syrup must have a density of 66° on the Brix scale" Seems odd that this is the first time the Brix scale is mentioned, since it is a large component of maple syrup making/processing.
  • Grades, "and US Grade B "Commercial"" Since above you have said that there is grade B and grade C/commercial, I think "grade B "commercial" might be confusing to some readers.

My prose is not the greatest, so for fine grammar tweaking I probably won't be much help in a pre-FAC run. However, I hope the above (focusing mainly on content, I think) are helpful. I'll be watchlisting this review, so let me know here if you have any questions. Nice work so far, and good luck with FAC! Dana boomer (talk) 17:17, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Attempted to address most of these, with some replies above. Thanks for commenting! Nikkimaria (talk) 16:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: couple of points re the lead:-

  • Each of the three paragraphs begins with the words "Maple syrup", and two of them end with "maple syrup". Some variation of expression is necessary.
  • You have cited the statement in the lead that "Canada is the world's largest producer of maple syrup." This fact is given in the text, and cited: "Canada makes more than 80 percent of the world's maple syrup..." etc, so the lead citation is unnecessary.

One other point: it should be possible to avoid squeezing the text between two opposite images. Brianboulton (talk) 18:50, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

All addressed. Thanks for your comments! Nikkimaria (talk) 16:32, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

San Diego[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because this article may be reached to FA. However, I want list this for peer review first since San Diego got promoted to GA back in June, since I started the San Diego WikiProject back in October myself to cover all San Diego related articles. Any comments are welcome here.

If you have any concerns, please contact me at my talk page. Thank for your time. Regards, JJ98 (Talk / Contributions) 00:31, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: COngratulations on GA! After a quick read through I think this needs a fair amount of work before it would stand a chance at FAC. Here are some suggestions for improvement with FAC in mind and thanks for your work on this and other San Diego related articles.

  • A model article is useful for idea and examples to follow. There are quite a few FAs on cities - please see Category:FA-Class WikiProject Cities articles for these, several of which seem like they would be good examples.
  • There is a toolbox on this PR page which has some useful things to check. It shows that there are several dab links and circular redirects here that will need to be fixed before FAC
  • Also finds several dead external links that need to be fixed before FAC here
  • Biggest problem I see with the article is a lack of references in places and a lack of full information for some of the sources used as refs. These would both be major issues at FAC.
  • There are many places without refs that need them, I will give a few examples. In the Geography section, the last three sentences of the first paragraph and the whole second paragraph do not have refs and need them. Big chunks of the sections on Climate, the 2008 subsection in Demographics, Colleges and univerisites, Culture, Sports, Media, Government, and Utilities are missing refs as well. This would be enouigh for a quick fail at FAC.
  • Even paragraphs that appear to have refs may well need more - for example in this paragraph there is ref [116] towards the end which seems like it shouldcover all the preceding sentences :The San Diego Surf of the American Basketball Association is located in the city. The annual Farmers Insurance Open golf tournament (formerly the Buick Invitational) on the PGA Tour occurs at the municipally owned Torrey Pines Golf Course. This course was also the site of the 2008 U.S. Open Golf Championship. The San Diego Yacht Club hosted the America's Cup yacht races three times during the period 1988 to 1995. The amateur beach sport Over-the-line was invented in San Diego,[116] ... However checking ref 116 it is only for over-the-line.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and at least every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Refs used do not always have required information. For example, internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. For example the first ref is just called "U.S. Census" and needs the page title, date, access date, etc.
  • Or current refs 122 and 123 are both identical (^ "San Diego City website". Retrieved July 1, 2010. ^ "San Diego City website". Retrieved July 1, 2010.) and need to be clearer as to what the page titles, etc are. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Make sure the references used are reliable sources and that the highest quality refs are used too. If there are published academic histories of San Diego or the region, there may be reviewers at FAC who would much rather see those than the Historical Society website, for example.
  • Language is OK, but the hardest FA criterion for most articles to meet is 1a, a professional level of English.
  • To that end avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections as they impede the narrative flow. Wherever possible these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded. As one example the Utilities section is only three sentences in two paragraphs.
  • There are several MOS issues to watch out for. PEr WP:MOSQUOTE single quotation marks (') are only for quotes within a longer quotation. For regualr quotes double quotation marks (") should be used.
  • The Demographics section has WP:RECENT and WP:WEIGHT issues - three sections on 2010, 2008 and 2000 and nothing older??
  • Avoid sandwiching text between images - the images of Horton and the 1915 World Expo sandwich text on my monitor.
  • I would include the 1858 hurricane as a sentence in Climate or perhaps History (not just as a See also)
  • External links section is very large - can it be cut back any? The Census link is used as a ref and so should not be here too.
  • Make sure the Lead follows 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 . My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 20:27, 14 July 2011 (UTC)

South Carolina Stingrays[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've done a significant amount of expansion since I started editing. I'd like to see if it's assessed properly and would also like advice on how to improve it.

Thanks,  Cjmclark (Contact) 14:42, 13 July 2011 (UTC)

Comments from Wizardman: The article looks pretty solid right now, and it should not have too much trouble passing WP:GAN after these issues are fixed. Here are some things I noticed:

  • I'm not a fan of having three logos in the article, as it seems like a fair use issue. The main one is fine, but I'd take out at least one of the two not actively used by the team; the Sharks one would be the one I'd get rid of since they didn't really use that name.
Done. I went ahead and removed the Sharks logo; while it's neat historically it was never used, so it was the best one to go.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "based in the city of North Charleston, South Carolina." It can just say "based in North Charleston, South Carolina."
Done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "In 1995, following dismissal of Scanlon's lawsuit" I'd take out in 1995 just to break up the frequent paragraphs starting with dates/years.
Done. It definitely got difficult to break up the use of dates, but I'm working on it.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I'd add in more about how well the team did in various seasons. Stats and records are quite limited in this article especially early on, which is great for lay readers, but it causes some of the meat to be lost. (I've been hit at these processes for having too much in the way of stats/records on my stuff, so this article's already better then many in that regard).
Not done yet. Working on doing this without getting too heavy on the numbers.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
Now done. I think it's pretty decent...not too detail-intensive but not too list-y.  Cjmclark (Contact) 07:15, 30 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "which they have maintained to present day." to the present day.
Done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "Bednar's two seasons were highly successful. In the 2007–08 season, the Stingrays advanced to the American Conference finals, losing 4–1 to the Cincinnati Cyclones in a suspense-filled series that saw 3 games (including the final) decided in overtime." add a cite at the end, plus I'm not a fan of the 'highly successful' sentence, as it starts moving into POV territory.
Agreed and done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "and winning the Kelly Cup on the road in the culmination of a dramatic 4–3 series with the Alaska Aces.[21] Bednar became a hot coaching prospect overnight." I'd take out 'dramatic' (modifiers get a bit overused the further I get in the article), and the hot prospect thing would need a cite if a statement like that's going to be made.
Reworded.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I don't like "disappointment and hope" as a section heading. I'm not really sure of a good alternative though.
This one was difficult. I've changed it up, but I'm not sure if it really works. I'm still thinking about this one.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "falling 3 games to 2" three games to two
Done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The "present day" section just feels like a summary, and by extension mostly a rehash of the lead. I'd move paragraph three to the list of alumni below, and while the other two paragraphs are fine to have in the article, I'm not sure if this is where they should go.
  • "The Stingrays management and ownership have shown a strong loyalty to their players and staff." I'd get rid of this sentence; the next one pretty much says this by showing examples anyway.
I definitely agree with these two. I went ahead and farmed the contents of this section out to what I felt were the most appropriate spots in the article.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • The whole team culture section is sorely in need of citations.
Got 'em!  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • "The organization's mascot (from its inception in 1993 to present day)" Since they've only had the one main one, the stuff in parentheses can be removed.
Done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Refs #25 and 26 need to be fixed; they're showing the url instead of the title.
Done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)
  • Don't have refs in all caps (Ref #1).
Done.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

Once these issues are fixed, do another look through for POV to make sure that statements aren't sounding outlandish. There's a fine line between captivating prose and sensationalism, which is tough to keep in check for sports articles. You mostly do a good job of staying on the right side, but there are a few spots where it crosses over. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 17:33, 24 July 2011 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments! I definitely agree with what you say about prose vs. drama. There was some pretty outlandish stuff in here when I started working on it and it looks like I hand't quite stamped all of it out. Thanks again.  Cjmclark (Contact) 21:51, 26 July 2011 (UTC)

2011 royal tour of Canada[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
Article format, content to add/remove, any sort of suggestions. Note that this is up for AfD currently, so even broad suggestions are appreciated, to whip this baby into shape, so people can see it's just my writing that's lacking, not the topic. Thanks, Zanimum (talk) 18:02, 2 July 2011 (UTC)

Note that this article is no longer an AfD candidate, sadly only "no consensus", but I'd still like to get at least a casual one-over, even though the article is still fairly rough. -- Zanimum (talk) 23:01, 8 July 2011 (UTC)

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

  • I looked at the AfD when it was running and just glanced at it now. There are some things in the AfD which I expected to be in here, like the three editorials on the increasing irrelevance of the monarchy in Canada. I would look carefully at the AfD and add / edit this to follow any useful suggestions and ideas that came out of that.
  • There is a toolbox on this PR page. It shows two dab links here that need to be fixed.
  • It also shows three dead external links here - note that print sources do not need a working URL (as the print version can be accessed in theory at an archive)
  • The lead does not really follow WP:LEAD, which says that the lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and can be up to four paragraphs long (depending on the article size). I think this lead could easily be 2 or 3 paragraphs.
  • 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. The whole Western, Cenmtral, Atalantic and Norrthern Canada bit is only in the lead, for example (article should say something like "their visit to PEI allowed them to experience Atalantic Canada" to explain). I might say something more explicit in the lead (say how many provinces and territories they visited, perhaps name them all)
  • If looking for ideas to expand the lead, my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
  • Another concern is references. While this has a lot of them, it still has some unreferenced bits. There is one citation needed tag, for example.
  • Statements like Upon landing at Macdonald-Cartier International Airport on Thursday, June 30, the cockpit showed the Duke of Cambridge's Personal Canadian Flag; the newly adopted flag was previewed only the day before by Canadian federal government officials. Among the dignitaries greeting the couple were John Baird, Canadian Minister of Foreign Affairs, David McGuinty, Ottawa South MP, William JS Elliott, Commissioner of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, and Jim Watson, Mayor of Ottawa. without a ref need at least one. If a paragraph has one or more refs in it, but has one or more sentences that follow the last ref, then those sentences need to be referenced too.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Make sure all refs have the required information. Current ref 27 is just a link with the word "itinerary". 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
  • Be consistent - each day of the tour they did something public get its own section / header (and not just July 2, 4, and 5)
  • I would also mention whatever they did Sunday in a sentence at the end of the Saturday section (assume they had a day off / out of the public eye)
  • Make sure to provide context to the reader - see WP:PCR. So they land in Canada, but the article does not say where exactly the airport is (Ottawa). See Upon landing at Macdonald-Cartier International Airport on Thursday, June 30...
  • When abbreviations are introduced, spell out the word(s) on first use, followed by the abbreivation in parenthesis - so Prince Edward Island (PEI)
  • I read quickly but noticed a fair number of typos - strumed (for strummed) comes to mind.
  • Statements like they were greeted by 5,000 spectators and protestors are vague - was it mostly well-wishers or mostly protestors or evenly mixed? Perhaps something like "They were greeted by a crowd of 5,000, which included a few protestors..." or "They were met by 5,000, most of whom were demonstrating against their visit..." would be clearer
  • Watch out for short (one or two sentence) paragraphs as these impede the article's flow. Where possible these should be combined or perhaps expanded.
  • I would mention the previous royal visit (Elizabeth) and any comparisons to it (one of the editorials did this - much less press for Her Majesty)
  • Make sure the focus is on Will and Kate and their visit. Sentences like Barred from attending the 2010 Stampede parade, attempts to block street preacher Art Pawlowski were unsuccessful. He planned to have his group march following the parade proper, or set up a protest.[42] There were no reports on whether he followed through. are confusing intially as the subject is not clear (who was barred?). I also wonder if this should be included at all - is he notable? Why was he marching (or planning to) and how does this relate to Will and Kate? Keep the focus on the main subjects
  • This reads like it was put together by many editors adding bits and pieces from news sources over several days (which I imagine it was). I would go through and rewrite it to make the story clearer and clean up the language. Make sure the tenses are correct (past in general, since the visit is over) and that everything is relevant and referenced.
  • Also make sure that all details are included - when did they return to the UK? What was the reaction in the British press?
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

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 ><>°° 11:16, 15 July 2011 (UTC)

Mount Cleveland (Alaska)[edit]

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it failed an FAC fairly recently. That experience taught me that over-prepared is still not prepared enough; hence, I'm listing the article for review here as a step towards renominating it and, hopefully, passing this time. ;) ResMar 04:22, 30 June 2011 (UTC):Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Wikipedia:Peer review/Mount Cleveland (Alaska)/archive2.

Tropical Storm Debra (1978)[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to improve it to "good article" status. I plan on adding Google News sources later.

Thanks, Hurricanefan25 (talk) 21:51, 30 June 2011 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Thanks for your work on this storm article. I always like reading about storms, especially ones not coming my way. Here are some suggestions for further improvement.


  • August 26 is repeated three times in the opening paragraph. Did all three things happen on that date? The "Meteorological history" section says the storm formed on August 25. The confusion here may be related to the vagueness of the first part of the "Meteorological history" section. Please see Juliancolton's note, "First paragraph of MH" on the article's talk page.
  • "Debra" is repeated six times in the second paragraph. That's too many. A bit of variety would help.

Meteorological history

  • "400 nautical miles south of New Orleans" - Should this be expressed in miles and kilometers also?
  • "the low-level vorticy center" - What is a "vorticy center"? Should that be "center of vorticity" with perhaps a brief explanation of wind motion in a cold low?

Preparations and impact

  • "In neighboring Louisiana... " - The word "neighboring" seems out of place since the preceding sentences discuss the situation in Louisiana.
  • "6 inches (15 cm) of rain was... " - Sentences in Wikipedia articles should start with words rather than digits.
  • "all rains had receded from the streets" - Should this say "rainwater" or "rain-induced flooding" rather than "rains"?
  • "was recorded in Freshwater Bayou Lock.[2][1][18]" - Any place you have a string of refs like this, the numbers should appear in ascending order; i.e., [1][2][18]. I see several of these strings in the article that are out of order.
  • "Across the state, more than 6 in (150 mm) was reported,[1][2][19] including more than 6 in (150 mm) of rainfall was recorded at Lake Charles." - Doesn't make sense as written.
  • "A 15 feet (4.6 m) wave killed a person at a rig 80 miles (130 km) offshore Cameron, Louisiana.[9][12][11][16][17]" - Does this claim really require five supporting citations?


  • In citation 1, that should be "Lawrence, Miles B." rather than "B. Lawrence, Miles".
  • In citations like 7 that include strings in all caps, the Wikipedia convention is to use house style rather than all caps even if the source uses all caps; i.e., "Tropical Storm Debra Local Statement Number 6". Ditto for the other citations with all-cap strings.
  • Citation 23 has a set of nested quotation marks. The way to handle these is to add an nbsp code wherever the two sets of marks collide; i.e., " 'Debra' makes devastating exit". You can look at note this in edit mode to see the six characters of the nbsp string. WP:NBSP explains the no-break code and some of its other uses.


  • The dab checker at the top of this review page finds one link, "Chevron", that goes to a disambiguation page instead of its intended target.
  • The article has too many images at the moment for a good layout. The two images in the "Meteorological history" section make a text sandwich with the infobox. If the article gets longer, it may eventually accommodate all of the images. Meanwhile, I'd suggest keeping the storm track image but moving it down to avoid the text sandwich, and I'd remove File:Tropical Storm Debra (1978).JPG, at least temporarily.
  • Image captions consisting solely of a sentence fragment do not take a terminal period.
  • In an article that's this short, I don't think it's helpful to link terms more than once in the lead plus (at most) once in the main text. I would not link the names of states, for example, more than once in the whole article. Ditto for terms like "landfall", which are pretty much self-explanatory; linking once might be OK, but I wouldn't link "landfall" more than once in the whole article. Technical terms like "mbar" need to be linked, but they should not be linked multiple times in the same section. "Mbar" is linked three times in the "Meteorological history" section, as are some other terms.
  • 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. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 19:36, 5 July 2011 (UTC)

Thanks! Hurricanefan25 tropical cyclone 21:20, 5 July 2011 (UTC)
  • I randomly clicked on one item, and it was reference 23. Reference 23 isn't what it is stated to be. Make sure all your references match what you say they are, or this article will not pass GA easily. Thegreatdr (talk) 21:51, 6 July 2011 (UTC)
I've corrected pretty much all of them. Hurricanefan25 tropical cyclone 20:43, 18 July 2011 (UTC)