Wikipedia:Peer review/Waste-to-energy plant/archive1

I've worked on this a lot, mostly with the layout. Could someone please look at it and suggest how it could be improved? Green caterpillar 23:51, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question (due to possible javascript errors/uniqueness of articles).

Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.

- Does anyone think some of the one-paragraph sections should be moved to the lead? Green caterpillar 00:04, 21 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 2(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.
This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.
- To assist you with this, add {{subst:js|User:AndyZ/monobook.js/footnotehelper.js}} to your monobook.js file (mine is located at User:AndyZ/monobook.js) and then bypass your browser's cache by pressing: Mozilla/Safari/Konqueror: hold down Shift while clicking Reload (or press Ctrl-Shift-R), Internet Explorer: press Ctrl-F5, Opera: press F5. In editing mode, click on the "Footnote creater" tab that appears.

Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.
You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions (and the javascript checklist; see the last paragraph in the lead) for further ideas.
Thanks, Andy _t 23:54, 20 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good article. Specific improvements that could be made include:

The article needs more references (if there is a good textbook you read on the subject include that).
Coverage of pollution is good but it will probably be the main interest many readers have in the article — so it needs to be better. Make sure to cite your sources and don't be afraid to get into specifics. For example, "nitrogen oxides are prevented from escaping the flue by using ..." and "In comparison to coal power plants that on average emit x tonnes of carbon dioxide per MWh, waste-to-energy plants emit on average x tonnes."
A statisitic on what fraction of energy, waste-to-energy plants provide as opposed to other energy sources would be helpful.