Wikipedia:Peer review

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
  (Redirected from Wikipedia:REVIEW)
Jump to: navigation, search
"WP:PR" redirects here. For the guideline on the use of press releases, see Wikipedia:Third-party sources § Press releases.
Main Current Instructions Discussion Tools Archive
Shortcut:
This page is about editorial review of specific articles. For off-Wiki review of Wikipedia, see Wikipedia:External peer review. For pending changes, see Wikipedia:Reviewers.
"WP:PR" redirects here. For the Public Relations FAQ, see Wikipedia:FAQ/Organizations. For information on Wikipedia press releases, see Wikipedia:Press releases. For patrolled revisions, see Wikipedia:Patrolled revisions.
"WP:Review" redirects here. It is not to be confused with WP:Reviewing.
PR icon.png

Wikipedia's peer review process is a way to receive ideas and feedback from other editors about articles. An article may be nominated by any user, and will appear on the list of all peer reviews. Other users can comment on the review. Peer review may be used for potential good article nominations, potential featured article candidates, or an article of any "grade". Peer review is a useful place to centralise a review from other editors about an article, and may be associated with a WikiProject; and may also be a good place for new Wikipedians to receive feedback on how an article is looking.

Peer reviews are open to any feedback, and users requesting feedback may also request more specific feedback. Unlike formal nominations, editors and nominators may both edit articles during the discussion.

To request a review, or nominate an article for a review see the instructions page. Users are limited to requesting one review at any one time, and are encouraged to help reduce the backlog by commenting on other articles. Any user may comment on a review, and there is no requirement that any comments may be acted on.

A list of all current peer reviews, with reviewer's comments included, can be found here. For easier navigation, a list of peer reviews, without the reviews themselves included, can be found here. A chronological peer reviews list can be found here.

Contents

Arts[edit]

Loham[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because…article is on start class, and not checked for B class.

Thanks, Charles Turing (talk) 09:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 28 August 2015, 09:42 UTC)----


Impossible Princess[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I am striving to make this article a WP:Featured article alongside a Featured topic or Good article topic. Since the last review in April 2015 here, I have created a private page to fix, construct, add and remove information about this album. I have stuck to a lot of reliable sources, research that I have obtained in several different formats (including magazine articles, image and text, radio, interviews, etc.) and detailed it thoroughly. After the failed attempts, I have tried to narrow down the article a lot of make it more appropriate and readable. Not to take personal credit or spotlight, but majority of the editing process of the artcle since the past year has been conducted by me through a lot of research, and again, I am striving to make this a featured article. I need this to be peer reviewed in order to achieve my goal.

Thanks, CaliforniaDreamsFan (talk · contribs} 03:58, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM

Happy to offer a review. I've taken some albums to FA status, but not recently. (As an aside, I've just reviewed Too Much Too Soon (album) at FAC, which strikes me as an excellent album article, and potentially a good one to emulate.) If my comments come across as a little harsh/picky, it's because I'm trying to catch the kind of things which could sink a FAC nomination.

  • "it was her first album to assert partial creative control" How can an album assert control?
  • "Because her label, Deconstruction's A&R department were not present through majority of the album process" This doesn't work. How about "Because the A&R department of her label, Deconstruction (link link), were not present throughout the majority of the album's production process, ..."
  • "An album with a mixture of different musical genres and styles, several songs on the album" This doesn't work either. The subordinate clause at the start of the sentence refers to the subject of the main clause, which is currently "several songs on the album". How about something like "A release with a mixture of different musical genres and styles, the album features several songs employing themes..."
  • "The album cover was directed" How can covers be directed?
  • The author/featured poet of the book would be a nice addition to the lead.
  • "as the albums official singles" Apostrophe! The singles belong to the album!
  • "while the rest of the album served as promotional singles in Australia and New Zealand" You don't mean the rest of the album, you mean the other songs on the album.
  • What does "sonic change" mean?
  • "where it peaked at number three" Why "where it peaked"? Why not just "peaking"?
  • "The trips with Sednaoui and his encouragement to express creative freedom allowed her to start writing songs for Impossible Princess" This doesn't work. Also, an unnecessary capital letter later in the sentence.
  • "Impossible Princess took nearly two years to record, becoming the longest period of time Minogue had worked on a project since her time acting on the Australian soap opera Neighbours (from 1986 to 1988)." This doesn't work. I'd drop "becoming".
  • "Minogue's creative director Steve Anderson later explained that its lengthy time was “due to the pure perfectionism of all creatively involved.”[10]" Be aware of MOS:LQ. I'd recommend checking the rest of the article for this- I'll not make any further comments about the rule. Also, why those funny quote marks?
  • "where they both completed the unreleased track" Both? Who's both?
  • "Welsh musician James Dean Bradfield contacted Minogue's A&R Pete Hadfield, asking him what their current project was where Hadfield replied “Kylie Minogue's new album.”" Grammatically odd. Is this really necessary? I think some people might claim you have too much background info, here.
  • "loved" is a bit hyperbolic.
  • "Sednaoui introduced her the work" Missing a word?
  • "Her most indie work in her career" How about "The most indie work in her career" or simply "Her most indie track"?
  • ""Breathe", the album's third single, and "Say Hey", are electronic tracks that have been compared to Icelandic recording artist Bjork." How about "Both "Breathe", the album's third single, and "Say Hey" are electronic tracks that have been compared to the music of Icelandic recording artist Bjork."
  • "The former track deals with calmess, while the latter talks about verbal communication with Sednaoui respectively." You're already saying "the former" and "the latter"; you don't need "respectively".
  • "is a trance song where Minogue" in which, not where
  • "about wanting attention and satisfaction from Sednaoui" She doesn't want satisfaction from Sednaoi (or, I'm guessing she doesn't...). She wants S to be satisfied. How about "about desiring Sednaoui's attention and wanting him to be satisfied". Not perfect, but better.
  • "as the albums most" Apostrophe!
  • "the albums most straightforward Motown–indie rock song on the album" If it's "the album's most", you don't need "on the album".
  • "Minogue stated the lyrical narrative was "difficult" to explain" that the lyrical...
  • "that shows Minogue singing" It doesn't "show".
  • "is a schizophrenic dance song" We really shouldn't use the word "schizophrenic" like that.
  • "over a orchestral and string arrangement" an orchestral
  • "Minogue concerned about the delays of the albums release." Apostrophe. Also, I don't like the way you attribute concern. How about "Minogue, discussing the delays in the album's release".
  • "but was postponed until May 1997" The release was postponed, not Deconstruction
  • "Deconstruction aimed to release the album in January 1997, but was postponed until May 1997.[41] Despite this, Deconstruction postponed the album until September 1997 but withdrew this decision, leaving the album unreleased" I'm struggling to follow this narrative.
  • "released selected album tracks and released them on various formats" Repetition
  • "followed by a 12 January 1998 released in" release
  • "but dismissed plans after they failed to find an American label to promote it" dismissed these plans
  • "Shooting a cover in 3-D required multiple static cameras and she grew tired of posing for long periods of time." You haven't mentioned a 3-D (and shouldn't that be "3D"?) shoot yet, and who's "she"? (This is a recurring issue throughout the article- lots of "she"s.)
  • " The background of swirling lights was achieved by Sednaoui, who was dressed in an all-black suit" I'm not clear what this means. Also, why on earth are his clothes relevant?
  • "The title" Specify that you mean the album's title
  • "It was given to Minogue" The title wasn't. How about "A copy of the book was..."
  • "Due to the death of Diana, Princess of Wales in August 1997, the title was changed to Kylie Minogue for the UK and the rest of Europe.[50]" This alternative title should really be mentioned in the lead- perhaps even the first line (with bold).
  • "After the albums European release" Apostrophe!
  • "Minogue embarked an Australian and European tour Intimate and Live," How about "Minogue embarked Intimate and Live, an Australian and European tour, ..."
  • "rehearsing for the tour while she was rehearsing" Repetition
  • "The production made for the tour was on a lower budget than her previous tours, only to give it more off a "special and unique" atmosphere. She decided to have it low budget so she could establish more risks in her performances rather than have a production bigger than her." Difficult to follow
  • "Kylie and Baker designed and drawn the concept and set out of the tour." Unclear.
  • "Objects in the album's content, including the "K" symbol and the multi-coloured cone had been featured as props for the tour." You need a comma after "cone" ("including ... cone" is a subordinate clause) but I'm not clear what "objects in the album's content" means.
  • "From the supporting album, Minogue performed "Too Far", "Some Kind of Bliss", "Breathe", "Cowboy Style", "Say Hey", "Drunk", "Did It Again", "Limbo" and unreleased track "Free"" If "Free" is/was "unreleased", it's not "from the supporting album".
  • "The live album with the same name was released on 30 November 1998 in Australia and the live DVD with the same name was released in July 2002." Unreferenced; same name as what?
  • Judging from the reception section, the album did not have "generally mixed" reviews.
  • ". It re-entered at number forty and enter back inside the top ten, staying there for three non-consecutive weeks and stayed in the albums chart for thirty-five weeks (including three separate stays in the Top 10 during its run) making it Minogue's longest-charting album at that point." All over the place.
  • "had a duration of four weeks" The album didn't have a duration of four weeks, it stayed in the chart for four weeks
  • "was a benefit of low sales" I am assuming this is not what you mean. I assume you mean that it was a possible cause of low sales, or was possibly caused by low sales.
  • "along with Minogue's radical change through the media industry, who criticized her appearance and the material on the record." I am unclear on what this means. Also, why is this criticism not covered in the reception section?
  • "felt that she had been fighting her previous egos to be taken seriously for Impossible Princess" What does this mean?
  • "UK critic Adrian Denning also called the album her biggest misconception in her career." How can an album be a misconception?
  • "Impossible Princess received huge backlash for her media dub as "Indie Kylie", her sonic exploration and low sales." I am unclear on what this means.
  • "despite the album being released months after" afterwards or later. Also, which album? The latter or the former?
  • " Tim Jonze opined that Minogue going back to pop music and disco in her 2000 album Light Years saved her career if she did another album similar to Impossible Princess." This doesn't make sense.
  • "Minogue commented since stated that while" What on earth does this mean?
  • "She did admit she does" that she does
  • "Use in various culture" is not a good section title; I'm not at all clear on the value of the discussion in the section. If you're going to keep it, it needs copyediting- a block quote would be valuable for the long quote.
  • The fact that the song articles are up for deletion is potentially an issue- I'd hold off FAC until that issue has been resolved.
  • What's the "subsequent releases" section about?

At first glance, the sources look OK, but there are issues. A full FAC review would definitely pick up these and likely more.

  • I'm not keen on the way you repeat the citation information for the booklet interview. Same with Baker.
  • There are some questionable italics (Rovi, for instance) which should be cleaned up.
  • "Unknown, Author" is not an author name.
  • Your Youtube link looks like a copyright violation and needs to go.
  • The full Aspinall source is never given. Neither is Taraborelli.
  • Herald Sun should be italicised and linked.
  • "Mushroom Records press release; included with disc" is not a title. There are others similarly and incorrectly formatted.
  • "Billboard - Google Books. Books.google.co.nz. 4 April 1998. Retrieved 11 August 2014." No no no.
  • "Unknown author (August 1997). "Review of Impossible Princess". Music Week." Page numbers? Volume? Issue? (Also no pp on Sunday Mail)
  • ""Kylie new album interview 'Sometimes you fall flat on your face'". By Robert Copsey. Wednesday, 17 October 2012, 12:09 BST." and "http://www.pop-cultured.net/deconstructing-kylie-minogue-analysis-artistic-input-deconstruction-records/" need sorting.

There were other smaller source issues, and a few websites of questionable reliability. The source list needs going through with a fine-toothed comb before FAC. Concerning the images: Your main cover has an incomplete rationale and your music sample has a useless copy-paste rationale. Do you really need the second album cover? Is it really adding anything? The real issue, though, is the prose- right now, the writing is a good way below FAC standards. I hope this review is helpful- if you fix everything I've pointed out, you will be a good way closer to FAC-ready. Josh Milburn (talk) 11:37, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 28 August 2015, 03:58 UTC)----


By the Bluest of Seas[edit]

Recently came across this obscure little film and thought I'd do what I could to increase our coverage on it. Although I believe that there may be some more scholarly articles and perhaps even books that have discussed the topic, I unfortunately don't have the time to track those down. As it stands, I really just focused on the Plot and Reception section, although I also expanded the lead and created a home media section. Using the sources that I've come across, it wouldn't be feasible to write a production section. I'm honestly not sure how much time I even have to address the points that are raised during this peer review; I mainly just want to hear what other's think of the article's current state. The Reception section could perhaps be perceived as unwieldy or disorganized, but I've tried my best to give it a decent flow. If there are any small changes that I could make, then I'll try to work on those, but feedback on larger issues is appreciated as well. Even if I can't address everything myself, it may be helpful for the next editor who comes along to have some suggestions waiting on the talk page on how to bring the article to the next stage.

Thanks, Jpcase (talk) 18:26, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM

Happy to take a look through.

  • Your lead image could do with a slightly expanded rationale. Your image of Barnet lacks a rationale, but clearly fails NFCC#8 anyway- it should be removed immediately.
  • Yelena Kuzmina is a dablink
  • The focus on UK releases in the lead does strike me as undue weight (that said, I see further down that there have been very very few releases- this could be stressed in the lead)
  • "Dennis Schwartz of Ozus' World Movie Reviews also noticed a dichotomy within the film's tone, writing both that the film is "strangely uplifting" and that it contains "some darker moments to reflect on."[5]" Be aware of MOS:LQ
  • In at least a couple of places, you seem to be using the wrong dashes- see WP:DASH. For example, "Allegations of propaganda have occasionally been made about the film's message[2][3] - a message described by Anthony Nield of the Digital Fix as "a paean to communism and collectivism".[1]" That's a hyphen, not a dash. (I struggle with this issue, too...)
  • "In a seven star review," Seven out of what?
  • I don't like the link to the French Wikipedia in the prose; Template:Interlanguage link multi may be a better way to do this
  • "not "persistent enough to have a genuine effect."[1]" LQ, again
  • Your sources look alright (though I suspect that there are better ones out there!), but I note that there's some inconsistency on author names- if you're just going for "John Smith", you should lose "Smith, John" or "Prof. John Smith", for instance.
  • There seems to be a little bit of inconsistency in date formats.

The writing is generally good, and the article is a good B-class article. I come away from the article with a good idea of what the film is about and why I should care about it. In terms of taking the article further, I think you already have a fairly good idea of what needs to be done- you need to look into developing a production section (at the very least, it sounds like there's some DVD commentary out there that you could use, but I suspect, given the comments in the reception section, that there will be some discussion/coverage in the film literature), and you need to delve into the literature on the history of film. It does look like there's plenty out there - see Google Scholar and Google Books - but you certainly wouldn't need to read everything out there. Just get some key points from some key texts. A final thought- as your reception section is rather long, you may want to consider splitting it out to an analysis and/or themes section and a reception section. A legacy and/or influence section would be another possibility. Certainly not a must, but just another way of splitting things up if you're worried about the current set-up. A few users out there have some experience writing very strong articles about older films (including older films from outside of the English-speaking world), but I don't know anyone off the top of my head who writes about Soviet cinema. I can give you some names if you're looking for people to offer some pointers and/or a possible collaboration. Anyway, nice work, and I do hope you find the time to improve the article further! Josh Milburn (talk) 10:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 27 August 2015, 18:27 UTC)----


Rod Steiger[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it's a very comprehensive account of the career and life of Rod Steiger, which with a good peer review I believe can be brought up to FA status…

Thanks, . BTW User:Rationalobserver and User:Ssven2 are welcome to assist me in answering comments and further improvement of the article.♦ Dr. Blofeld 15:27, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley[edit]

First lot of comments after first reading for typos etc:

  • "his usual effortness" – effortless?
  • "Zinneman" appears once and "Zinnemann" three times
  • "neutrotic" – probably a typo for "neurotic"?
  • "Columbia Pictures's" – not sure about the ess-apostrophe-ess
  • "which Steiger concurred that he wasn't effective" – "wasn't" seems too colloquial, and would be better as "was not".
  • W.C. Fields or W. C. Fields?
  • "mid 1980s" – wants a hyphen, I think
  • "mid seventies" – ditto, and perhaps this and the above should be in the same word/digit form as each other

More to follow on the content after a close reading. – Tim riley talk 19:59, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

I took care of these, except that the link to W.C. Fields and Me has to be un-spaced or the link won't work. Maybe the page should be moved; I don't know. I guess I could pipe it for consistency. I also went with "which Steiger concurred that he was ineffective". RO(talk) 20:15, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Thanks both.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:27, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Comments to the end of "Early career"
  • Early life and acting background
    • "Battle of Iwo Jima and the sinking of vessels by the Taussig, known to have women and children aboard" – two things here. First, can we link the battle? Secondly, it was no doubt the sunk vessels rather than the Taussig that had the women and children on board, but that isn't what the sentence actually says.
    • "pretty young girls" – not very PC phrasing: "pretty (or attractive?) young women" might be less likely to attract flak
    • "the name Steiger, which had so humiliated him during his childhood" – not clear why the name was a matter for humiliation
      • Not done. RO(talk) 21:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
It's earlier explained that his mother's severe alcohol problems made his family name a laughing stock in his neighbourhood. "Her alcohol problem caused Steiger much embarrassment and the family was frequently mocked by other children and their parents within his community." As Steiger put it "The name Steiger become a laughing stock" or something like that.♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:45, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
    • "biographer Hutchinson" – you've already told us he's a biographer
    • "the tricks of the trade" – I thought the point, such as it was, of method acting was that there are no tricks
    • "Night Music" – why quotes rather than itals?
Well spotted!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:17, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Early career
    • "NBC manager of program development Fred Coe" – as false titles go this is a prize-winner; it could be make to clunk rather less if redrawn as "Fred Coe, NBC's manager of program development".
    • "It wasn't long" – WP:N'T
    • "watching Steiger give none of his usual effortless persuasive performances" – sounds anything but a positive review. Is it what you meant to write?
      • Not done. RO(talk) 21:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
It's actually a typo for "one" ;-)♦ Dr. Blofeld 11:48, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
    • "Steiger made his screen debut" – television screens excepted
    • "self-describing himself" – is this different from or better than just "describing himself"?
    • "director Kazan" – we already know that Kazan was a director
    • "William Shakespeare's Othello" – Shakespeare is already linked earlier, and we need neither duplicate link nor his first name here, I think.

More anon. Tim riley talk 17:36, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I took care of these concerns, except the two noted above that I'd rather wait to see what Dr.B says before changing the meaning. RO(talk) 21:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

e-heat the oven to 190C/Gas Mark 5.

Final batch
  • Early career (resuming)
    • link film noir? Done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
    • "He sought inspiration" – Steiger, presumably, rather than Palance. Done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • A struggling actor
    • "Indian extras" – now here I think Guardianesque PC wording probably is called for. We don't refer to aboriginal Americans as "Indians" any more, surely? The preferred (though linguistically idiotic) term seems to be "native Americans".
I suppose it could have been "red injun'" ;-). Done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
    • "The film established Rod Steiger" – we don't need to be reminded of his given name at this point, do we?
Indeed nope!
    • If you're going to link all the obscure critics you might link the one very important one, Ken Tynan. The New Yorker seems at least as deserving of a link as The Daily Mirror, too.
Done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
    • "he conceded to play" – doesn't read very naturally" – perhaps "agreed"? Though you'd then have to change "the producers agreed" in the same sentence, I suppose.
Yes, but I can't have two "agreeds" in one sentence to I reworded the whole thing!♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
    • "earned Steiger a Laurel Award" – to my mind we drag in too many tuppenny-ha'penny awards in WP articles on film stars. The Laurel Awards merit a 150-word stub article, I see, and I think we can do without this factoid.

I agree on the Sant Jordi Award but not the Laurel Award, they're actually pretty notable in my opinion, and a short article should never be an assumption of its lack of notability! What the article doesn't seem to tell us is that they were judged by the Writer's Guild.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

    • "Though perceived as something of a caricature of Capone the Ultimate Book of Gangster Movies" – syntax awry here: as it stands the book, not the film or performance, is described as a caricature.
    • "and his relationship with Cardinale" – whose?
  • Mainstream film acclaim
    • "New York City" – WP:OVERLINK
    • "the Daily Mail" – I quite see why you would be loth to link to The Daily Mail, but I'm afraid you must hold your nose and do so.
    • "Steiger was universally acclaimed" – meaning no critic anywhere disliked his performance? Do the sources support such a large claim?
    • "Sant Jordi Award" – another obscure award not worth mentioning, meseems. It doesn't even rate its own WP stub article.
Agreed.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:51, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Historical roles and declining fortunes
    • "chauvinist" – why the quotation marks?
    • "which earned him critical acclaim" – I'm sure it did, but "acclaim" pops up fourteen times in the article, which seems to me to rather over-egging the pudding.
    • "a Steiger found" – "and Steiger found"?
    • "legendary comic actor" – WP:PEA
    • "Steiger played … Sylvester Stallone plays" – troubles with tenses
  • B-movies and criticism
    • "wished he'd done" – another chatty contraction
    • "wary of his issues" – I advise caution with the word "issues". It has become a catch-all and somewhat woolly term. Where it means "problems" (as here) it is better to write "problems". Where "health issues" means "ill health", that is what one should write. Where "having an issue with" means "disagreeing with"… etc.
    • "appeared as a reverend" – can one use "reverend" as a noun? Looks odd.
    • "a small Georgian town" – I suggest a link to Georgia. (My first thought was of a Georgian town such as Bath)
  • Acting style
    • "showcase his remarkable talent" – the "remarkable" in the source or is it your opinion?
    • "associated with method acting" – need to be consistent in capitalising (or not) Method/method.
  • Performances
    • I think you do yourself an injustice by calling the list of roles "Main article". There's more about the roles on this biographical page than there is on the list page. I'd make it just "See…"
OK.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:48, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

That's all from me. I hope these few comments are of use. – Tim riley talk 13:35, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Cheers Tim riley, yes very helpful, much appreciated.♦ Dr. Blofeld 14:38, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

I took care of the remaining issues. I went with lower case for method acting, but I changed on that was mid-quote, which I think is allowable as minimal change. I also linked to Georgia the country, but I've been told we shouldn't link countries. RO(talk) 21:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Not the country, the state of Georgia! Changed to American South. Thanks RO.♦ Dr. Blofeld 08:13, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Jim[edit]

Just nitpicks really Jimfbleak - talk to me? 11:10, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Changed to "in the South Pacific"♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:14, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Across the Bridge (1957) and Al Capone (1959), in which his portrayal of Al Capone—reads as if he played Capone in both
Done. Tweaked the sentence. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • daughter by actress Claire Bloom, opera singer Anna Steiger,--> daughter, opera singer Anna Steiger, by actress Claire Bloom,
Done. As asked. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • shadowy, fugitive figure, one which haunted Rod— shouldn't it be who haunted?
Done. As asked. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • link paedophile, Soviet Union, clinical depression
  • Another prodigious pupil—he wasn't that big, I think you mean prodigiously talented or similar
Done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:11, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Burton made him look like "one half of a naked ass-hole"—I know this is what the source says, but I wonder if it has been translated to AE? It's difficult to imagine the quintessentially welsh Burton use "ass" instead of British "arse"
Yes, AE, see here. I'm Welsh too and use Asshole rather than Arsehole!♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • On the contrary, the critic from Variety'—"On the contrary implies rebuttal, I don't think that is what is intended
  • Steiger appeared as a Reverend—why cap reverend?
Done.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:13, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
  • actress Sally Gracie (1952–1958),[191] actress Claire Bloom—some style guides (eg The Guardian) would use "actor" for both sexes
Eeks, I'm not sure about that, I find the idea that its no longer politically correct to call a female actor an actress absurd. What does Tim riley think?♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:07, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Actress is usual on Wikipedia, which is a lot less doctrinaire than The Grauniad. (And I speak as a Guardian reader of many, many years' standing, but it can be irritatingly right-on sometimes.) Tim riley talk 15:56, 27 August 2015 (UTC)
Not a big deal, just raising the point to be considered, since I have the Guardian's style guide (crossword prize) Jimfbleak - talk to me? 10:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Steiger eventually sold their New York apartment in the mid-seventies, which was too expensive to keep.--> Steiger eventually sold their New York apartment, which was too expensive to keep, in the mid-seventies
Done. As asked. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 12:02, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks both.♦ Dr. Blofeld 12:05, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 25 August 2015, 17:21 UTC)----


Man Down (song)[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because… it has, in my opinion, been unfairly failed at FAC. Prior to nomination in July, I worked on this article from April until nomination. It had a substantial copyedit from Miniapolis at the GOCE, a thorough copyedit from Wikipedian Penguin during the nomination, and some copyediting from SchroCat, an FLC delegate. It received 5 supports, but also two opposes in the later stages of the six weeks it was open for. Despite a lot of generous contributions from editors mentioned previously, the article was deemed not worthy of being an FA by a few editors who opposed. I've been told for opt for a Peer Review, but I still don't know if this will ever be enough to please.

Thanks,  — Calvin999 12:28, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM

If it sounds like I'm being harsh, it's because people were critical of the prose at FAC.

  • In the lead, the line about the lyrics doesn't really work. Lyrics don't "involve" so much as "address" (or something similar), and I'm not keen on the passive voice.
  • "confident performance" and "vocal agility" are non-neutral- they're terms that belong in a review, not an encyclopedia article.
  • "and was covered live by British singer and songwriter Leona Lewis as part of a mashup with Lewis' 2008 single, "Better in Time"." Does an unreleased live cover really belong in the lead?
  • "and stated that a writing camp typically involves the label hiring ten recording studios for two weeks at the cost of $25,000 per day" I'm not really clear on what the point of this is
  • "Ray Daniels, the manager of musical duo Rock City (brothers Theron and Timothy Thomas), was present during the sessions, and stated that a writing camp typically involves the label hiring ten recording studios for two weeks at the cost of $25,000 per day.[2] Daniels revealed that it is where songwriters have written a song but have no music and where producers have music but no lyrics.[2]" This is a bit odd. What are you aiming to do with these quotes?
  • "Sham's manager organised for him to attend the camp as a result of knowing someone who worked for the record the label." This is all over the place. Do you mean something like "Sham's manager had arranged his attendance at the camp through an acquaintance who was an employee of the record label."?
  • "His inspiration was to envision" Do you mean "He was inspired by a vision"?
  • "responded "Let's give Rihanna a one-drop! Like, a response to 'I shot the sheriff!"[2]" Check your speech marks.
  • "Together, Sham and Rocky City write the lyrics to "Man Down" in twelve minutes." Tense
  • "Daniels said that once the writing camp concludes, Rihanna listens to all of the songs which have been composed for her and picks her favorites, comparing the process to a reality show whereby Rihanna is the judge." Tense? Also, surely it'd be "in which" rather than "whereby".
  • "Daniels said that once the writing camp concludes, Rihanna listens to all of the songs which have been composed for her and picks her favorites, comparing the process to a reality show whereby Rihanna is the judge." The phrasing makes this sound like gossip.
  • "Recorded during Rihanna's Last Girl on Earth tour, the song's instrumental was recorded" Repetition
  • "Daniels estimated the total cost of the writing camp to be approximately $200,000" Again, passive voice- why not just "as"?
  • "sing the song correctly as to achieve the desired sound" Why "as"?
  • "similarly priced fee" Why not just "similar fee"?
  • "With its strong Barbadian "patois",[10] Slant Magazine critic Sal Cinquemani described "Man Down" as one of Rihanna's "most confident vocal performances"." The subject of the sentence is "Slant Magazine critic Sal Cinquemani", but surely she is not the object "with ... strong Barbadian 'patois'".
  • "the song has lyrical context, with regard to Brown's assault on Rihanna." ??
  • "When asked by HipHopDX about how he reacted to listeners of the song saying that it condones violence, Sham dismissed the accusations:" This comes out of the blue, as you haven't introduced these claims.
  • "The song was released in France and Switzerland on July 11[30][31] and the Netherlands on July 15.[32]" Were these the only international releases?
  • "arguing that murdering a rapist as socially-acceptable justice is impermissible" Do you mean something like "arguing that portraying the murder of a rapist as a socially-acceptable form of justice is impermissible"?
  • "after the announcement that she would be a Hackney Weekend ambassador." What does this have to do with anything?
  • Is "cringeworthy" not a little informal?
  • The song has received at least a little bit of academic analysis- this would be a valuable addition to the article. For example, there's a long analysis in Nicole Fleetwood's "The Case of Rihanna: Erotic Violence and Black Female Desire", published in the African American Review- doi:10.1353/afa.2012.0047. Have you looked into the academic literature? If you don't have access to particular works, I may be able to help you.

To me, this does feel a little short of FA level. I fixed a few silly mistakes (like a missed apostrophe) but I suspect that there is more that could be done to improve the prose. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:43, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Calvin999, let me know when you've addressed Josh's comments above, so that I can offer some input myself. I'm reading a FAC right now and once I am done with it, I hope to assist you. The Wikipedian Penguin 15:52, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks.  — Calvin999 15:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • Barbadian singer
Two uses of this in the lead, but you don't call Marley a Jamaican singer.
  • Rihanna's confident performance – emphasizing her West Indian accent – and vocal agility praised.
This really ought not be in Wikipedia's voice. Sounds like a PR plug.
  • British singer and songwriter Leona Lewis
With the Barbadians this is too much. Why emphasis their nationality?
Background
  • Rihanna's then untitled fifth studio album
Wikilink Rihanna on first occurrence after the lead.
  • Daniels revealed that it is where songwriters have written a song but have no music and where producers have music but no lyrics.[2]
Revisit this for proper punctuation.
Production and recording
  • Together, Sham and Rocky City write the lyrics to "Man Down" in twelve minutes
The proper verb form here is "wrote", not "write"
  • In a Flavour Magazine interview, singer Shontelle said that Rihanna called her during the Last Girl on Earth tour and asked her to be involved with the song. According to Shontelle, Rihanna was present when "Man Down" was written in the recording studio.[5]
Why do we need to know the source of this info, and why the "according to"?
  • "I'm super inspired by reggae music [and it] has been a part of me since I was born, and I grew up listening to it. I grew up loving it. My favorite artists are all reggae artists ... I never get tired of it. I can listen to reggae music all day long, and it was exciting for me to take this on as my own and do a song like this, especially with the lyrics being like that."[6]
This quote is redundant, and I wonder why you don't just paraphrase it or cut it much shorter.
  • It is the responsibility of the vocal producer to tell Rihanna how to sing the song correctly as to achieve the desired sound, and to provide any riders
This reads like a how-to of vocal production. Rewrite it so it's more narrative-based.
  • Composition and lyrical interpretation
  • The first sentence has five cites. Please see WP:CITEOVERKILL
  • not meaning to kill her attacker
Explain how this was unintentional? Did she shoot him?
  • The long quote at the end should be condensed and/or paraphrased, as it's way too long.
Release and reception
  • I don't see anything critical here. Surely there must be some available, particularly if the song is a sort of rewrite of the Marley classic.
Chart performance
  • I can't help but feel this section is really better as a chart, or maybe a condensed form with an accompanying chart. Why is this all repeated in a chart at the bottom?
Background and synopsis
  • The video opens as the protagonist (Rihanna) shoots and kills a man while he walks through a busy train station
This makes the earlier statement that she didn't mean to kill him all the more confusing.
Controversy
  • and thus Rihanna should not have been allowed
Needs polishing to avoid "thus"
  • There's too much extended quoting in this section too. With the long quote in "Composition and lyrical interpretation", there are 437 words in quotes, which is about 17% or the article.
Conclusion

Not too bad overall, but there's way too much quoted material, and the "Chart performance" section is really just an un-bulleted list of chart achievements that ought to be summarized and included in an actual chart. I'm also concerned that the reception seems to be universally positive, which might be the case, but surely there is some criticism of the actual song, and not just the violent theme. RO(talk) 18:26, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 23 August 2015, 12:28 UTC)----


List of best-selling Latin albums in the United States[edit]

I am considering further improving this list to possibly nominate it FLC. I created this list a few years ago when I looked at the RIAA's certifications for Latin albums. As the list mentions, the RIAA has a special certification for Spanish-language which is why I compiled this list. I'd like to know if this article makes complete sense to the reader and if there's anything in the prose that might fall under original research. I also liked suggestions for improving the grammar in the prose if necessary. I've based this list on the List of best-selling albums in the United Kingdom with permission by the editor who helped promote to FL. I'm also considering adding sales provided by Nielsen SoundScan, but I'm not sure if I can find sales for every album listed in the article. Thank you, Erick (talk) 19:12, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999
Fixed
  • The first Latin albums chart were compiled → It's one chart, so it should be "was compiled", not "were compiled", unless there is more than one Latin album chart?
Fixed
Fixed
  • LP's from the US territory of Puerto Rico was included → Opposite situation. Albums were included, so it would be "were included"
Fixed
  • for Latin albums. → Remove, just because 'Latin albums' is being a bit repetitive.
Fixed
  • On June 1985, → Unless you give the day, it would be "In June 1985"
Fixed
  • into the chart → Not needed.
Fixed
  • Mi Tierra spent 25 → The album spent/ It spent. (You've just mentioned it as the subject, so you don't need to say it again so soon, as it sounds repetitive).
Fixed
  • weeks at number one in 1993 → weeks atop in 1993 (Again, repetition of 'number one')
Fixed
  • 33 weeks at this position in → 33 weeks in
Fixed
  • 1994 and was → 1994, becoming
Fixed
  • at number one in the Billboard 200, → at number one on the Billboard 200,
Fixed
  • making Selena the first Hispanic singer to debut at the top of this chart. → making her the first Hispanic singer to do so.
Fixed
  • main influential for → main influence for
Fixed
  • You write 11× Platinum and then later 35 times. Keep it consistent with how you format/phrase it.
Fixed
  • In the Key, I'd write (RIAA) after Recording Industry Association of America.
  • For The Best of the Gipsy Kings, it should sort under 'B', but still leave it in the same place, so just replace it with "{{sort|Best|[[The Best of the Gipsy Kings]]}}"
  • When I sort the Number of times certified platinum column, it doesn't sort in numerical order properly, going 11x, 12x, 14x, 16x, then multiple 1x and some 2x, then 35x at the end.
  • In the table, which chart is the Chart peaks column representing? The Billboard 200?
Fixed
  • In Ref 2, Billboard and PMG need link as it's the first usage.
Fixed
  • A problem I faced with my own FLC the other day is that all the refs (bar three which are RIAA) in the article are Billboard. I was told that third party sources are needed, otherwise it fails part 3b of the FL criteria, and will most likely incur opposes for your nomination. So if you can find non-Billboard sources, that would help. Otherwise, I doubt this list will stand any chance of being promoted.
I'll see if I can replace some of Billboard's sources with a third party reference.

I hope my comments help you. It's a really good list. Please ping me or leave me a talkback if you have any questions or comments.  — Calvin999 14:48, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Hello Calvin999 and thank you for your input. I having trouble getting the sort key for certifications to work right. I'm trying to get it sort for Latin certifications by decimal value to represent the shipment figures, but it isn't working. I'm thinking putting back the old shipment values and sales (if provided by Nielsens SoundScan) like I did before I revamped the list. What do you think? Erick (talk) 13:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
A problem with that is that shipments and sales are not the same thing, and that says Shipments (Sales).  — Calvin999 15:02, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
@Calvin999: Right, I meant putting the shipment values with actual sales in parenthesis like I did before. I don't know how to get the sort key for shipments to work still. I'm open to any suggestion as well. Erick (talk) 15:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
I've just fixed the last column for you. The certification 'x' now sorts in order.  — Calvin999 15:11, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
@Calvin999: Hmm, it's still a problem because albums that have been certified 14x Latin should be higher than 1x regular but lower than 2x. Erick (talk) 15:18, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Oh, so you want it to sort with the highest number first? Descending numerically?  — Calvin999 15:33, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
@Calvin999: Sorted by shipment value. Like 14x Latin represents 1.4 million units shipped so it should be higher than 1x regular but lower than 2x regular. Same thing with the others like 16x, 35x, etc. Erick (talk) 15:39, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Ah right, I wondered why you had decimalised in the sort coding (Also, don't include the dagger code inside the sort code in the future, keep them separate). Yes I think you should include the numerical certification of shipments in another column, because that isn't clear at the moment.  — Calvin999 15:51, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────── @Calvin999: Alright, I've added a column which contains the shipment values. Tell me what you think. Thank again, btw. Erick (talk) 16:14, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

¿Dónde Jugarán los Niños? looks like it has one too many zeros? It doesn't many that it sorts descending, you can click it again to sort it ascending.  — Calvin999 16:19, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
@Calvin999: I've corrected the album's shipment units. Erick (talk) 16:26, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay. I think it's fine now.  — Calvin999 16:46, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
Calvin999 I want to thank you once more for taking the time to review this list. I'll go search for non-Billboard sources to ensure it becomes. Thanks again! Erick (talk) 16:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome.  — Calvin999 16:54, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 16 August 2015, 19:12 UTC)----


True Detective (season 1)[edit]

I and a few other editors have spent a lot of time polishing this article and a few days ago, it passed its GA review. I would love to bring this to FA status and eventually I hope to do so within the near future. Any feedback would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, DAP388 (talk) 00:34, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 15 August 2015, 00:34 UTC)----


New Wave of British Heavy Metal[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review after having completely rewritten the article. For a list of changes see Talk:New Wave of British Heavy Metal#The state of the article. The matter treated in the article has been discussed continuously among scholars and fans since the 80s, so I referenced as much as possible every sentence. I would like to know if this frequent use of references is compatible with a fluid reading of the article or is an insurmountable obstacle. I also need advice on grammar and syntax and on the sections sequence. I would be very happy to update the article according to everyone's remarks!

Thanks, Lewismaster (talk) 19:30, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Retrohead
  • Can you lose the "or NWoBHM" from the brackets in the lead because it doesn't differ much from the first?
Some sources (like MusicMight) use NWoBHM instead of NWOBHM, so I put in both of them. Trimmed down.
  • Small c/e suggestion: drop "mainstream" from became international mainstream stars and "both" from both with live performances and new studio albums.
Done
  • Chronologically, I think the influences and legacy should read after the history section.
I was unsure about this, but you are probably right. Moved.
  • Just to ask, is Judas Priest considered part of the movement? I saw British Steel in the first wave (1979-1981) section, but is the band regarded as a predecessor or part of the NWOBHM?
Judas Priest are not part of the movement, but the albums of many estblished bands like them received a boost of sales because of the NWOBHM. They were a major influence for the new bands.
  • After reading the entire article, I can hardly detect some obvious abberation. In fact, this is very well researched and written in detail, so I suggest a GA nomination right away because the waiting line is immense.
I'll wait another week for eventual new suggestions and then I will apply for GA. Thanks for your help. Lewismaster (talk) 17:47, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 11 August 2015, 19:31 UTC)----


List of awards received by Lecrae[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I am considering nominating it as a featured list, but want to make sure that it is up to par first.

Thanks, 3family6 (Talk to me | See what I have done) 04:00, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999
  • His first album Real Talk received → Include the year of release in brackets
  • Same for After the Music Drops. Because the years of release are different to the when the awards were given or nominated. Same for subsequent albums.
  • first nomination at the Grammys for→ first Grammy Award nomination
  • The following year, he garnered two → I'm getting confused about what year we are in. The only date you've provided is 2007 at the start. I would say "At the x ceremony in *year*" or something, because I'm not keeping up with the dates.
  • There's repetition of "The following year" and "In the same year"
  • Personally, I think the lead is too long. Given the length of the list, I think one paragraph would be sufficient.
  • I think all info regarding charting should be removed, it seems irreverent and they aren't awards or nominations. This isn't a discography. Any chart info will be covered there, as well as album articles and his bio.
  • As of September 2014, he has sold over 1.4 million albums. → This is completed superfluous. I would replaced this with now many nominations and wins he has had.
  • Shouldn't the info box have a nominations column in red too?
  • The picture doesn't seem to fit properly, can it be made to be in the centre or enlarged?
  • All of the tables need to be marked up for access, so the Year column should be shaded. Use the coding from List of songs recorded by Lady Gaga to make it shaded grey.
  • In the BET Awards table, you could scope row the Award column so that Best Gospel Artist isn't repeated twice.
  • Same for Billboard Music Awards table with Top Christian Album
  • Shouldn't Billboard be italicised ?
  • Same for GMA Dove Awards dove awards (2012 Rap/Hip Hop Recorded Song of the Year and 2013 Rap/Hip Hop Recorded Song of the Year)
  • Same for Stellar Awards awards instead of repeating it every row six times.
  • HipHopDX in the refs should not be italics.
  • Same for Rapzilla
  • Ref 3 and 27HipHopDX shouldn't be linked, only the first time.
  • Same for 9 and 10 and 15 and 20 with Rapzilla
  • Same for About.com
  • Lecrae's tempalte nav box at the bottom of Lecrae should be at the bottom here too.

Hope these help. Please ping me with any comments or questions.  — Calvin999 15:56, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 11 August 2015, 04:00 UTC)----


Ferris Bueller's Day Off[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it's gotten to Good Article status, and I'm trying to push it to becoming a Featured Article. I think there may be issues with prose or superfluous info in the article. What should be done?

Thanks, The lorax (talk) 15:08, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 9 August 2015, 15:08 UTC)----


Rejoined[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I think this is one of the more interesting Star Trek articles I've worked on recently, and I think following J's comments during the GA Review I think it is also one of the best placed articles to make a run at FA. However, having only completed a couple of FA's before I'm still not at all confident with that process so I'd like to get some second opinions on issues with the article as they stand so that I don't waste anyone's time there.

Thanks, Miyagawa (talk) 09:22, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

I think you need to plum the depths of the sources that are out there.

  • The episode is at least mentioned in "This Species Which Is Not One: Identity Practices in Star Trek: Deep Space Nine", doi:10.1080/1040213022000013894. I don't think I can access it... doi:10.1111/j.1540-5931.2009.00703.x also has something.
  • There are a good few hits in the Deep Space Nine Companion ISBN 9780671501068, which actually has some really nice real world analysis. There's a whole section (pp. 278-80) on the episode, with some very interesting analysis. There's also a comparison to themes in episode "Dax" (p. 33) and the "Rom starts a union" storyline (from "Bar Association") was apparently considered as a b-plot for "Rejoined" or "Crossfire" (p. 315). There may be more. Might be a good one to get hold of, but there's a good hunk of it on Google Books. Definitely something to be using if you want to see DS9 episodes hitting FAC. (Wikimedia UK might buy it for you if you haven't the money.)
  • Thanks - I actually have a copy. I never thought about using google books to search for the episode (I just used the hard copy). Which of course means that I miss mentions of episodes outside of the normal couple of pages specifically on it. Like you say, it's a really good book - the best ST source until These Are The Voyages came along. Miyagawa (talk) 21:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks to Google Books indexing those pages, I've added those mentions along with one in the "Afterimage" episode during season seven as well. Miyagawa (talk) 08:47, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
  • This book has some discussion- it'll be worth downloading the PDF!
  • I've added the mention to the themes section as it helpfully supports an existing view from another source in there. (And I've downloaded the PDF for future use!). Miyagawa (talk) 09:06, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
  • From page 63 of this "Beyond the skepticism of the government body to which most of the main characters in Star Trek answer, Deep Space Nine diverges from the other series in the franchise on several other fronts. ... It is also the only series that resists the heteronormativity that is present in the rest of the franchise, most notably in “Rejoined” and the “Mirror Universe” episodes, even if its representation of bisexuality is problematized." Even if they're all saying the same kinds of things, a focus on what the academic literature has picked up (as well as citing as much good academic literature as possible!) would be great.
  • I think that would work well to expand the themes section. Miyagawa (talk) 21:55, 5 August 2015 (UTC)

Hope this is helpful. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:00, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 29 July 2015, 09:22 UTC)----


LiSA (Japanese musician, born 1987)[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because the article has come quite a long way from its creation in late 2011 and its appearance as a DYK blurb on the Main Page. Right now, the biography section is fairly comprehensive, with parts of her early life, early career as an indie musician, and her major career. As my second favorite singer (next to Mami Kawada, whose article I've brought to peer review three separate times), I was hoping to improve her article to Good Article status (there are quite a few sources and interviews with her online, I just haven't had the time to add them to the article, including sources regarding her musical style). I'm not sure if an article can be nominated for DYK more than once (say, once for creation and once for reaching Good Article status), but if it could, it would be a great achievement and promotion for the Anime and Manga WikiProject, which right now is lacking in active members.

Anyway, I still feel that the article is lacking a few things. For example, it doesn't have (yet) a section on her musical style (although her influences are mentioned in he biography). But as always, further help is appreciated. Other than this, what else can be done or expanded to give the article a good shot at passing a GAN?

Thanks, Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 03:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Hey, I skimmed over the article and it looks good. Just like you said, it needs a 'musical influences/style' section. Also, I noticed that her birth date is not sourced? Here are some minor issues I noticed:
You say "In primary school, she was inspired by seeing the band Speed on television", but that sounds ambiguous to me. Was she inspired to sing? Perform on piano? Or, make her debut as a singer?
"During her sophomore year, the band received advice that they should start making their own songs..." this might get challenged ({{By whom}})
It'd be better to give a translation of the Japanese song titles. It's just my suggestion though.
How about giving a critic commentary or something for significant releases along with the chart positions?

I know it's hard to get information on Japanese artists or works, but you have found some interesting facts about her. Good luck, this will make it through the GAN, I'm sure. Ryoga (talk) 14:25, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

@Ryoga Godai: The biographical stuff was taken from her Japanese Wikipedia page so they were just as ambiguous there. From what I can comprehend, I guess she was "influenced" (not really inspired) by Speed, though it could also be said that seeing them on TV helped her decided to become a singer. For the birthdate, I guess I'll just use Chucky's old biography since it's mentioned there. Finally, for the advice portion, I guess Chucky received advice from their peers. I'll fix those issues in a moment. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:13, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
I've addressed some of the issues raised above. If I have enough time (since I'm going back to university in a few days) I'll probably add a section on reception and music influences soon. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:34, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
Japanese Wikipedia has some of the weirdest statements out there. I guess the admins and bureaucrats are low on number there. The corrections fit in pretty well, the article is looking good. Is any data on how she ranks among anime song singers available? Like a poll, a commentary or something like that? That would be beneficial to the article too, I think. Ryoga (talk) 15:54, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
@Ryoga Godai: I don't know, but given that she's performed solo at the Budokan thrice (and sold out twice), got cast in the Japanese dub of Minions, and has a number of gold records, she's probably in the upper tier of anison artists. If anything, she's at the very least three times as popular as Kawada. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:59, 31 July 2015 (UTC)
If we can find a source for that, Oricon, Billboard, or any other newspaper, it'd be a great addition to the article! Ryoga (talk) 16:08, 31 July 2015 (UTC)

Okay here's my feedback:

  • Is "Love is Same All" a backronym, that is, it was constructed for her band, since Lisa was originally Risa? But I guess it can flop either way, not like BoA and Beat of Angel.
  • Found two dead links that should be able to be wayback'ed to their archives.
Thanks, will try to fix those. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "In primary school, she was inspired to sing by seeing the band" replace "sing by" with " sing after" ? Similar thoughts as the previous review.
  • years active, should it be 2010-present as her high school bands shouldn't really count toward her professional career. associated_acts should also exclude those.
  • The part about the band being named Love is Same All and herself being named that makes it a bit confusing, like whether there should be a LiSA (band)? Has it stayed around to support her music work or did it break up after she worked with Girls Dead Monster and started a solo career?
I think "Love is Same All" would be the band that comes with her during her live performances. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Girls Dead Monster / Keep the Beats! should be split from her discography to be put in a collaborations section.
    • I suppose that would make sense since technically she did not sing on those releases under the name LiSA. Would the 1 album and 4 singles then be split into its own Girls Dead Monster section then?-- 10:11, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
      • It's hard to say since parts of Girls Dead Monster are covered by the Angel Beats soundtrack article and other parts by Angel Beats! article. It can have its own table along with other collaborations. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 00:09, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Lisa covered the songs ...": cover implies the song was released for a different artist before and she is singing her cover version. Is that true? If not, change the wording.
Those songs from Kagerou Project were covers. If I recall correctly, the original songs used Vocaloids. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Might be good to have a section on her style. She sings a lot of anison, and mentioned Avril Lavigne as an influence. Is her music similar to that or is it more general J-pop? Any information about her vocal range? There's some good stuff in the Natalie interview about her being influenced by Blink 182, Oasis, Green Day.
Will try to write a section. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Also mention of Oricon top tens is okay for the history section. That she regularly has hits in the top ten (despite the charts being overwhelmed by AKB48 and the like) is fairly notable. She's not like some of those voice artists who consider themselves singers but their character albums land somewhere between 70 and 200.
  • Mention of any tours to promote the album? Has she done nationwide tours?
She has tours for each of her albums. I might add a few stuff, including her Budokan concerts, one of which sold out on both days. I could also mention that some stops on her Launcher tour had to be postponed due to illness. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Has she been any farther from Singapore? Aha, check out her Anime Expo bio:[1]
In case you're interested, she actually had a mini-concert in the Philippines on June 27, and I was able to see and even speak to her personally. She's also been to Malaysia, Indonesia, Thailand, the United States, China (includes Hong Kong), Taiwan, and Mexico, as far as I know. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Number of Gold albums/singles? Only see the one for Keep the Beats! Can you get some more RIAJ certifications listed if that were the case?
In case you missed it, Crossing Field was also certified Gold. Nevertheless, I'll add it to the article text. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 08:24, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

AngusWOOF (barksniff) 04:52, 2 August 2015 (UTC) updated 05:14, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: Some of the issues above have now been addressed. Pinging Juhachi, the article's creator and primary editor, for help in addressing the other issues that still need to be fixed. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:05, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

Some of her top ten hits should also chart in Billboard Japan, so you might want to visit that site? If they didn't chart there, then nevermind. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 00:01, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

The discography needs a little work! It's in a style not used for quite a few years now (e.g. sources directly on the chart position numbers, the year of release in the prioritised column over the release name, catalogue codes in the details box, etc.). There aren't any Billboard positions listed, and a big chunk of her certifications are missing (gold digital for Oath Sign, platinum digital for Crossing Field, gold digital for Rising Hope). The titles should also have kanji/translations next to their titles as well. Oh, and I think Leters to U is mis-sorted, it's an EP/mini-album, not a studio album, right? --Prosperosity (talk) 04:44, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Oh, and "Bright Flight / L. Miranic" isn't a song, it's two songs (so that needs to be formatted a little differently). --Prosperosity (talk) 04:45, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
I made some additions, what do you think? --Prosperosity (talk) 08:09, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
Looks really good! Thanks for structuring it! AngusWOOF (barksniff) 13:21, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: @Prosperosity: Many thanks for the fixes in the discography section. Now could you help in expanding the musical style section? Because I think once that's finished the article could be good enough to have a GAN. Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 13:35, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't really know her that well and I'm a little strapped for time, so I'm sure you or someone else would be able to find out more info than I could! --Prosperosity (talk) 04:06, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

@AngusWOOF: @Juhachi: @Prosperosity: It was a lot of hard work (and making sense with what Google Translate came up with), but I finally expanded the stubbish Musical style and influences section. Three paragraphs long, which I guess in proportion to the rest of the article is okay. Anyway, I still think the section might need some work: I'm not very confident with the wording I used, while due to the nature of Google Translate I don't even know if some of the information I added is correct or not, so it could need some double checking with the sources. Anyway, how is the article now? Is it good enough for a GAN? Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 10:52, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for digging up those details. It needs a little bit of structuring; is color a regular theme for her work? I'm also trying to get an understanding of the musical range of her work. Is it mostly rock? Anison? R&B? Pop? Are the dark songs typical of her repertoire or the exceptions? As a songwriter and lyricist what are the themes she tends to cover? It should be good to push for GA for the overall article. AngusWOOF (barksniff) 14:21, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
@AngusWOOF: I'm afraid I have no idea, I just included what the sources said. With that said, it could be argued that she's mostly a rock singer, but I have no idea on how to include and/or cite that, lest I fall into original research territory. And the section does have some structure: it's in chronological order, although I have no idea if that's an acceptable way to structure musical style sections (it's what I did to Mami Kawada's article months ago, prior to that article's most recent peer review). Narutolovehinata5 tccsdnew 15:07, 12 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 28 July 2015, 03:58 UTC)----


Thom Yorke[edit]

I've been picking away at this article for a while now. I think it's much improved since I started, but I don't think it's ready for a GA nomination and I'd like to get another pair of eyes on it to see what can be improved, particularly the "Musical approach" section. Thanks! Popcornduff (talk) 17:30, 20 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999
  • There are some dead links
  • For genres, instruments, assoc. acts, labels etc, you can use a hlist so it bullet points them and makes them clear. See "Man Down" info box for an example.
  • Associated acts generally are only included if there are three or more notable instances/songs/recordings/collaborations where Yorke has worked with someone. Not just once or twice.
  • best known as the singer and principal songwriter of the alternative rock band Radiohead. He is known → Repetition of known
  • is an English musician best known as the singer and principal songwriter of the alternative rock band Radiohead. → is an English musician. He is the lead singer and principal songwriter of the alternative rock band, Radiohead. (link alternative rock too)
  • He is known for his falsetto vocals. As a multi-instrumentalist, Yorke mainly plays guitar and piano, but also plays synthesiser, bass guitar and drums. → He is known for his use of falsetto, and is a multi-instrumentalist. While he predominantly plays guitar and piano, he also plays the synthesiser, bass guitar and the drums.
  • with schoolmates. → with his schoolmates.
  • After he finished his degree at the → After graduating from the
  • The 2000 Radiohead → Which album was this? First, second, third?
  • saw Yorke move → It's not just him if he is part of a band
  • In 2009, to perform the album live, he formed Atoms for Peace with musicians including Flea and longtime producer Nigel Godrich → This reads awkwardly, especially the second clause
  • the band released an original album, → So was their previous material covers and not original work?
  • he creates artwork for Radiohead's albums. → he creates the the bands album artworks.
  • Use of one line paragraphs/sentences should be kept to a bare minimum per criteria. There are a few instances of this, as well as two line paragraphs. I personally think it makes the article look messy and unfinished; a paragraph should ideally be 4 to 5 sentences.
  • Yorke has been critical of the music industry, → Why?
  • and with Radiohead and his solo work has pioneered alternative music → Should be a new sentence.
  • wear a patch over his eye. → You don't need to say "over his eye" because a patch already indicates that.
  • Yorke's family moved frequently. Yorke's → Repetition of Yorke successively.
  • after his son's birth; → after his birth;
  • Yorke was seven. Yorke moved → Repetition of Yorke close together again
  • The whole Early life section sys Yorke a lot to be honest. I know it's his name but you can use 'he', 'the singer' etc.
  • worked a few jobs → worked at various jobs
  • worldwide hit single → the article for Creep doesn't have any chart positions. What made it a hit exactly?
  • By the time of Radiohead's second album, → By the release of their second album
  • but Yorke was ambivalent about this success → Need context
  • Ref 1: The Guardian, not guardian.co.uk
  • Ref 5: link The Observer
  • Ref 11: link The New Yorker
  • Ref 18: Problem with the formatting, red link.
  • 26 and 27 are missing publishers and dates.
  • Same with 84
  • Ref 113 Don't WP:SHOUT
  • There's inconsistency with the date formatting throughout the references.

Hope this helps. I think it needs quite a lot of work. I don't think it would pass a GAN right now. Ping me if you need more help or have questions.  — Calvin999 15:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much. Yeah, I don't think it's ready for GA either - I've yet to really undertake that particular mission, but wanted some more feedback first. All your points are appreciated. Popcornduff (talk) 01:47, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 20 July 2015, 17:30 UTC)----


Beautiful Monsters Tour[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I feel it is already complete and near ready for GA.

Thanks, Red marquis (talk) 02:07, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

Hi. As you know, I've gone through the article. I made some changes to prose, and I've fixed several URL redirects found in the MTV sources. There are no other issues to be found here. As far as I can make out, this article meets Wikipedia:Good article criteria and is ready for nomination. Good work. =) Homeostasis07 (talk) 22:55, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Comment—Hi Red marquis. Your article has 17 KB of prose, which is not enough for a four-paragraph lead. You may receive objection there in a GA review, as MOS:LEAD is part of the GA criteria. I would strongly suggest a concise, well-summarized lead with two medium-sized or three small paragraphs. The Wikipedian Penguin 13:28, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the input. I'll look into the how I can reduce the size of the lede. =) -Red marquis (talk) 15:56, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
Made changes to shorten lede. How does this look? -Red marquis (talk) 14:13, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Still rather big. I suggest an average of three or four sentences per paragraph. This is a GA nomination I once reviewed at the time of its promotion with a similar amount of prose, and the lead size you should be aiming for. Good luck! The Wikipedian Penguin 16:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Lede has been pruned even further. Has it hit the sweet spot? -Red marquis (talk) 10:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
Anymore? -Red marquis (talk) 13:55, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Comments from JM

At first glance, this looks like an article that is ready for GAC. My view may change once I've looked a little more closely. Here I go...

  • The rationale on the poster image needs to be tidied up. Also, where's the evidence that it's been released for non-commercial/educational use?
  • Your double bill wikilink goes to an article about films.
  • The phrase "the frontperson of both bands" suggests that there are two bands which share a frontperson. You mean "the bands' respective frontpersons [or frontpeople]", but I do note that the OED doesn't list the word "frontperson". Same issue later in the same paragraph; also, you link "frontperson" at the second mention rather than the first.
  • "Hole's management, Q Prime". How about management company?
  • "However, Hole's management aggressively pursued Marilyn Manson amid her and singer Marilyn Manson's" Confusing to the uniniated (also, you've already linked the band). How about something like "However, Hole's management aggressively pursued the band Marilyn Manson, even amid the quarrel between her and Marilyn Manson's singer, also known as Marilyn Manson, ..." I'm not certain, but something to think on.
  • "The Long Hard Road Out Of Hell" of rather than Of (several times)
  • Do we have an article on the Korn/Rob Zombie tour to link to in the lead?
  • "Hole's management, Q Prime," As above
  • Do we really need the subsection titles in "Background and development"? They strike me as unnecessary.
  • Be aware of MOS:LQ
  • "He had reservations about Love, whom he pejoratively described in an interview with New Musical Express as "an opportunist" that he felt tried to exploit his band's newfound fame to bolster theirs" This sentence seems to turn Love into an object rather than a person. How about "He had reservations about Love, whom he pejoratively described in an interview with New Musical Express as "an opportunist" whom he felt tried to exploit his band's newfound fame to bolster hers."
  • "Manson accepted the offer to support their own third studio album Mechanical Animals" If you mean the band, you should spell it out fully. "Manson" surely refers only to the person
  • "Melissa Auf Der Maur" Shouldn't this be der rather than Der? (Other examples.)
  • "Manson and his band voted for early 1980s Brit-pop groups like Fun Boy Three and Fine Young Cannibals; while members of Hole wanted "more modern" bands." That semi-colon should just be a comma.
  • "who chose Imperial Teen" Link, please?
  • "Another stipulation in their negotiation was the cost of mounting each show, which resulted in revenues earned being split an even 50/50 between the two bands.[5][9]" This doesn't quite work, grammatically, and doesn't quite match what is said in the lead
  • "mutual admiration for one another" "mutual" implies "for one another"- you can remove the latter
  • "The allusion also extended to the polarity between each group's approach to the change.[3] Hole revamped their grunge sound into 'wholesome high-sheen, glitzy' alternative pop, while Marilyn Manson abandoned goth subculture-tinged industrial metal in favor of a hedonistic 'David Bowie-like glam rock'." Why single quote marks?
  • "The tour was covered extensively by MTV who anticipated the tour" Repetition
  • Is "banter" not a little colloquial?
  • "a 'lewd remark' about" Again
  • "stomping ground" is a little colloquial
  • "receptical [sic]" If this was spoken, how could it be misspelled? You should just correct MTV's mistake.
  • "Manson initially resisted responding to Love's criticism during their turn on stage" Again- "Manson" is the person rather than the band, I would have thought.
  • "However, after they performed their single, "The Dope Show", Manson" You should lose the comma after "single". The name is not a clause subordinate to the clause beginning "after"- it's part of it.
  • "Pamela Fallon refuted the announcement" I think refute is a bit strong. Challenged might be better.
  • " the inability among the two groups to resolve" How about of rather than among?
  • "that contain rare and unreleased footage including" In what way was the footage "rare"?
  • "Instagram ... Billy Corgan" Wikilinks?
  • You don't need to italicise "Rutgers University Press".

Your sources look great- there's a heavy reliance on MTV, but that's not a problem for GAC. As you can see, most of my comment are for rather small issues, and I've no doubt that this article will be ready for (and will easily pass) a GA review once you've dealt with my comments. Nice work! Josh Milburn (talk) 13:17, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 17 July 2015, 02:07 UTC)----


24 (TV series)[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I am interested in improving this from good to featured article status and would like feedback on the article.`

Thanks, Steven Zhang Help resolve disputes! 22:06, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Gabriel Yuji[edit]

A few suggestions that you might like to ponder:

  • I'll not list all them and I cannot but you may check for repeated links. You can only link an article twice (once in the lead, once in the body). Sutherland stands out as his name is linked twice just in the infobox and there is ten more (one in the lead, nine in the body). Another major one is Jack Bauer that is linked four times in the body (five if we count the image).
  • You don't need to repeat every person's name several times; you can call them just by the last name. "Joel Surnow" and "Robert Cochran", for example, are written seven times each, while "Kiefer Sutherland" is repeated more than twenty times.
  • Is the existence of 24: Live Another Day controversial? Per WP:LEADCITE you don't need to source it in the lead if it is not. The same goes for the rest of the sourced material in the lead.
  • You might reorder the lead a bit; it starts with the premise and then goes to airdates, then in the second paragraph it returns to the plot.
  • The second paragraph uses an untied "him"; it probably refers to Bauer but you may reword it. Actually, if you group the part about the plot in the start of the first paragraph into it... you won't need to.
  • Although I understand it is obviously important inside the series, I wonder if it's not too WP:IN-U to add the hour which each season starts.
  • Is it important to the reader to know that Surnow and Cochran's first discussions were over the phone and then on IHOP?
  • "24 episodes in a season, with each episode lasting an hour" – it's something that can be paraphrased, isn't it? I mean, quotes should be used to remark unique commentaries that otherwise would be difficult to be replicate. It's not the case here.
  • In fact, "This idea started ... 'race against the clock'" repeats the first paragraph of "Conception". Is it necessary?
  • "As a result of the timing nature of the series, a number of visual cues were projected onto the screen." – unsourced.
  • "Series conclusion" is a bit inflated with quotes; I guess most of them could paraphrased, focusing on why the series was cancelled ("we always wanted 24 to finish on a high note") and its impact ("it has redefined the drama genre and created one of the most admired action icons in television history") rather than sentimental stuff ("I will never be able to fully express my appreciation", "it is the loyal worldwide fan base that made it possible for me", "I echo his sentiments of gratitude", etc).
  • "'We are extremely ... and unforgettable eight days" – missing a quote mark in the end of the sentence.
  • "said that the film will be a two-hour representation of a twenty-four-hour time frame" and then "It's going to be a two-hour representation of a 24 hour day" – repetitive.
  • Is it important to the reader to know that his interview was given at a BAFTA event?
  • "an involvement ending with Scott's death in August 2012." – although it's obvious he could not continue working after his death, I guess anyway it needs a source for his death.
  • Overall, the section "Feature film development" seems a bit sparse. In addition to being composed mainly by short paragraphs, it follows a "In X date, it happended" format.
  • "The series is set ... back to 11:00 a.m." Is everything here presented through the plot to not require a secondary- or tertiary-party source?
  • Again, is it important to know what he said was said at a "Q&A session held in Los Angeles"?
  • "Sutherland ... is the only actor to appear in all of the show's 204 episodes and the television film, 24: Redemption" – needs a source(?)
  • "while Mary Lynn Rajskub, who plays Chloe O'Brian, has appeared in the last seven seasons." – needs a source(?)
  • "with Time stating that the show took" – Time didn't say that, James Poniewozik did.
  • Homeland,24 executive producer – space needed
  • "describing it as 'stunning - everyone...'" – the source uses a period. I'm not sure you can change it but if you can at least you should be consistent on the use of WP:DASH.
  • "... and real, even." – missing a quote mark in the article.
  • "it's fourth season" – its.
  • "(though mistakenly quoted it as an advertisement for the second season" – parenthesis opened but not closed
  • "They could be next door." should be 'They could be next door.' as it's a quote inside a quote, per MOS:QUOTEMARKS
  • Actually, the are too many paragraphs on torture and Islamophobia. I mean, it's important to point the critics but Clinton, Scalia, Garofalo, Aghdashloo, and Gordon opinions on it could be trimmed. Of course it's important to show it impacts and the show's productor response but the reader doesn't need to know what Clinton or Scalia said, but that they said. The same goes for Garofalo and Aghdashloo. And although Gordon's should gain more emphasis than the others, it's almost a full transcription. For example, "I actually do have regrets about one particular moment, which had more to do with the promotion of the show." is something that could be easily removed without loss.
  • You can call LA Times, BuddyTV and NY Times reviewers by their names.
  • The entire prose in "Ratings" is unsourced(?)
  • Well, I'm not sure "24 was nominated for and won several other television awards including the Emmy Awards, Golden Globe Awards, and Screen Actors Guild Awards." can be unsourced but below there are sources for it. However, "It is one of only four TV series (along with NYPD Blue, The West Wing and Breaking Bad) ever to have won the Emmy Award, the Golden Globe and the Satellite Award for Best Drama Series." must have a source.
  • "Distribution" is a bit sparsed. It stars with "24 was distributed across the globe" but then with have nothing else supporting this. Then it talks about the UK TV distribution. We have a separate paragraph discussing the DVDs in the UK (which could be grouped with the former paragraph) and the US DVDs too. Then we go onto a well-detailed description of a special edition of the first season. But there's no such description for other seasons DVDs; okay, maybe there isn't special editions every season but what about the regular ones? Then we go to the film—albeit unsourced—to finally return to Blu-Ray information. Then, we have two separate one-sentence paragraphs to talk about the same subject—digital distribution. And, Region 2 and 4 releases are mostly unsourced.

I hope it helps a bit, Steven Zhang. It's a shame you had no commentaries on the last PR and that this one has been almost a month without any input. Regards, Gabriel Yuji (talk) 03:56, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 12 July 2015, 22:07 UTC)----


Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because… I'd like to nominate this for Wikipedia:Featured article candidates and I'd like the most critical peer review possible to work it up to FAC presentation.

Thanks, The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 23:56, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999

This has been waiting a few weeks without response, so here's some comments from what I found looking at the article.

  • Alphabetise the genres in the info box
  • Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814 is the fourth studio album by American recording artist Janet Jackson, released on September 19, 1989, by A&M Records. → Long winded. Try: Janet Jackson's Rhythm Nation 1814 is the fourth studio album by American recording artist Janet Jackson. It was released on September 19, 1989, by A&M Records.
  • Despite label executives desiring → Although label executives wanted
  • Collaborating with record producers → Collaborating with musical duo (since they are songwriters and producers)
  • for youth because → for youth groups because (I doubt she was a role model for all youth)
  • Notable for → Noted for (?)
  • Songs range → The songs range
  • appeal along multiple → appeal across multiple
  • sixfold → six-times
  • , among other publications "best of" album lists. → Unless you're going to give an example(s), I'd remove this.
  • It has been cited as an influence in various musical trends, inspiring numerous artists. → Such as?
  • It is only album → A word is missing here
  • For further promotion, → What was the previous promotion in order for this to be further?
  • She became regarded → To me, to reads a bit awkward
  • She became regarded as a fashion icon, with her "Rhythm Nation" attire being emulated by youth. → What attire?
  • producer Jimmy Jam later → Link Jimmy Jam.
  • Jimmy Jam stated → Jam stated (Use surname only following the first mention)
  • The Background section, I think, is too reliant on long quotations.
  • According to Jimmy Jam, → Same here, use Jam
  • Actually, make: According to Jimmy Jam, he, Terry Lewis and Jackson → Jam, Lewis and Jackson
  • Prior its recording, → Missing word
  • sixfold platinum → six-times platinum
  • The first two paragraphs of Release and commercial performance should remain as so. But the following paragraphs discussing the singles should be in their own section called Singles
  • You start Composition and production, Release and commercial performance and Critical reception with "The album"
  • Elizabeth the Queen Mother → Queen Elizabeth The Queen Mother
  • Rhythm Nation World Tour 1990 is far too detailed. It should be one, perhaps two, paragraphs at the very most. There's no point having a Main article tag if this much info is being used.
  • In the Accolades section, you either have prose or a table, not both, as it's repeating the same thing.
  • The Organization column should be marked up for access (shaded grey) and I would rename it to Ceremony. I don't think magazine ranks should be included here, they aren't 'awards' as such.
  • Tables like this should also go at the bottom of an article, with the others.
  • All songs except interludes and "Black Cat" are co-produced by Janet Jackson. → A bit irrelevant.
  • United Kingdom Albums → UK Albums Chart
  • There doesn't seem to be many charts?

I'm actually going to buy this album now, I want to listen to it after reading this. Please ping me if you have any comments of questions. Hope this helps.  — Calvin999 15:48, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the notes. I hope to continue editing the article over the weekend. The Bookkeeper (of the Occult) 14:03, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
You're welcome. I actually bought this album yesterday.  — Calvin999 15:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 9 July 2015, 23:56 UTC)----


Journey Through the Impossible[edit]

I'd love to bring this quirky science fantasy to FA, and I'm not sure what edits are needed to get the article to that level of quality. Any and all suggestions will be much appreciated.

Thanks, Lemuellio (talk) 15:06, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • Looks good
Plot
I guess it's okay to not cite plot material, but it seems odd to allow what amounts to WP:OR.
  • Some years before the play begins
This might be a little informal. Would "Several years" convey the same thing?
  • Dr. Ox is a sinister Tempter figure
Should "tempter" be capped?
  • The doctor, catching Georges alone, reveals Georges's true parentage
How about, "The doctor, catching him alone, reveals Georges' true parentage"?
  • and persuades him to drink a magic potion which allows him to go beyond the limits of the probable and journey through the impossible.
I'd replace "which" with "that", since it's more of a restrictive clause.
Themes
  • However, the plot of the play sets it distinctly apart
"However" is rarely helpful, so avoid it whenever possible.
  • the plot of the play sets it distinctly apart from the rest of Verne's work: where his novels are based on meticulously researched facts and plausible conjectures
I think that colon ought to be a comma.
  • celebrating it for its humanistic achievements and discoveries but also warning that it can do immense harm
You need a comma to preceded "but" here.
  • the play can be considered Verne's most purely science-fictional work
"Can be" considered seems a bit vague and/or passive.
  • The play, by exploring science in both positive and negative lights, has been said to show Verne in transition
As with above, this seems unnecessarily passive.
Production
  • but under the terms of the contract Verne's profits barely earned him a living.
The profits don't really "earn you a living". They enable a living, but this could be better.
  • Verne's stage adaptation of his novel Around the World in Eighty Days, however, was a smash hit in 1874,
Another "however" that could be dropped.
  • almost overnight
There's no such thing as an overnight success, so maybe drop this idiomatic expression that reads a bit cliché, especially surrounded by what is otherwise excellent prose.
  • However, a novel featuring a similar trip around
Another
  • According to the féerie historian Paul Ginisty,
This attribution might not be necessary.
  • The music was by Oscar de Lagoanère, a prolific composer and music director.
I'd rewrite this in an active voice, but IO can see why you might want "music", not de Lagoanère as the subject of the sentence.
Reception
  • The Parisian critic Arnold Mortier, in a long review of the play, found it "very beautiful and very elegant"
Instead of the longer quote here, it might be better as: "The Parisian critic Arnold Mortier, in a long review of the play, described it as "beautiful" and "elegant", since those "verys" add little.
  • Nice critical balance in this section, BTW.
Rediscovery
  • However, it remains relatively little-known among his works
Try to minimize use of "however" in the article. I think a few are okay, but there are several that ought to be reconsidered.
  • Conclusion

The first thing that strikes me is how well-written this article is. The prose is overall quite excellent. The second thing is the neutrality and balance, and views of the work seem to have been given a comprehensive treatment. This is a great article. I love Verne (who doesn't), but even those who are less familiar with his work will find this to be enjoyable reading. Nicely done! Please let me know when you take this to FAC, as I'd love to have another look. RO(talk) 21:04, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks so much! All of these are good points. I'll get to work on the article.--Lemuellio (talk) 23:53, 15 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 8 July 2015, 15:06 UTC)----


Misty Copeland[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because she is currently in the spotlight having been on the cover of Time and featured on 60 Minutes in May and having gotten a groundbreaking promotion this week. I would like feedback to prepare this for WP:FAC.

Thanks, TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 19:52, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • The first sentence seems to offer more info about ABT than Copeland.
  • On June 30, 2015, Copeland became the first African American woman to be promoted to principal dancer in ABT's 75-year history [3][4][5] after being named one of the 100 most influential people in the world by Time the prior month.[6][7]
I'd rearrange this so we don't go back in time with the second clause.
Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 12:10, 23 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Per WP:LEADCITE, most if not all of these cites should be in the article body, but not the lead.
  • The 1998 legal proceedings involved filings for emancipation by Copeland and restraining orders by her mother.[9] Both sides dropped legal proceedings,
Copyedit this so you don't repeat "legal proceedings".
Done.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:46, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Stylistically, she is considered a classical ballet dancer.[12]
This seems out of place in the last paragraph. Maybe it would be better near the top.
Now in second sentence.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 07:13, 21 August 2015 (UTC)
Early life
  • Might be too much detail about her mother's marriages and boyfriends. Seems a bit off-topic.
  • When she was seven, Copeland saw Nadia on Lifetime and suddenly Nadia Comăneci was her new role model.[20]
Casual readers might not realize that Lifetime is a television station.
Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 05:50, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Copeland never studied ballet or gymnastics formally until her teenage years. However, she did enjoy choreographing
Avoid "however" whenever possible, which is almost always.
O.K.--TonyTheTiger (T / C / WP:FOUR / WP:CHICAGO / WP:WAWARD) 04:05, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
Would be better to say "When she saw Paloma Herrera perform".
  • she declined with visions of a subsequent summer with ABT.[38]
"visions" doesn't seem right here.
Custody case
  • Would "Custody battle" be more descriptive? Or is that too loaded?
  • Copeland lived and trained with Cynthia and Patrick Bradley for nearly three years when she was 13 years old,
This needs a rewrite.
  • Scan for opportunities to replace "Copeland" with a pronoun, as it seems a bit overused.
American Ballet Theatre
Drop the isbn.
Early ABT career
  • sidelined due to a lumbar stress fracture
Is it notable enough to explain how she sustained the injury?
  • medically induced physical maturation,
She was 19 in 2001, so what's the deal with her puberty being medically induced?
  • The last paragraph of this section could benefit from some copyediting to improve the prose. It's a little too like a list of facts without bullet points.
Soloist
  • The fourth paragraph needs some improvements to transition through all those points.

The section is really long, so be sure you aren't giving us too much detail.

  • It might be helpful to separate the material to do with her books and calendars as not really about her work as a soloist ballerina.
Endorsements
  • As with the previous sections, I worry that this is less a work of prose and more a bullet pointless list of everything she'd done. E.g., are soda commercials especially notable to her illustrious career?
  • (that was available on newstands on August 14)
It's not necessary to include details like this one, which only serves to bog stuff down.
Works
  • What happened to the calendars and youth book?
Conclusion

Overall, this is quite comprehensive, but perhaps too much so. While there is lots of details, these things need to be worked into an overarching narrative, which is currently hard to discern in places. The bones of an FA are here, but please take some care to reinforce the narrative, staring with a reevaluation of each point for notability. She's a real hero and budding icon, so it would be great to get a better sense of her life and person, versus an extended resume. There is too much detail about her mothers relationships, but I see how they helped from her life story. For example, you mention in passing her struggles with racial issues, but nothing concrete jumps out, so we don't learn anything that isn't true of pretty much anyone who is multiracial. Tie it into her story. The emphasis needs to be on Misty, not her mother. Great work overall. Thanks for working on this important topic. RO(talk) 19:15, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 2 July 2015, 19:52 UTC)----


Circus Juventas[edit]

This article is the product of a good deal of work from last summer and now I'm aiming to take it to FAC. It's my first time here (and, if all goes well, at FAC) so any guidance re: prose, content, images is welcome. Thanks for your time and help!

Best, BobAmnertiopsisChatMe! 16:21, 23 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • ranging in age from 3 to 21
How about, "ranging from 3 to 21 years old"?
Yes check.svg Done
  • From there, the school's enrollment quickly expanded and the organization initiated a campaign to fund a $2.1 million permanent big top facility which opened in 2001 on Saint Paul parkland in the Highland Park neighborhood.
You're missing a comma before that last clause, which is non-restrictive.
Yes check.svg Done, I think.
  • while noting the occasional mishap of the school's performers.
Is this worth expanding upon?
I reworded it to clarify that the reviewers have picked up on the fact that in shows, students have occasionally botched tricks. Does it read more clearly now?
History
  • Betty Butler wondered, "Wouldn't it be great if we could do something in Minnesota ..."[4]
Drop the terminal ellipsis.
Does that work?
  • around thirty more students were enrolled
It would be better to just state the total enrollment at this time than to say "30 more".
Going back to look at the sources to see what they say. Doing...
  • the estimated cost of the project was quoted at $700,000 with a groundbreaking planned for April 1998.[9]
You need a comma before "with a groundbreaking".
Yes check.svg Done
  • Ultimately, the project totaled $2.1 million[4] and by 2006, the school was $700,000 in debt.[14] It was, however, working
Words like "ultimately" and "however" are rarely useful or appropriate in formal writing.
Yes check.svg Done
  • the circus school enrolled students from ages six to 21
We would normally spell out number lower than nine, but the juxtaposition of "six" and "21" is a little odd.

Yes check.svg Done

Facilities
  • Is the facility really in a residential neighborhood?
Yep, it's a biggish neighborhood that also includes a golf course, municipal water park, and parkland. The circus is tucked away on a plot of this parkland.
Bleacher collapse
  • sending seven people to the hospital
Were any of the injuries serious?
It's not given in any of the sources unfortunately.
Performances
  • according to Dan Butler
This seems unnecessary.
Yes check.svg Done
Other engagements
  • This needs some polishing, as it's difficult to list so many items and still retain the flow of good prose.
Music
  • In 2005, upon discovering his affinity for the mandolin and fiddle, the Butlers asked if Ostroushko would volunteer to play a Celtic song at the permiere of their upcoming summer big top show, Dyrnwych.[51]
This is confusing, whose affinity did they discover?
Yes check.svg Done, let me know if it's still unclear.
Reception
  • "[T]here is nothing child-like about the talent in this show. The budding stars fearlessly swing, flip, and soar through the air like pros."[56]
There's no need to bracket that "t", as typographical conformity allows for minimal change to quoted material such as adding or removing caps without the need for brackets.
Yes check.svg Done
  • There's an issue with citation #18: ([2]). I think that date range is messing up the template.
Yes check.svg Done
Conclusion

This is a very well written and presented article. Scan for comma usage, though, as I see some missing ones, particularly those that set off nonrestrictive clauses. The "Other engagements" section reads too much like a list, so see if you can add some topic and transition sentences to polish the prose. Nicely done. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 15:33, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley=[edit]

  • Lead
    • "Today, Juventas is" – WP:DATED. You need to say something like "As of 2015 Juventas is…"
  • History
    • Although you have introduced the Butlers in the lead, I think you would be wise to do so again in the opening of the main text: "The founders of Circus Juventas, Dan and Betty Butler, …"
    • "while Betty was an aerialist" – if this means simultaneously, fine; if it just means "and Betty…" I'd change the "while"
    • "so-called" – shouldn't be hyphenated here, as the phrase is not being used as an attributive compound.
    • "The Butlers kicked off" – perhaps a touch informal for an encyclopaedia article?
    • "A total of $627,183 were disbursed" – singular noun (total) with plural verb.
    • "Neighborhood STAR which sought to fund neighborhood initiatives" – repetition of "neighborhood" could be avoided by making the second one "local", perhaps.
    • The picture of the big top could do with alt-text
    • "to resolve the issue" – I'd be cautious about using "issue" as a synonym for "problem". The advice of Plain Words is shrewd: "Issue: this word has a very wide range of proper meanings as a noun, and should not be made to do any more work" – the work, for instance of subject, topic, consideration and dispute."
    • "estimated that 90% of work" – better as "estimated that 90 percent of work": see MOS:PERCENT
    • "As of 2010" – not sure of the import of "as of" here. Does it just mean "in"?
  • Facilities
    • "bleacher" – evidently a term used only in America. A link, please.
    • There is a good deal of WP:DATED in this section. All the things in the present and future tenses will get out of date unless carefully maintained. I'm sure you are going to maintain them, but the matter will be raised at FAC, and you would be well advised to redraw them: " The additional space will house" -> "The additional space would house", "In response, the Butlers are considering" -> "In response, the Butlers said that they were considering" and so on.
    • "would likely cost $10 million, require a capital campaign to fund,[36] and likely not begin" – to avoid the repetition you might make one of the "likely"s a "probably".
    • "the school is performing a small expansion to their Highland Park space" – singular noun and verb with plural pronoun.
  • Performances
    • "The school typically puts on two shows per year" – following the sound advice, "Prefer good English to bad Latin", I'd make "per year" "a year".
    • "put more focus into" – does one focus into things? "focus on" would seem more natural.
    • "integrating said acts" – the "said" grates rather. Perhaps just "the", "these" or "those"?
    • "new permanent big top facility" – how does a big top facility differ from a plain big top?
    • "real outlaws, lawmen, and singers, including Lillie Langtry" – Lillie Langtry was none of those three things.
  • Other engagements
    • This is a very long list, and I rather lost the will to live half-way through. Could you give us the highlights and confine the rest to an efn footnote?
  • Music
    • "came from local mandolin player Peter Ostroushko" – this puts me in mind of the advice of The New York Times style guide on the subject of the false title: "Do not make titles out of mere descriptions, as in harpsichordist Dale S. Yagyonak. If in doubt, try the 'good morning' test. If it is not possible to imagine saying, 'Good morning, Harpsichordist Yagyonak,' the title is false."

I hope these few comments are of some help. Tim riley talk 09:35, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 23 June 2015, 16:22 UTC)----


Mayabazar[edit]

I, along with Kailash29792 and Ssven2, am aiming to bring Mayabazar to FA status upon a suggestion by Dr. Blofeld. Mayabazar happens to be my first attempt at a FA, second for Ssven2 and third for Kailash29792. Thanks, Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:13, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Skr15081997[edit]

  • For Telugu language sources use |language=Telugu in the cite templates.

--Skr15081997 (talk) 05:00, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:13, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
  • 5 sentences in the lead start with "The film".
  • "eighth in the series of the adaptations of the folk tale Sasirekha Parinayam." We can have a note regarding the other seven versions.
  • The info regarding the technicians & 400 members can be moved to the filming section.
  • The fact that 4 members of the cast were alive during the release of the digitally remastered version would be appropriate in "Digitisation and colourisation" section.
  • "Telugu singer include stage actor Madhavapeddi Satyam" something is wrong about this.
  • " with no duplicate houses looking alike." If they are duplicate then they would surely be alike.
  • supervision of the art directors
  • Why is "Film, TV and Theatre Development Corporation and Kinnera Art Theatres" in italics?

--Skr15081997 (talk) 09:15, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

@Skr15081997: All your comments were resolved by Ssven2 in my absence, except the second, as we do not have any information about all the other seven films. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:48, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from IndianBio[edit]

For the Telugu language titles in the references, you have used the corresponding English title in braces. Please use the trans_title parameter in the citation where it should be ideally placed. —Indian:BIO [ ChitChat ] 07:06, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Yes check.svg Done Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:11, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Srivin[edit]

Hi bro, why dont you add details in popular culture for instance please check out the Telugu films in which the songs from this film has been parodied. "Vivaha Bhojanambu" was reused in animation film Ghatothkacha. Not only Aha Naa Pellanta, even other songs were also named as films. Srivin (talk) 07:37, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

@Srivin: I thought of that and it is best to add the info. — Ssven2 Speak 2 me 07:39, 3 June 2015 (UTC)
Added info regarding Vivaha Bhojanambu (1998), Choopulu Kalisina Shubhavela (1988) and Ghatotkach (2008). Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:12, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Viriditas[edit]

Prose will need a close review before FAC. For example, the last paragraph of the lead says: "The Telugu version's digitally remastered and colourised version was released on 30 January 2010. It too was successful both critically and commercially." Two things: first, the repetition of "Telugu version's...colourised verison" should be removed. There are any number of ways to do this. You could say, "The digitally remastered and colourised Telugu version was released" or something along those lines; second, the last sentence would work better merged with the previous. Something like this: "The digitally remastered and colourised Telugu version was released on 30 January 2010 and was critically and commercially successful." Viriditas (talk) 06:28, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

@Viriditas: Rephrased as per your suggestion. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:37, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Bollyjeff[edit]

Lead section:

  • "produced ... under the Vijaya Vauhini Studios" Under the building? Improve the grammar.
  • "the eighth in the series of the adaptations" Is there an official series of adaptations? Watch out for unintended messages in the text.
  • ₹ 200,000. There should be no space between ₹ and the figure, per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style#Currencies.
  • "Ghantasala orchestrated and recorded four songs composed by S. Rajeswara Rao apart from composing the rest after the latter left and Marcus Bartley was the cinematographer." Very confusing about the music and then a couple words thrown in about cinematographer at the end.
  • "with its cinematography, art direction and visual effects," What about them?

I am afraid this would get killed at FAC. You need to have it copy edited first. BollyJeff | talk 13:42, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@Bollyjeff: Comments resolved by Ssven2 in my absence. Made a request at GOCE for a thorough c/e. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • I am not sure that you need a separate section for 'Legacy' and 'In popular culture'. The data each seems fairly interchangeable at present.
Initially we had only a Legacy section. During a c/e before GAR, it was split into two sections for easy reading. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 02:27, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
For it to be split, there should still be a clear difference between what is in each section. For example, wouldn't stuff about text books and names of newspapers be better in the second section? Also, you could consider removing or changing the name of the second section title for another reason. To some FA reviewers, 'In popular culture' sounds like 'trivia' which could be a problem. BollyJeff | talk 12:10, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Removed the second section title. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 12:19, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
Okay, now everything should be as close to chronological order as possible in the section.
Done. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • You list a budget for both original and remake. Is there no information on the earnings of either one?
Remake? Which Remake? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Sorry, I meant the colourized re-release. BollyJeff | talk 12:18, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Oh! Well, there is no reliable information available about the earnings of either one. When i expressed this doubt to Krimuk90, he said that it is not such a big issue. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Make sure you go through the toolbox at the top of this page. For example, you seem to be missing alt-text on some images. There are also some duplicate links in the 'casting' , 'filming', and and 'music' sections.
I and Ssven2 have added the alt comments. The duplicate links shall be fixed soon. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:04, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • "This was the first time in his career that Rama Rao played the role of Krishna". Were there others times after? How many? Was it because he was well liked in this role that he did it many times? Needs some elaboration.
Rama Rao reprised the role of Krishna in seventeen unrelated films. He became an ideal actor to play Rama and Krishna in Telugu cinema. This was covered in the legacy section with a note mentioning those unrelated films as per Dr. Blofeld's comments at the GAR. This may be trivial, but for better understanding : M. L. Narasimham of The Hindu - Forty-thousand multi colour calendars of NTR as Lord Krishna were distributed and most of them adorned the drawing rooms, offices and other establishments and some even found their way to the prayer rooms of Telugu homes. Utmost care was taken to design his get up (make up: Pithambaram and Bhakthavatsalam) and NTR did the rest. The ‘Lord’ had arrived! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 04:10, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Then could you please change that first sentence to "This was the first of many times in his career that Rama Rao played the role of Krishna"? And I would not say that this is too trivial. BollyJeff | talk 12:18, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
Changed the first sentence as per your suggestion. Can you suggest me where to place that calendars issue? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
If it happened as part of the initial release, then Release section would be the place for it. I do not see the full source to know if that is the case. BollyJeff | talk 23:05, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
the source Pavanjandhyala (talk) 01:59, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
Yeah it doesn't say exactly when, but it would probably be okay in this section. However, the source also says "The previous year he had made a brief appearance as Krishna in Sonthavooru", so it was technically not his first appearance. Probably his first full length role, but don't you think the minor appearance should be mentioned as well? BollyJeff | talk 00:55, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Done. Mentioned about his brief appearance in Sontha Ooru. Will add the calendars issue later today. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:10, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
  • "Telugu and Tamil bilingual" and "bilingual film in both Telugu and Tamil languages" in back to back sentences.
Done. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • In 'Themes and influences' it would be nice to have another source or two, and name who said what about the themes, rather than just stating everything as a fact.
This is it, sadly! Pavanjandhyala (talk) 15:53, 12 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Jaguar[edit]

Just noting some prose concerns I can find along the way:

  • "₹ 200,000" - there appears to be a space in between the symbol (oh, I just realised it was mentioned above!)
  • The first paragraph in the lead would need to be re-organised in order to meet the FA criteria.
  • "Mayabazar was the eighth in the series of the adaptations of the folk tale Sasirekha Parinayam" - this is a run-on sentence, what kind of adaptation is it? Is it the eighth film adaptation or eighth overall? If I knew what it was I could re-structure this sentence to something like Mayabazar was the eighth adaptations of the folk tale Sasirekha Parinayam
  • To meet the FA criteria, the plot segment in the lead could be expanded slightly to summarise more
  • "The digitally remastered and colourised Telugu version was released on 30 January 2010 and was critically and commercially successful" - could be rephrased to The digitally remastered and colourised Telugu version was released on 30 January 2010 and was similarly met with critical acclaim or something similar?
  • Not enough on development/production is in the lead. More importantly I would recommend slight re-structuring of the lead, I could help with that once all of the above are clarified!

I'll try and find more as I go along. JAGUAR  14:10, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

@Jaguar: Comments resolved. I request some time to elaborate the plot. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 06:12, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Artscribbler[edit]

The fact about the film becoming the first Telgu film to be colorised and digitally mastered would be of point of interest to many readers,it should perhaps be mentioned earlier in the article. --Artscribbler (talk) 19:45, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the participation. Well, the lead section is summarised according to the flow of the article and perhaps, placing information regarding the first Telugu film to be colourised and digitally mastered may break the flow of the lead. Since the article is currently at WP:GOCE, the copy-editor would decide a better position for the same. Face-smile.svg Pavanjandhyala (talk) 05:14, 26 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Csisc[edit]

Dear Mr.,

First, I thank you for your work about Mayabazar that talks about a Tamil Classical Film. However, you had missed some important details. In fact, you had only talked about the expenses of the film. You did not talk about its income... Furthermore, the abbreviation of INR is not supported by computers... So, try to write INR instead of . Try to expand this... This will better the output of your excellent work. Moreover, you had not well described the places where the scenes had been done and how the fees had been allocated for the Mayabazar film and you had not well estimated the value of Roubie in USD so that the users can get a better overviews of the material expenses of the film.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 21:29, 27 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the participation. I feel sorry and sad to say that i missed out details about the film's income because no reliable information is available regarding the same. Ditto with the fees of the actors and technicians. With the limited resources we had, i could expand the Production section and sadly, that information did not inform the places where the film was shot particularly. I shall change the template to INR text soon as per your suggestion. But i could not understand the statement you had not well estimated the value of Roubie in USD so that the users can get a better overviews of the material expenses of the film, Can you please explain me in detail? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 00:47, 30 June 2015 (UTC)
Dear Mr., I thank you for your reply. What I meant is just to give what the INR is worth in the time of the film. For example, the gram of gold is worth 2435.47 INR in 2015 due to the inflation. However, it was worth 1782.26 INR in 2009. The INR of the mid XXth Century has not the same value as the INR of nowadays... So, you have just to convert the gram of gold in INR as of the time of the publication of the film. Yours Sincerely, --Csisc (talk) 15:51, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
@Csisc: One of the co-nominators have addressed this issue. Please go through the article once and suggest the right way if we are wrong. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:23, 18 July 2015 (UTC)
@Pavanjandhyala: Well done. Excellent work. Thank you. Yours Sincerely, --Csisc (talk) 12:32, 18 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Dr. Blofeld[edit]

I'll make most of the minor edits myself, but I feel that the Themes section isn't of FA quality. It's so weak in fact that it tells me nothing about themes but reiterates the plot scenario, rendering it redundant. Is there no way you can further develop it to read as more scholarly?♦ Dr. Blofeld 06:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

No, but i have an idea. Since there are bleak chances of developing the section, why not rewrite/remove few sentences and shift them to Development and Casting sections? Pavanjandhyala (talk) 07:56, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
If you can't write anything about it I'd remove it, otherwise it looks like padding and comes off looking worse than if it didn't exist.♦ Dr. Blofeld 10:17, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
Okay doctor. I have blanked the section as per your advice. Pavanjandhyala (talk) 11:36, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Overall I'm of the opinion that the prose isn't up to FA quality yet. It does read as a bit sketchy and lacks the finesse of a higher end article throughout. I think it needs a considerable copyedit by a few people before it heads to FAC. @RHM22: and @SandyGeorgia: are usually excellent commentators on that aspect, so requesting their input.♦ Dr. Blofeld 07:05, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 3 June 2015, 18:50 UTC)----


Boys Don't Cry (film)[edit]

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review to get some more comments before I re-nominate this article for FAC. I've already fixed the problems with the article that people mentioned at the last FAC, so I'm just looking for some comments.

Thanks, BenLinus1214talk 21:26, 9 May 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! BenLinus1214talk 18:02, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Disclaimer: I've had limited experience in FAs and even lesser in films so I think we both will learn something in its next FA nom. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

  • Plot: "female-to-male non-operative transgender" there are three different links here and WP:SEAOFBLUE comes to mind. Try to fix this as how they've advised there. I've did some minor ce and this section looks fine otherwise.
  • Background:
    • "Peirce stated she" opinion needs a backing inline cite. You know what? Be on the safe side, add inline cites at the end of almost everything likely to be challenged, quotes/stated opinons, figures etc.
      • done
    • Use the {{further| header template for a link to Brandon Teena
    • Why in "She admired Brandon's.." two words are with quote marks and the others are not? Either do all or none otherwise it'll look like scarequotes -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 10:33, 10 June 2015 (UTC)
      • done The Sragow source doesn't actually support that sentence--I changed it.

Great that you got it copy-edited. Now that it's over, let's continue.

  • "Drew Barrymore was an early candidate to star." as lead role, right? why isn't this in the Casting section?
    • done put it in the casting section.
  • " search for freedom rather than capitalize on his sexual identity crisis." would need a backing inline as I said above. Would you like me to find more like these, or you could just add them by checking all the statements without any and judge whether their non-controversial enough to be remain like that.
    • done removed.
  • Casting: Notice the text sandwich between both the images? try to avoid that. See WP:IMGLOC
    • done Moved image one paragraph down. This was better with the text anyways.
  • ""She's not one ..never catch her acting." onwards seems to be an unnecessary addition. Have a good enough reason to keep it?
    • done No. I removed it.
  • " Lana's charismatic former boyfriend" Can't say such a subjective thing in the paedia's voice. Of course, he was in the movie but here I think you're referring to the real person.
    • Removed non-neutral "charismatic"
  • "Peirce used filming techniques that allowed the audience to explore Brandon's perspective and imagination" What is this referring to? Can it be replaced with something less subjective?
  • done
  • "A flood gave the cast and crew a "mud bath"; " what is the relevance of this sentence? it's already mentioned that they got stuck in mud. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:34, 12 June 2015 (UTC)
  • done I also just condensed this part of the paragraph.
  • Here are the sentences which need backing inline cites.
    • "She described the mood she was trying ..."
      • done
    • ". In addition, she took visual inspiration ..."
      • done I've had to reformat this section a lot, and I just did again. :)
    • This para"Many scenes were shot at night to give..." has two cites to a single source.
      • I removed that because I'm not sure where that came from.
    • "Peirce drew inspiration from the ..."
      • done
    • "which one critic said was " shouldn't this be in a reception-like section
      • This long quote isn't necessary, but I kept the "eerily lit" part.
    • "most of whom focused primarily on the adult-themed..." and be wary, there's a cn tag in the next statement.
      • done with both.
    • "Before the film's theatrical release, Lana Tisdel sued ..."
      • done
    • ". She said the film depicted her as ..." -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 09:31, 13 June 2015 (UTC)
      • done
  • Controversy section: WP:CSECTION says that such sections focusing on negative content should be avoided. It should be integrated with the rest of the article. Titling it as just "Controversy" too makes it sound very vague as to what it covers (just a place to club all the negative material?). If this was about just a specific incident you could retitle it to "X incident" like say (Acceptance speech controversy or something) but I see three separate incidents covered here: The speech, the graphic scene and accuracy. So perhaps the scene part could be merged with Home media and be called Rating and home media. The speech incident could be added as a subsection to Awards and nominations. The accuracy part and Tisdel reaction could be merged to the first mention of her reaction para in the Critical reception section.
      • done
  • Here are some FA case studies Blackrock, But I'm a Cheerleader and American Beauty. They maybe long, but read the part about formatting the references. I think now the only obstacle left would be that, the prose (it's good but not exceptional), and the research and factual accuracy. There's not much I can do more now and good luck. I'll be watching its developments. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 12:30, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
    • @Ugog Nizdast: I've looked through them, but I don't see anything about reference formatting… I'll look through the prose myself one time before renominating. What research and factual accuracy things are you talking about? :) BenLinus1214talk 16:24, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
They don't? first one I think had a slight mention about it. I'll find a better one, reference formatting even I'm not sure of. Anyway, there would have been something to learn from those reviews.
I meant that those are those two things I haven't checked, they might be something that might pop up in the future review. I don't see any thing prominent which will make it a quick-fail or something, most of the problems you will be able to solve during the review itself (provided you know the article and refs in and out). ‑Ugog Nizdast (talk) 16:34, 14 June 2015 (UTC)
Around 8 dead links have been found and ref 43 only has the name field, why so? -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 15:17, 15 June 2015 (UTC)
I think I've fixed all of that! :) Almost all of them could be found in archive services, and I removed stuff cited to the other ones. As for then-ref 43, I removed it. I have no idea what that was--I didn't put it in the article. Thanks! BenLinus1214talk 23:15, 16 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Csisc[edit]

Dear Mr.,

I thank you for your work about this important film. Detailed information are provided in this current work. However, it can be developed by involving more misconsidered details... You can talk about the expenses and the incomes of the film and how it has been published worldwide.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 13:44, 28 June 2015 (UTC)

Hi! It's actually Ms. :) Anyways, expenses, income, and international release are already discussed. Please see the Background and the first paragraph of the Release sections for that information. BenLinus1214talk 00:38, 29 June 2015 (UTC)
I apologize for this fault Ms. and I congratulate you for your excellent work. --Csisc (talk) 15:54, 6 July 2015 (UTC)
It's okay and you're welcome! :) BenLinus1214talk 01:17, 7 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM[edit]

  • If you're going to include who's based on who to the cast list, you're going to need to cite sources.
  • I removed it. I definitely could have cited sources, but I don't think it was necessary in the cast section. BenLinus1214talk 20:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "Peirce became engrossed in Brandon's life and death; he said," Pierce is a "she"? Or am I wrong? (Also, could you check that quote? Grammatically, it's not great.
  • Yeah, Peirce is a she. That was just a mistake. That quote is correct. BenLinus1214talk 20:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "The leap of imagination that this person took was completely overwhelming to me."[11] The sensationalist publicity generated by the case prolonged her interest.[9] Peirce said she looked beyond the brutality of the case and instead viewed the positive aspects of Brandon's life as a "leap of imagination" that eventually causes his death" Repetition
  • done
  • "The leap of imagination that this person took was completely overwhelming to me."[11] The sensationalist publicity generated by the case prolonged her interest.[9] Peirce said she looked beyond the brutality of the case and instead viewed the positive aspects of Brandon's life as a "leap of imagination" that eventually causes his death" What's the "also" doing in this sentence?
  • "Initially, the film was to be largely based on Aphrodite Jones' 1996 true crime book All She Wanted, which told the story of Brandon's final few weeks.[15] Rather than focusing on Brandon's early life and background, the screenplay was later modified"Vachon and Eva Kolodner's production company, Killer Films as well as Hart Sharp Entertainment and IFC Films provided financing for the project to be closer to Peirce's vision." How was Pierce's vision different from Jones's book?
  • I just reframed the whole first part of that paragraph. BenLinus1214talk 20:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "Vachon and Eva Kolodner's production company, Killer Films as well as Hart Sharp Entertainment and IFC Films provided financing for the project" Clumsy
  • done
  • "Prior to filming, Peirce conducted extensive research into the case, which lasted almost five-and-a-half years." Again, this seems to repeat what was said earlier
  • changed
  • "The filmmakers retained the names of most of the case's real-life protagonists, but the names of several supporting characters, including Candace's character who in real-life was named Lisa Lambert, were changed." Complex
  • "Sevigny had auditioned for the role of Brandon,[33][34] but Peirce decided Sevigny would be more suited to playing Tisdel. Peirce could not see Sevigny as a man and thought she would be perfect for Lana.[32][34]" Again, this is a little repetitive.
  • "Peirce cast Alicia Goranson, known for playing Becky on the sitcom Roseanne, as Candace because of her likeness to Lisa Lambert, who was 24 when Lotter shot her" Is this the first mention of the shooting?
  • No, this is the same shooting that kills Brandon. However, I don't think her age at the time of death is necessary.
  • There seems to be slightly contradictory information about where the film was "originally" going to be shot.
  • fixed
  • I think the whole paragraph beginning "Some scenes in Boys Don't Cry required emotional and physical intensity" needs to be looked at closely. For example, I'm unclear on what "The bumper-skiing scene" is- it's not in the plot section, I don't think?
  • I clarified that and one other thing. I don't really know what else to do, so tell me if it's good. BenLinus1214talk 20:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "The use of low natural light and heavy artificial light is illustrated early in the film–in the opening roller rink scene in which Brandon pursues his first relationship with a young woman, Peirce used a similar three-shot method to that used in a scene in The Wizard of Oz (1939) in which Dorothy leaves her house and enters Oz.[9] The scene consists of a three-shot sequence meant to symbolize Brandon's metaphorical "entrance to manhood"." I'm not clear what this means.
  • clarified
  • "the sequence in which Lana has an orgasm" Again, this hasn't been introduced- you seem to be assuming readers are already familiar with the film.
  • "and incorporated neo-realism techniques" neo-realist?
  • done
  • You seem to be inconsistent on whether you list the date of films you mention.
  • I decided to put dates after all of them. BenLinus1214talk 20:53, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • " the scene in which the two have sex in a car" Again
  • done
  • ""The Bluest Eyes in Texas" was played when Hilary Swank went onstage to receive her Academy Award for Best Actress in 2000.[50][51]" If this really matters, could we incorporate it into the former paragraph?
  • "Boys Don't Cry has been regarded academically as a thematically rich love story between two ill-fated lovers, not unlike Romeo and Juliet or Bonnie and Clyde." Is that claim you've made on the basis of one source, or is that a conclusion reached in the cited source?
  • After fixing that ref, I checked and fixed it.
  • "in the scene in the barn," Again
  • done
  • "Boys Don't Cry was the subject of an essay, Psychoanalysis and Film, written by Donald Moss and Lynne Zeavin, and edited by Glen Gabbard under the supervision of The International Journal of Psychoanalysis." Is this really necessary? Also, that's not the same of the essay, and it's hard to see how a journal can supervise anything.
  • done
  • "Its strategy is comparable, perhaps, to using the particulars of the For a case not for what they might reveal about female hysteria" Huh?
  • done
  • "The film received a limited release theatrically on October 22, 1999, in the U.S.,[65] where it was distributed by Fox Searchlight Pictures, a subsidiary of Twentieth Century Fox that specializes in independent films.[66] The film grossed $73,720 in its opening week. By December 5, the film had grossed in excess of $2 million. By May 2000, it had a U.S. total gross of $11,540,607—more than three times its production budget.[67] Initially, many viewers complained via email to Peirce that the film was not being shown near them, as the film initially was only being shown on 25 screens across the country. However, this number increased to nearly 200 by March 2000.[68]" It'd be good if everything about the limited release could be together
  • done
  • Source for the UK release?
  • I don't know how I missed this. Done. BenLinus1214talk 22:15, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "he performances of Swank and Sevigny were selected as two of the film's strongest elements; Rolling Stone said the pair "give performances that burn in the memory",[76] and The Film Stage called Swank's performance "one of the greatest" Best Actress Oscar-winning performances.[77]" Avoid personification. Publications and websites don't say anything; people writing for them do.
  • done
  • Just a thought- it may be worth trying to arrange the reception section thematically, rather than by review.
  • Question the problem is that the reviews are thematically very similar, with praise going towards acting, directing, and writing. Am I missing your point?
  • Great- so have a think about (say) having a paragraph about the acting, then the directing, then the writing. Have a look at how I did it on The Turn of the Screw (2009 film), for instance. I'm not saying this is how you have to do it, just something to think on. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "In 2007, Premiere ranked the film on its list of the "The 25 Most Dangerous Movies".[85]" I'm unclear on the point of this; is this positive? Negative? Neutral?
  • I can see how it would seem negative because of its placement, but it was meant to be neutral. Moved to a different paragraph.
  • Well, if my my mother called something "dangerous", she probably wouldn't be complimenting it! Josh Milburn (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "the truth about Brandon's gender," Sex?
  • done
  • "Tisdel said the film falsely portrayed her continuing her relationship with Teena after she discovered Teena was anatomically and chromosomally female" Repetition. Also, think about MOS:LQ for that paragraph.
  • done
  • "Boys Don't Cry‍ '​s release was concurrent with the murder of a homosexual teenager, Matthew Shepard, on October 12, 1998, almost a year before the film's premiere" Self-contradictory? Also, what's this doing in the awards section?
  • I have no idea what it's doing in the awards section. Moved it and fixed the sentence. BenLinus1214talk 22:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Your referencing style is inconsistent; look at accessdates, for instance. This needs to be cleaned up before FAC! You probably don't need publishers/locations for periodicals, but be consistent either way. Check your italics (eg, Political Film Society and CNN shouldn't be italicised). Page numbers for offline periodicals, and volume and issue numbers for magazines/journals, should be included, and included consistently. Check your Genders link. Is Soundtracks.net reliable? Your Movies and the Meaning of Life reference is incomplete- you're citing the edited collection, when you should be citing the chapter in the edited collection (as you do with the Moss/Zeavin source). And so on- you should go through these sources with a fine-toothed comb.
  • I will—I can already see things that need improvement. However, I do not know how to put sources not in italics in the cite web template…?
  • You could pull it out of the cite web template, or perhaps switch between "work" and "publisher". The template's just a tool; don't panic too much about using it "right". Josh Milburn (talk) 22:41, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

I'm sorry to say this, but I think there's still a moderate amount of work to do before it's ready for FAC. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:13, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

I was able to fix it--you ironically put italics around the work. BenLinus1214talk 22:30, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Also, it looks like there's a lot of scholarly literature out there which you should have a look at. Your Movies and the Meaning of Life source may have more worth citing, then there's doi:10.1080/08873630509478233, doi:10.1080/14616740110078211, doi:10.1177/1532708603003002007, doi:10.1525/fq.2001.54.3.47, doi:10.1080/07393180216552, two articles in this issue, two more in this, one in this and this article (which was reprinted in an edited collection). There seems to be real cross-disciplinary interest in the film, and I am not sure the high-quality (judging from a glance at the journals' publishers) research that's going on is being reflected in this article. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:29, 19 July 2015 (UTC)

@J Milburn: Thank you. I'll take a look at this quite soon. BenLinus1214talk 16:20, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
@J Milburn: I think I've responded to all your comments. I would love to take a look at the sources you mentioned, but I don't know how I would get my hands on them. They do seem quite good though. Never mind, I'll incorporate things from those as well. Just a question--after this, do you think I could go to FAC? BenLinus1214talk 22:20, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
I think it'll be closer to FAC ready, but I couldn't say for sure. I can help with access to some of the sources if you need it; Wikipedia:WikiProject Resource Exchange/Resource Request (and other places) can also help. Josh Milburn (talk) 22:39, 27 July 2015 (UTC)
@J Milburn: The things that I can't access are all the DOIs except the first one as well as the connection.ebscohost.com article. If you could get them for me, that would be greatly appreciated! Otherwise, I'll just go to Resource Request. BenLinus1214talk 02:56, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
I'm on a poor internet connection at the moment, so I'd rather not download any PDFs, but I'll get back to you on this soon. I suspect I'll have access to at least some of them. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:58, 28 July 2015 (UTC)
Ok, I've got a load of PDFs- email me! Josh Milburn (talk) 22:22, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
Sent- let me know if there's any issue. Josh Milburn (talk) 09:59, 30 July 2015 (UTC)
@J Milburn: Great! I believe that I've incorporated everything into the article. When you get a chance, could you take another quick look? That would be much appreciated. :) BenLinus1214talk 02:42, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 31 May 2015, 21:03 UTC)----


Captain America: Civil War[edit]

Need a peer review to keep up with GT status of MCU films. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:58, 30 April 2015 (UTC)

  • I see that the filming section has a lot of info on the cast, which seems better in the pre-production section. Kailash29792 (talk) 08:23, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Doing... Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs(talk) 16:21, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. Will do. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 04:49, 9 June 2015 (UTC)
  • First of all, have in mind that the article can't be a good or featured article until the film is released, as articles about works still under production are considered unstable. Still, it is a good idea to have it as good as possible, so that when it is released the work needed is minimal. Now, let's see
    • Cast: You should include both an in-universe description of the character's role in the story, and an out-of-universe info about the actor and his work in the film. Vision, War Machine, Scarlet Witch and Ant-Man only have in-universe descriptions, add more info once it's available.
      • Yes, that is the intent (per other MCU film articles). We just have not gotten anything from these actors or the creative team to add anything. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    • The premise is basically a "crisis crossover" of the MCU, so what about the characters introduced in Agents of Shield, Agent Carter or the Netflix series? If they are not used, we should have a line explaining their absence, as that may became a common concern.
      • Once again, if a reliable source exists discussing this, then we will certainly find a way. Right now, even if a reliable sources covers this, it is just their personal speculation of characters they would like to see, not really commentary about them appearing, or not. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    • You should mention that the film Batman v Superman: Dawn of Justice from the "Distinguished Competition" was initially scheduled to be released on the same day, and then changed.
      • I feel that info is more applicable at that article (which has some info on this). If they chose to stay on the date, it would be worth a mention in my opinion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    • Most sections have an excesive use of quotations.
      • Will attempt to work on that. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    • A sentence in "Filming" has 5 footnotes. Do we need so many ones?
      • Yes. It is to justify the use of "many outlets and fans" at the beginning of the sentence. Originally, it was broken down with thoughts from each outlets, but has since been condensed to a general summary of the statements, with the refs there for readers to continue if they choose. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 17:35, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
    • "Music" and "Release" will of course have to be expanded, when info is available. Cambalachero (talk) 14:45, 11 June 2015 (UTC)
  • Quick comment Is it worthwhile adding about the end credits scene for Ant-Man which is taken directly from this film? Presuming you can find a reliable source of course. Miyagawa (talk) 09:25, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
    @Miyagawa: We definitely have the sources, but we generally don't make mention of this in the article. If anything, I'd say it could possible be put under marketing, but it really isn't marketing. It may be worth a discussion, and for more eyes to see it, we could start a talk page discussion. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 15:40, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
    Fair enough, I wasn't sure what was usually included. I thought the best place would be (if you did include it) under marketing as anywhere else would be seen as trivia. I just thought it was interesting because (correct me if I'm wrong) it's the first time a scene from a future film was used as an end credits scene for an earlier one. Miyagawa (talk) 19:27, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
    It was actually done with Iron Man 2 and Thor (the Coulson scene at Mjolnir is a variation of a daily shot for Thor). And looking at Thor, it is mentioned in the marketing section there. So in that case I don't see a reason why we can't here. :) We have sources on the Ant-Man page, but there may be better ones out there for Civil War's purposes. - Favre1fan93 (talk) 22:54, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 22 May 2015, 03:13 UTC)----


Everyday life[edit]

S.L. Benfica in European football[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I have recently expanded the article, with written prose and statistics and wanted to know what it needs before it can get promoted to GA.

Thanks, Threeohsix (talk) 09:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 28 August 2015, 09:30 UTC)----


Bootham Crescent[edit]

I have expanded this article recently and hope to nominate it for WP:FAC soon. Looking for any constructive comments, especially regarding prose quality. I'm also concerned the Future section might be over-detailed. I wonder if starting a York Community Stadium article and reducing the content here might be a good approach? Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 19:13, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from me:

  • Most of the Future section deals with the past
  • In any case, it's way too detailed on stuff that hasn't come to fruition
  • With a ground that old, it's recentism to devote so much space to the last 8/9 years, too (in essence, it's an offshoot of the History section)

More to come --Dweller (talk) 13:38, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Thanks for taking a look. I've condensed the Future section, and have signposted the newly created York Community Stadium article. Do you think it looks more balanced now? Mattythewhite (talk) 20:50, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 22 August 2015, 19:14 UTC)----


Persona (series)[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because… I feel that it can be brought up to Featured Article standards, but I need some advice and tips from other editors on how to improve it before it is brought up for FA review. I am fully expecting faults in the grammar and such, but I would also like any other faults that are seen with the references or the usage of images to be pointed out so I may either address the problem or explain it in some way. --ProtoDrake (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks, ProtoDrake (talk) 18:42, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 22 August 2015, 18:42 UTC)----


Killer Instinct Gold[edit]

I know that a page is nearly ready for FA when I've exhausted every possible avenue of sources. Although this article did not exist a few days ago, it is now (hands down) the most complete and authoritative resource for the game on the Internet. It has contemporaneous sources from the 90s and goes through to the Rare Replay reviews—only one major reviewer had something to say about it. It has some nice flourishes in the Dev section, and I think it's about done. Anyone have any advice on how it may be improved before I bring it to FAC? Thanks, – czar 09:58, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM

I think I played one of the Killer Instinct games, but I can't remember which one...

  • It might be worth thinking about the player/player character distinction- for example, "players fight on a 2D plane" is wrong; players control characters who fight on a 2D plane. I'm guessing that this is potentially something which will throw non-gamers
  • "Reviewers preferred the Gold Nintendo 64 port to its arcade version" Picky, but Gold didn't have an arcade version, if I understand correctly. Gold was the non-arcade version of Killer Instinct 2.
  • I think "face-off" is a noun- "face off" would be the verb
  • "Gold also features a new camera with automatically zoom functions to better frame the fight" This doesn't work
  • "Some voiceovers are missing from the Nintendo 64 release." As opposed to what?
  • "A departure from fighting games such as Street Fighter" Perhaps this should be "In a departure"?
  • "for 90s video games" This should probably be "for '90s video games" or "for 1990s video games".
  • "wrote that Gold was decent" Slightly odd
  • "(better than the other option, Mortal Kombat Trilogy" Specifically, the other option in the same genre
  • You know this, but I'm not keen on personification of publications- AllGame doesn't say things, writers for AllGame say them
  • "but one reviewer commented that Gold had few other positive features" One reviewer from Game Informer?
  • Is "extempore" a noun? I think you're using it as one.
  • Just a little thing, but in the lead you talk about reviewers wanting a "graphical update", but in the prose it just seems that reviewers wanted better graphics. Judging from the review scores in the box, I think you might be able to give a better impression that a lot of viewers were, overall, not particularly impressed.
  • Especially for FAC purposes, I would say that the generic rationale for the screenshot is not appropriate. Especially given the extensive discussion of the graphics, I do feel that the image is justified, but that doesn't mean that a good rationale isn't necessary.

This is all very picky- the article does strike me as very strong. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:30, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Another quick thought- especially given that there's no real story to speak of and that other video game articles would have a story section, perhaps a list of characters would be a useful addition? I'm not certain about this. It does strike me as something that I'd personally be interested in seeing, especially if I knew other games in the series. Josh Milburn (talk) 18:54, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 7 August 2015, 09:59 UTC)----


Rust (video game)[edit]

Notified: Rhain1999, WikiProject Video games


I've listed this article for peer review because I've been working on it a lot over the past few weeks and I'd like feedback and ideas for the article. I want to try to get it to GA standard, when the game is fully released. Thanks, Anarchyte 05:05, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

You can copyedit the article again so as to make sure that the article is free from any grammatical error. One more reminder is that you should nominate the article after the game's release, or it will basically be an instant fail. Hope these comments help. AdrianGamer (talk) 12:16, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

@AdrianGamer: Thanks for all the tips, I've left comments under some. Anarchyte 06:59, 7 August 2015 (UTC)
@AdrianGamer: I've rephrased some of the quotes, except the one under development as it would be better left alone. Is it better now? Anarchyte 06:42, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
The one in the development section can be leave alone, but it does not really need to be mentioned twice in the article. AdrianGamer (talk) 08:59, 12 August 2015 (UTC)
I removed the pull quote, AdrianGamer. Anarchyte 11:45, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 6 August 2015, 05:06 UTC)----


2010 Korean Grand Prix[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I intend to take it to FAC in the near future. The Grand Prix was the first to be held in the Korean peninsula and proved to be a crucial event in the 2010 Formula One season, as Red Bull driver Mark Webber (who led on and off since that year's Monaco Grand Prix) lost the championship lead to Ferrari's Fernando Alonso after Webber crashed out on the race's 19th lap. Webber's team-mate Sebastian Vettel also lost an opportunity to take the Drivers' Championship when his engine failed on lap 46. Furthermore, the race was stopped for three quarters of an hour because rain had saturated the circuit with large amounts of standing water and drivers had to deal with fading light during the race's final laps. I welcome all feedback on this article.

Thanks, Z105space (talk) 07:15, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment - Looks good, but as the article progresses, it looks more and more like it's suffering from WP:CITEKILL. Some WP:OLINK cleanup between the lead and background section wouldn't hurt either. That's all I've got off the top of my head though. Twirlypen (talk) 10:01, 23 July 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 23 July 2015, 07:16 UTC)----


List of UAB Blazers head football coaches[edit]

As a part of my spur-of-the-moment effort to bring UAB Blazers football to a featured topic, I'm bringing this list to a peer review as it is the furthest point I can bring it. Since it is ineligible to be a Featured List, I would very much appreciate it if someone could give this a quick review to make sure that there is nothing wrong with it. I've expanded the lead to the standard for a college football head coach list (Example 1, Example 2), and Patriarca12 handled the key, table, and much of the referencing. This is relatively brief, so it shouldn't be very hard. Thanks to anyone that helps (and if anyone has time: my current FLC for a similar topic). Thanks again, - A Texas Historian (Impromptu collaboration?) 05:39, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 16 July 2015, 05:39 UTC)----


Sunday football in Northern Ireland[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I have made it a GA and I was wondering if there were any improvements I should make before taking it to FA?

Thanks, The C of E God Save the Queen! (talk) 09:03, 23 May 2015 (UTC)

Reply from Smurrayinchester[edit]

Interesting article! I did a bit of copy-editing - I think it could use a bit more work just to improve the flow of some sentences (for instance, there are some sentences where a couple of commas might help, and few "however"s that should be "but"s).

More specific comments:

  • It would be good to have a more detailed citation for the point about women's football - the current citation is just a throwaway sentence in a BBC article, doesn't mention NIWFA.
  • " It is not known when the official ban on Sunday football was instituted but it is known that it was created in the 1930s." I don't understand this sentence - what's the difference between "create" and "institute" here?
  • " IFA Article 36.b which stated that no football would be scheduled on Sunday but matches on Sunday could be played if both teams and the organizing competition agreed" Again, it might be nice to have a better explanation of what this means - when can a match be played on a Sunday. (Also, if 36.b is still in effect, then it's "states" instead of "stated").

I hope these comments help! Smurrayinchester 10:28, 30 May 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Mattythewhite[edit]

An interesting topic of which I had no knowledge before reading this. I've a few comments:

  • "but was also a way to combat a perceived encroachment on their culture by Catholics": this is not expanded on anywhere in the body of the article.
  • "Sport plays a significant role in national identity in Northern Ireland": needs citing.
  • "However, unofficially no matches were scheduled on Sundays": does "However, unofficially matches were not scheduled on Sundays" read better?
  • "ban on Sunday football was instituted but it is known that it was created in the 1930s" -> "ban on Sunday football was instituted but it is known to have been in the 1930s"?
  • "The arguments in favour of the ban when was introduced are not recorded" -> "The arguments in favour of the ban when it was introduced are not recorded".
  • "Before the 1982 FIFA World Cup, it was noted that Northern Ireland would play France on a Sunday": awkward phrasing.
  • "As a result of this, one Christian member of the Northern Ireland team refused to play": is it worth noting the player?
  • "69-28" and "91-14" should use en dashes.
  • "A year later, the request was made again and members of the": this sentence could do with splitting into two.
  • "Before the match there was a protest against the match": repetition.
  • "from mutual agreement between nations": wouldn't associations technically be more correct than nations?
  • Reference date formatting: dates should be written out, e.g. "3 March 2005" instead of "2005-03-03".
  • I'd include publisher locations for books and newspapers that don't include the location in their titles.

Thanks, Mattythewhite (talk) 18:56, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 23 May 2015, 09:03 UTC)----


Engineering and technology[edit]

Dependency injection[edit]

I would like to move the article past Start-Class quality, a status that it's had for a while. Several improvements have been made by myself and others. Would like some guidance.

Thanks, Galhalee (talk) 05:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999
  • One dead link
  • Why have you included quote boxes in the lead? I've never seen that before and structurally it looks really out of place and imbalances the article.
  • There shouldn't be citations in the lead, as it's supposed to be a summary of the sourced prose in subsequent sections in the main body of writing.
  • to external code → to an external code (?)
  • There is serious repetition of 'the client' in the lead, especially the second paragraph.
  • The second paragraph reads like a list of hard facts. Short, stubby sentences that don't provide any flow. It's a bit boring to read.
  • It works the same → It works in the same
  • Referring to "parameter passing" as an injection carries the added implication that it's being done to isolate the client from details.

An injection is also about what is in control of the passing (never the client) and is independent of how the passing is accomplished, whether by passing a reference or a pointer.

Dependency injection involves four roles:

the service object(s) to be used the client object that is depending on the services it uses the interfaces that define how the client may use the services the injector, which is responsible for constructing the services and injecting them into the client Any object that may be used can be considered a service. Any object that uses other objects can be considered a client. The names have nothing to do with what the objects are for and everything to do with the role the objects play in any one injection. → None of this is attributed to a any citations or sources.

  • So far, there are several instances of one line sentences/paragraphs. These should be kept to an absolute minimum.
  • Are you supposed to bold words like that in the prose if it's not the title of the article and in the first sentence of the lead?
  • This is significant if the client and services are published separately. This unfortunate coupling is one that dependency injection cannot resolve. → This is not engaging prose. Both short sentences, both connected to each other but separated by a full stop, both start of "This is"
  • may connect together → Remove "together". 'Connect' already indicates that they are indeed together.
  • on a DI framework → What is DI? Is it different to DIP?
  • Put simply IoC → Comma after 'simply'
  • Here polymorphism → Remove 'here'
  • The Frameworks section consists of a sole sentence. Is it necessary for it to have it's own section or can it be merged elsewhere?
  • The first three bullet points of Advantages are not sourced.
  • Again, using the first bullet point as an example: Dependency injection allows a client the flexibility of being configurable. Only the client's behavior is fixed. The client may act on anything that supports the intrinsic interface the client expects. - Three really short sentences which could be quite easily connected by uses of punctuation that allow flow and not a full stop.
  • Likewise, the first three bullet points of Disadvantages are not sourced.
  • like Java and C# [23] → Link Jaza and should there be a full stop after the # instead of just a space?
  • Do the bullet points in Three types of dependency injection need to have italic words?
  • For the references, use {{Reflist|30em}} so they aren't just in one long list.
  • Ref 2 has a Url showing?
  • Ref 3 is missing a publisher.

It's probably because this article is science/engineering related, but I don't really understand it. I find it quite confusing, but someone who has an interest in the subject probable makes complete sense to them! Hope my comments help you. Ping me if you have questions.  — Calvin999 20:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 9 August 2015, 05:32 UTC)----


Darknet market[edit]

Hi. I've spent several months working on this article due to brevity of detail you will find on any individual news article about the matter, the dubious reputation of various 'guides' on the internet and to showcase the serious academic research that is now happening in this area.

It's reached a point as primary editor that it's hard for me to obviously restructure it further, so I would appreciate feedback. I'm aware the 'History' section is not yet 100%, complete, this probably can't be done until Draft:List of darknet markets is completed and submitted.

Expert feedback would be appreciated to develop this further :)

Thanks, Deku-shrub (talk) 12:37, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • The lead seems a bit short for an article of this length. Make sure you haven't neglected to summarize all important points.
1970s to 2011
  • Though the earliest known darknet market started in 2006
This might be a good place to introduce that market.
  • to be transacted using the Internet
Internet ought not be capped.
  • Web-based drug markets
Also ought not be capped.
  • This section has two stand-alone sentences, which is odd. Work them into the paragraphs.
2011 to present
  • operated by Ross Ulbricht under pseudoname "Dread Pirate Roberts" from 2011[18][19] until October 2013 when it was shut down by the FBI.[20]
You need a comma to set off the nonrestrictive clause that starts with "when".
  • described by news site DeepDotWeb as 'the best advertising the dark net markets could have hoped for' following the proliferation of competing sites this caused.
Those quote marks should be double, not single.
  • Some former Silk Road site administrators went on to form Silk Road 2.0.
Needs a citation.
  • This section also has several one-liners that ought to be worked into prose as part of an over-arching narrative.
Search and discussion
  • Many market places maintain their own dedicated discussion forums and subreddits.
Whenever a sentence ends a paragraph or section it needs to be cited.
  • allows the searching of multiple markets directly without login or registration.
Another sentence fragment that appears to be uncited.
  • A further PIN maybe be required to perform transactions, better protecting users against login credential compromise.
Another
Payments and infrastructure
  • Buyers may 'finalize early'
Single marks should be double, or even better avoided via paraphrasing.
Market types
  • This section has four rather small "paragraphs". I'd combine these into one or two.
Vendors
  • Evolution would ban 'child pornography, services related to murder/assassination/terrorism, prostitution, ponzi schemes, and lotteries' but allow the wholesaling
More single quote marks that should be double.
Commentary
  • There's more single marks in the first paragraph of this section.
  • James Martin's 2014 book 'Drugs on the Dark Net: How Cryptomarkets are Transforming the Global Trade in Illicit Drugs' discusses some vendors
Book titles ought to be italicized, not single quotes.
  • even branding their opium or cocaine as "fair trade", "organic" or sourced from conflict-free zones.[83]
These quote marks are double, but superfluous.
  • I'd combine the last two paragraphs, which are quite short.
Conclusion

A nice piece overall. I think the main issues are with quote marks and short paragraphs that ought to be worked into the prose. I found this an interesting topic that I know virtually nothing about prior to reading. The narrative needs to be tightened up some, but I think the bones of a good article are here. Nicely done, and keep up the great work! RO(talk) 16:22, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rationalobserver: Thanks very much for the feedback, all great points I'll incorporate! Deku-shrub (talk) 17:25, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
@Rationalobserver: All done! Deku-shrub (talk) 23:20, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 8 August 2015, 12:37 UTC)----


Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge[edit]

To all concerned, I've listed this article for Peer Review because I would like to improve it in order to nominate it for Featured Article candidacy. Any and all guidance you could provide would be of the greatest help in preparing this article for FAC! -- West Virginian (talk) 11:14, 12 July 2015 (UTC)

Commments from Niagara

Looks great, I'm surprised there is so much on a little bridge. Have you looked at other FA bridge articles, like Plunketts Creek Bridge No. 3 or Sonestown Covered Bridge, as models?

  • My personal preference is to place the "Architecture" section ahead of the "History", so as to avoid trying to describe the bridge design before one actually gets to the design section.
  • Niagara, I've reorganized the article per your suggestion. Please let me know if this works! -- West Virginian (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Another preference of mine is to use the {{Infobox bridge}} or {{Geobox}} to include both bridge and NRHP info. Not a requirement for anything (people prefer different infoboxes, some like having no infoboxes), but since its a bridge article I like knowing the bridge's specification without to having to hunt for them.
  • Niagara, I've formatted a new template based on the one provided for Sonestown Covered Bridge. Please let me know if this works. Because this is a pedestrian bridge no longer in active highway service, it is not located in the national bridge database. -- West Virginian (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • NRHP nomination forms generally have section and page numbers that you could use to cite; rather than saying "p. 8 of the PDF file", you could say "sec. 8, p. 4".
  • Niagara, I actually used to format my page numbers the way you've recommended here, but several reviewers of previous NRHP articles recommended that I choose the page number of the PDF file instead. I think both methods work just fine, and both make logical sense, but for consistency's sake, I'll go ahead and keep the PDF page number format as is. Thank you for the suggestion though! -- West Virginian (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Okay, I like section/page numbers just in case someone finds a hardcopy of the nomination form, but its not a big deal. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 20:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "...approximately 2.05 miles (3.30 km) southwest...": That seems incredibly precise to be an approximation.
  • Niagara, you are quite right about that. I've removed "approximately" in two such locations within the prose. -- West Virginian (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "...by civil engineer Squire Whipple in 1847, the same year in which he received a patent for the design from the U.S. Patent Office."
Condensed and reversed "...in 1847 by civil engineer Squire Whipple, who received a patent from the U.S. Patent Office the same year."
  • Niagara, I've incorporated your suggested rewording into the prose. Thank you for the suggestion! -- West Virginian (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "The T. B. White and Sons iron bridge construction company that built the Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge was established in 1868 by Timothy B. White, who had been working as a carpenter and contractor in New Brighton, Pennsylvania, since the 1840s."
Run-on sentence, perhaps "The construction company that built the Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge, T. B. White and Sons, was established in 1868. Its founder Timothy B. White had been a carpenter and contractor in New Brighton, Pennsylvania since the 1840s."
  • Niagara, thank you for this suggestion. I've separated this into two sentences and reworded it per your suggestion. -- West Virginian (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Because Whipple truss bridges were easily disassembled and re-erected..." and "The Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge was originally constructed in 1874..."
One sentence paragraphs, should be merged into another.
  • Niagara, both paragraphs have been merged with their respective succeeding paragraphs. -- West Virginian (talk) 01:22, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "as of that year the bridge is maintained...": Seems stuck on to an already long sentence, might better as a separate sentence (perhaps "Since its listing the bridge is maintained...")
  • "The property containing the Capon Lake Whipple Truss Bridge is less than 1 acre (0.40 ha) in size.": Doesn't really need to included here or in the infobox, as its not really that useful for a bridge (merely a requirement for the nomination form).
  • Niagara, I know this little bit of information is a bit superfluous and we could do without, but I included it for spatial context, even though it doesn't really provide additional information of note to the user. I'll keep it in for now, but of course I wouldn't mind taking it out if need be. -- West Virginian (talk) 01:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I note that you use extensively {{Harvnb}} for shortening footnotes; {{Sfn}} accomplishes the same, but without needing <ref> tags. Not a big deal, but it might make things easier for you.
  • Niagara, for consistency's sake, I'll probably maintain the current citation format, but I will surely keep this in mind for future articles, as it does take up a lot less space! Thank you for the suggestion! -- West Virginian (talk) 01:24, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Hope that helps... Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:03, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Niagara, thank you for taking the time to engage in this review and share your thoughtful guidance. I will be addressing your comments and suggestions sometime in the next 48 hours. Thanks again and let me know if you have any questions or concerns in the meantime! -- West Virginian (talk) 23:51, 6 August 2015 (UTC)
Niagara, I've incorporated or addressed all your much welcomed suggestions, and thank you again for taking the time to peer review this article. Because of your efforts, this article is definitely better suited for a Featured Article candidacy! Please take another look and let me know if you have any further comments or suggestions! -- West Virginian (talk) 01:32, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Looks good! The only other that I've noticed is that all of your images are right-aligned; you might want to left-align a few to make it more visually "interesting". Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 20:50, 11 August 2015 (UTC)
Niagara, thank you for the suggestion! I've reorganized the images so that they are interspersed between the left and right sides. Also, thank you for your edits to the info box. All your efforts here are greatly appreciated! -- West Virginian (talk) 22:45, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 6 August 2015, 00:03 UTC)----


B. V. Sreekantan[edit]

I propose this article for peer review as I feel the article has potential to be a good article or better.

Thanks, --jojo@nthony (talk) 07:40, 14 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • is an Indian high energy astrophysicist
Shouldn't high-energy be hyphenated?
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The Government of India awarded him the third highest Indian civilian honour of Padma Bhushan in 1988.[5]
You can remove "Indian" as it's quite clear what's meant.
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Early years
  • Scan for missing commas; I'm seeing some run-ons.
  • to develop the reading habit
This should read, "to develop a reading habit".
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • He did his schooling at the local high school in Nanjangud
This needs work. How about, "he attended ..."?
Rephrased--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • specializing in Wireless
This needs some clarification, or at least a Wikilink.
Wikilinked--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Career and legacy
  • More issues with missing and/or misplaced commas.
  • has a research station at Ooty which is equipped with and Extensive Air Shower array
The nonrestrictive clause that follows "Ooty" should be set off with a comma.
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • This research, later, developed into the Proton Decay experiments of the 1980s.
Remove "later" as superfluous.
Removed--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "His experiments served as the base of his doctoral thesis on the intensity and angular distribution of muons at different depths"
Why is this in italics? Is it the title of his dissertation? If so it ought to be in title case.
Title cased--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • who helped him to develop Geiger Muller counters
Drop the split infinitive: "helped him develop".
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • He was also a member of the team experimented on the Grand Unification Theory to detect the decay of protons in deep environment in the 1970s
"a member of the team that experimented"
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • It was under the his directorship
Corrected--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
The article would benefit from a general proofreading for these types of issues.
  • superannuation
Wikilink or explain for the casual reader.
Wikilinked--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The citations in the last paragraph of this section are a bit distracting. You are not required to bundle them, but it might be a good idea here.
Positions
  • He was a member of the governing council of the institute from 1988 till 2007 of which 15 years from 1992
It's not clear to whom this pronoun refers.
Rephrased--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • It was during this period, the institute set up the Himalayan Chandra Telescope
How about, "During this period, the institute set up the Himalayan Chandra Telescope"?
Rephrased--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The last paragraph of this section reads as a list. See if you can add some prose to transition through it, so it's not just a listing of his past positions.
Selected bibliography
  • I think this would be better at the end of the article.
Done--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Awards and honours
  • This is also a little bit like a list. See if you can add some details to make it more prose-like.
Copy edited--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Personal life
  • If this is all you know about his personal life, see if you can incorporate this into the biography, since a two sentence section is discouraged.
Transferred to Biography section--jojo@nthony (talk) 16:39, 16 August 2015 (UTC)
Conclusion

It's a nice little article. The biggest issue with the prose is that parts are too much like a list versus prose. I also see lots of missing commas that will need to be added prior to promotion to GA. Nice job overall; keep up the great work! RO(talk) 20:03, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Further comments

Regarding this passage:

He secured his graduate degree in physics, with honours, in 1946 and completed his master's degree the following year, specializing in Wireless communication, from Mysore University.[7]

I find it confusing that he secured a graduate degree in 1946, but completed his master's the following year. Did he earn two graduate degrees during these years, because a master's is a graduate degree? RO(talk) 17:33, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

His graduate degree was an honours degree and, as far my knowledge goes, many Indian universities allow honours graduates to appear for master's degree examination after one year of study.--jojo@nthony (talk) 17:51, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 14 July 2015, 07:40 UTC)----


Kawasaki Heavy Industries C151[edit]

I finally had some time to have another go at article writing again. This article has been substantially rewritten with a view of hopefully making it the first electric multiple unit article to reach FA status (however impossible it seems these days). The closest standard I could base it on is OS MX3000 (a GA). - Mailer Diablo 08:11, 9 June 2015 (UTC)

Just off the top of my head: Two citation needed tags need fixing. Jo-Jo Eumerus (talk, contributions) 12:56, 8 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Thanks. They have been newly added after the review was started. Will go through them slowly. - Mailer Diablo 13:59, 17 July 2015 (UTC)
  • Just fixed the cn tags. - Mailer Diablo 15:35, 17 July 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 9 June 2015, 08:11 UTC)----


General[edit]

Kemi Omololu-Olunloyo[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because… I feel there is too much self promotion on the article and an editor with a COI is continuously editing the article to white wash away any negative connotations of the sequence of events that transpired, most of my edits were relative when it came to discussion of controversies with the subject matter, there is currently an edit war transpiring and I would just like some neutral points of view to discuss where to go from here, wikicohen is referencing glowing articles about herself from a source, events transpired and the same source is being referenced for some material that doesn't paint the subject in a good light which wikicohen then "polishes up" the COI is continuously "rewording" and reverting large chunks of text. Something I wish to note the editor wikicohen appears to be logging out and editing the article and slandering me in the process which I sure is not exactly encouraged on wikipedia. thank you for your time in viewing my request.

Thanks, I/O (talk) 15:24, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 28 August 2015, 15:25 UTC)----


Bank of Bird-in-Hand[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because why not

Thanks, TheWarOfArt (talk) 01:07, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

I don't think there's particularly much to review. Is this a serious request?  — Calvin999 19:43, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 26 August 2015, 01:07 UTC)----


Sci-Fi Dine-In Theater Restaurant[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because, when promoting the article to good status, TheMagikCow wrote that the article would be ready for a FAC after a peer review. I would be grateful for any constructive criticism of the article that would help prepare it for a FAC.

Thanks, Neelix (talk) 01:35, 9 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • these playful names were later altered so that they are now more recognizable.
This is confusing. What's more recognizable about them?
  • The menu once offered a popcorn bisque, but poor reception resulted in this dish being removed.
This might be a good tidbit for the article, but it seems a little out of place in the lead.
  • Cathy Wood of the Daily Mail
The Daily Mail is a tabloid, so maybe this isn't the best source to cite, especially in the lead.
Location
  • and many areas dedicated to other activities.[4]
This is too general to be that informative.
  • and is one of only five restaurants in park that make this recommendation
"... in the park"
  • There are four restaurants in the park that offer table service: the Hollywood Brown Derby, Mama Melrose's Ristorante Italiano, the 50's Prime Time Café, and the Sci-Fi Dine-In.[5]
I think you could drop some of the other restaurants as off-topic for this section and just say "it is one of four that offer table service". I also wonder if this is better suited for the section on Food, versus location.
  • a restaurant that is easy to get into without reservations but is not themed
This is more general info about the park, so it's a bit off-topic here, IMO.
Theme
  • where guests eat off formica countertops
"Eat off" is not great prose.
  • There are six picnic tables near the back of the room that are used as overflow seating. These tables are only used when the rest of the restaurant is full and there are guests who are willing to forego the experience of sitting in the cars.
You state essentially the same thing twice here, so either assume readers will now what overflow seating is, or copyedit so you only state this once.
  • There are too many blue links in this section, IMO, and the list of movies is excessive.
Food
  • The restaurant closes each day at the same time that the park does
Give the reader an indication of the time frame.
  • Popcorn is served as a free[8] hors d'oeuvre.[11]
There are lots of cites scattered throughout sentences like this one. WP:CITEBUNDLE is optional, but it might be helpful to cleanup some of the refs.
  • The last paragraph of this section is too much like a list. Make sure you aren't listing more examples than necessary.
History
  • I think the history section would be better placed after location and before theme and food, but that's just my opinion.
Reception
  • Reconsider your use of the Daily Mail here.
  • This section would benefit from some reorganization, as you go back and forth between positive and negative opinions that might be better grouped together. You could probably trim a few of the less enlightening quotes too.
Conclusion

Pretty good overall. I see lots of blue links, but maybe they are all appropriate. Still, make sure you aren't listing too many items consecutively. The article could benefit from some reorganization. Some lines, such as "The chefs at the Sci-Fi Dine-In are willing to make a wide range of dishes not on the menu if they are given 24-hour advance notice.[5]", read as slightly advertisement-oriented, so make sure the tone is neutral throughout and not promotional. Nicely done. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 16:56, 17 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for the review, Rationalobserver! Your comments are helpful. I have implemented most of your recommendations with the following few exceptions. I retained the phrase "and many areas dedicated to other activities" because, without it, the article would state (or at least strongly imply) that Walt Disney World is solely composed of four theme parks and two water parks; it is the inclusion of this phrase that allows us to avoid listing all the other areas. I have kept the information about the park's other table service restaurants in the "Location" section because I think it most appropriate there; the "Food" section is about the food at the Sci-Fi Dine-In rather than the food landscape of the park as a whole. I have altered the description of the ABC Commissary to demonstrate why it is relevant to this article. I have reorganized the "Reception" section so that the first paragraph is about the restaurant in general, the second paragraph is about the consensus that the restaurant works wonderfully as an attraction but not as a food destination, the third paragraph is about positive reception of the food, and the fourth paragraph is about the film clips and other niche reasons for appreciating the restaurant. Please let me know your thoughts on the changes! I would be glad for any further advice you might provide. Neelix (talk) 01:59, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Epicgenius[edit]

I might just be complaining here, but I think you could separate the refs. Instead of having one reference that states, "For the street location, see Shumaker & Saffel (2003), p. 76. For the information about Star Tours, see Sandler (2007), p. 257. For the information about the ABC Commissary, see Miller (2011), p. 122.", you can put three references: one at each place where the fact is mentioned. (This approach might not be good, though, because then the article may be punctuated by way too many references.) Epic Genius (talk) 03:42, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your input, Epic Genius! Yes, this is always a trade-off. I had initially formatted the article as you suggest, but Rationalobserver recommended above that I bundle the citations to avoid punctuating sentences with citation numbers, so I followed that advice. I agree that neither solution is entirely satisfactory, but now that the citations have been bundled, I would prefer to leave them as they are. Please let me know if you have any additional concerns I might address before I submit the article for featured status! Neelix (talk) 15:14, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
@Neelix: Bundling the citations is also fine with me. Good luck with your Featured Article nomination. In the meantime, I will try to look over this article later. Epic Genius (talk) 17:40, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 9 July 2015, 01:35 UTC)----


Anand Narain Kapoor[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because of the Notices on the Anand Narain Kapoor page which are - 1. The article is an orphan 2. This biographical article needs additional citations for verification. 3. This article contains content that is written like an advertisement. 4. The topic of this article may not meet Wikipedia's notability guideline for biographies. 5. This article contains wording that promotes the subject in a subjective manner without imparting real information. 6. This article is an orphan, as no other articles link to it. Please introduce links to this page from related articles; try the Find links tool for suggestions. Thanks, Chandareshwar Sharma Chandar sharma (talk) 10:09, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

  • I feel that his golfing hobby may be overemphasized here. I would suggest talking more about his political career.--Ewiding33 (talk) 19:43, 25 June 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 10 June 2015, 10:09 UTC)----


Deep frying[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because this article has been expanded from 8k to 43k (Start-class to nearly B-class) and some uninvolved opinions would be useful.

Thanks, Esquivalience t 02:29, 1 June 2015 (UTC)

Review from Smurrayinchester[edit]

This is a bit weird, but the thing that really struck me from reading this article is that there's barely any mention of batter, which is a fairly essential part of deep frying most foods. In general, the international section could be a lot longer - there's certainly more that can be said for America (influence of immigrant foods such as latkes, doughnuts etc, soul food, modifications of native foods like hushpuppies, through to modern fairground foods), Asia (India has samosa, bajji, gulab jamun, pakora and papadum, among others, and deep-fried foods are also common in a lot of Chinese dishes. Things like tonkatsu, which Asian nations borrowed from the west, are also worth mentioning) and Europe (fish and chips goes back way earlier than 19th century Britain, and pretty much every region has its own version of fried dough), and I'm sure Africa and Oceania can be made longer too. I'd also merge the culture section to here - each country has its own culture anyway. Hope these help. Smurrayinchester 09:31, 8 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • Per WP:LEADCITE, these citations ought to be in the article, but not the lead.
  • has been around for over 7000 years
It's better to say, "more than 7000 years", versus "over".
  • but many modern deep fried foods were not invented until the 19th century.
I'd drop the word "modern".
History
  • Although the nouns "deep-fried", "deep-frying",
Are you sure "deep-frying" is a noun, because I'm pretty sure it's a adjectival verb.
  • Romans first use of deep frying to prepare Pullum Frontonianum
Is there a good Wikilink for this? Or can you briefly explain what it is?
  • Eastern cultures including the Chinese and Japanese had developed techniques for deep frying by the 16th century.[6][13][14]
"including the Chinese and Japanese" should be set off with commas.
  • Modern deep frying began in the 19th century with the growing popularity of cast iron, particularly around the American South which lead to the development of many modern deep fried dishes.[14]
Some missing comma before the non-restrictive clause that begins with "which".
Technique
  • One common method for preparing food for deep frying involves adding multiple layers of batter around the food, such as with cornmeal, flour, or tempura, bread crumbs are sometimes also used.[22]
That last clause is a comma splice. Replace with a semicolon.
  • When performed properly, deep frying does not make food excessively greasy
"Performed" is an odd word here. I'd put "done properly".
  • However, if the food is cooked in the oil for too long
It's best to avoid using the word "however" in encyclopedic writing.
  • It has been considered that oils that do not break down at deep frying temperatures are best
Drop the words "it has been considered" as superfluous.
Tools
Dishes, foods, and culture
  • Deep-fried foods are common in many countries
Deep fried is hyphenated 53 times, but 29 times it is not. Make consistent depending on the convention.
  • Examples of food that can be deep-fried include meat, poultry, fish and vegetables.
You omit the serial comma here (before vegetables), but it's used elsewhere. As with above, make consistent.
Europe
  • Many countries in Europe use pure or hydrogenated rapeseed oil for deep-frying.[49]
"deep-frying" is hyphenated five time and unhyphenated 43 times. Make consistent.
Oil deterioration
  • but this process is not widely used in the food industry due to the high investment cost involved.
This clause needs a citation.
  • Instruments that indicate total polar compounds, currently the best single gauge of how deep-fried an object is, are available with sufficient accuracy for restaurant and industry use.
Also needs a cite.
Hazards
  • Most commercial deep fryers are equipped with automatic fire suppression systems using foam.
Needs a cite.
Conclusion

This is a nice little article overall. The prose it decent, but could use some polishing. Make sure your terms are consistently applied throughout. I'd add more detail about batter, and trim out some of the less notable examples, which are too numerous in places. Nicely done, keep up the great work! RO(talk) 22:09, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 1 June 2015, 02:29 UTC)----


Geography and places[edit]

Gunwalloe[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because although a great deal of information is available, I believe there could be more we could touch on. Any comments would be very much appreciated.

Thanks, Samuel Tarling (talk) 12:37, 16 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 16 August 2015, 12:37 UTC)----


History[edit]

Jeannette Expedition[edit]

This is the story of an expedition that went badly wrong. Its basis premise—that the North Pole lay in the midst of a temperate sea and could be reached by a vessel following a thermometric current—was false. The ship was crushed by the polar ice after nearly two years of largely aimless drift, and only a third of the 33-man complement eventually reached safety after months of unimaginable hardship. Researching and writing this has been an odd experience; I cut my Wikipedia teeth eight years ago by writing polar expedition histories, but have rarely looked at the topic in the last five years or so. I may well be tempted again; meanwhile I would appreciate any comments and suggestions regarding this draft. I have attempted to use US spellings, but I daresay I have lapsed on numerous occasions.


Thanks, Brianboulton (talk) 20:20, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Cassianto[edit]

  • "De Long's rescue mission in Little Juanita had won him a certain celebrity..." -- Would: "De Long's rescue mission in Little Juanita had won him celebrity status" be better? Or were they handing out such celebrities back then?
  • "... the port from which the Arctic expedition as to sail." -- tails off at the end and doesn't quite make sense.

I've conducted a few fixes; closing of spaces, ref formatting, etc.. . All looks ship shape so far. Up to "Voyage". CassiantoTalk 22:00, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Wehwalt[edit]

Here is the first tranche of comments.

General comments
  • The government report I've sent you by email indicates that there was quite a to-do when the bodies of De Long et al. arrived in the U.S. Possibly some mention of this glorious return could be made. Those lieutenants may be worthy of mention in the article.
Lede
  • "but the landfall proved inhospitable" While accurate, this may take too much thinking about for smooth prose. I might cut the phrase entirely as the next sentence deals with the matter. In that next sentence, I might focus on the numbers who died, rather than who was saved. It seems to me that would make things clearer to the reader.
  • "The chief protagonist of the theory" protagonist is rarely used in that context, making it a challenge for the reader, I think. Possibly "champion" (which has a bit of alliteration) or "exponent"? And "thermometric" is even more of a jawbreaker. "ice-free"?
  • Not another Pandora? Not raised from her watery grave on the Bounty-chasing expedition, I hope? (no action)
  • Shouldn't the Herald be linked?
  • "was the German cartographer, August Petermann." I know you prefer to do it that way in British English, but my view would be go with "was German cartographer August Petermann". I'm not the best at writing theory, and it's likely some Americans would agree with you, but my view as a practical writer is that in American English, it feels like you're being wordy. There! All this prose over a comma and an article.
  • " the proprietor of The New York Herald," "owner of the New York Herald". "Proprietor" is less common.
Background
  • " or otherwise of registering a "Farthest North"." maybe "or at least registering a "Farthest North"."
  • "thermometric". That word again. At least link to a definition. But I would suggest open-water channels or similar. Possibly you could cast the sentence in terms of the sea being reached, rather than the ring being penetrated, that way you are keeping the focus on that undiscovered sea you speak so eloquently of.
  • " lost Franklin expedition generated a rash of expeditions" 2x
  • "This brought a succession of expeditions to the Sound" I'm not sure on the caps. Possibly the whole issue can be avoided with "A number of explorers pushed north from there in the following years"
August
  • "among those who rejected it was the leading German geographer and map-maker August Petermann" I'd cut the "the", though more because I try to avoid unneeded articles than because of any views about American English.
  • "The route had never previously been attempted." Possibly you should specify that you mean to reach the polar sea this way. The reader may feel that you are saying that the Bering Strait was as yet unnavigated.
George
  • "Greenland waters" less common in Yankspeak. Maybe "the coast of Greenland" or similar".
  • You are inconsistent in whether to include "The" in the name New York Herald. Our coverage suggests not.
  • "proprietor and publisher" I'd say "owner and publisher"
  • "full patronage" I'd say "full support" possibly "enthusiastic support"
  • I'd crop that image, could go either way on keeping the signature.
James
  • "his father" I'd link to Bennett, Sr.
  • "barely observed mass of land" maybe "incompletely mapped mass of land" or similar.
  • " in the western hemisphere" I'm not sure this adds anything.
  • The last phrase of this section is the first phrase of the next section. I would change one or the other.
Ship
  • " Pandora on sale for $6,000." Given that "on sale" can have the meaning of a discounted price, I would change "on sale" to "offered". No price in sterling?
  • "was released from general naval duties" would the phrase "active duty" work in there?
More soon.--Wehwalt (talk) 13:35, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Tim[edit]

Just booking my front stall, but shall not occupy it with critic's notebook in hand till my learned friends, above, have had their say. Shall go and look at Diamonds are Forever in the meanwhile. Tim riley talk 16:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Finetooth[edit]

Lede

  • "After weeks of wandering in the wastes of the delta, less than half the ship's complement were saved..." – The logic seems a bit off. The whole complement wandered, not only the survivors.
  • "Thermometric" is unusual enough to justify a Wiktionary link, perhaps: thermometric.
  • Unlike The New York Times, the New York Herald appears not to have included the "The" in its name.
  • Add a link for New York Herald on first use in the lede?

George DeLong

  • "the ship's tender" – Link ship's tender?
  • "Bennett knew the news value of Arctic exploration—two Herald reporters had accompanied Juanita,[34] and in 1874 Bennett was helping to fund the British sailor Allen Young..." – Em dashes usually come in pairs. Should there be a trailing one after Juanita instead of a comma?
  • "On his return from Gotha..." – This implies that he traveled to Gotha to see Petermann, but it might be even better to say so more directly. Also, Gotha should be linked, I think, either here or earlier in the Petermann subsection, which mentions the "Sage of Gotha" without further explanation.

Ship

  • "formally commissioned into the U.S. navy" – Cap "N" on "Navy"?

Crew

  • "hoped to utilize" – I'm always inclined to replace "utilize" with "use", though it sometimes might cause a verb-noun confusion. Flip a coin to decide.

Problems

More to come. Finetooth (talk) 18:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 27 August 2015, 20:21 UTC)----


Chief Secretary, Singapore[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because it is translated from a "good article" on the Chinese Wikipedia and I wish to promote it to good article status. All comments on the article are welcome.

Thanks, HYH.124 (talk) 07:59, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • highest ranking government civil positions in the colonial Singapore
"the colonial Singapore"? That article seems unnecessary.
  • The first sentence of the second paragraph is too long. Split it up into two.
  • After the war, in 1946,
1946 implies "after the war", so this is redundant.
  • The name "Colonial Secretary" was later changed into "Chief Secretary" in 1955
Changed to, not changed into.
  • the position was finally abolished in 1959
The use of "finally" here is odd. Just say it was abolished.
Background of its creation
  • extend their influence to the Malay Peninsula as early as in the late eighteenth century.
Drop "in" and just say "as early as the late eighteenth century".
  • a trading settlement in Singapore; He appointed Resident of Malacca
It's not necessary to cap the first word after a semicolon.
  • On the other hand, when the Straits Settlements
Phrases like, "on the other hand" should be avoided in formal writing.
  • However, the ultimate control
Same with words like "however".
Straits Settlements
  • On one hand, the status and On the other hand
This is too conversational and informal.
  • However, both the Governor and Colonial
Same
  • The responsibilities of the Resident-General of the FMS and the Colonial Secretary of the Straits Settlements did not overlap, but both were similar in nature
Consider adding some of the responsibilities.
  • Hence, he held relatively more powers
Avoid "hence".
  • 'the then-Colonial Secretary Stanley Jones was revoked from his position and he returned to the United Kingdom due to alleged ineffective defence coordination
Fix this run-on.
  • both of them were imprisoned
Instead of "both of them" you should just say "they".
Evolution after World War II
  • In the 1950s, constitutional amendments were made several times in preparation for self-governance in Singapore.
This is awkward. How about, "In preparation for self-governance in Singapore, several constitutional amendments were passed during the 1950s"?
  • arrangements; Under British suzerainty
No caps needed following a semicolon.
Major responsibilities and powers
  • i.e. their predecessor
Don't use i.e. or e.g. in formal writing.
  • On 1 April 1946, Singapore became a crown colony, reducing the Colonial Secretary's jurisdiction to only Singapore
Be sure this isn't repetitive with previous material, as this has already been stated.
  • It was worth mentioning that the Colonial Secretary had the power
Drop the informal introduce introduction.
Career paths
  • no locals had ever been appointed as Colonial Secretary or Chief Secretary
Should "had" be "have"?
  • Other than them
Drop this as informal.
  • All holders of the position had resided in Sri Temasek from 1869 to 1859
Odd use of past perfect, so drop "had".
Conclusion

This is a nice piece overall. The biggest issue with prose is use of informal introductory phrases. The punctuation is pretty solid too, except that you shouldn't use caps after a semicolon. Some of the details get a little burdensome, which is always a challenge when the goal is to be comprehensive. There might be some minor repetition of facts, so be sure you aren't mentioning things more than necessary. Nicely done; keep up the great work! RO(talk) 16:44, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 6 August 2015, 07:59 UTC)----


Union Station (Erie, Pennsylvania)[edit]

What could be better, an Art Deco train station that one can still catch a train at, and also where one could get dinner and a beer. Been a long-time coming, this article...but, I believe an eventual FAC would be more than likely. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 00:34, 6 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Finetooth[edit]

  • I'm copyediting, as requested, as I go. I'll have to do this in stages, and here is my first set of comments.
  • No dead links.
  • Image licenses look fine.
  • The images themselves look good with the possible exception of the derelict station, which I think might be better if rotated slightly counterclockwise and cropped. It seems to tilt to the right. (I can do this in Photoshop if you want me to give it a try.)
  • Do you want to add alt text to the image captions? It used to be required at FAC but may be optional these days.
  • With the last two FA's of mine I did not, so I won't at the moment, unless they become in vogue again and am prompted to at FAC. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The article contains four duplicate links: "barbershop", "lunch counter", and "soda fountain" in the "Operations" section, and "Youngstown, Ohio", in the "Renovation and restoration" section.
Removed. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Design

  • I think it would be helpful to include a sketch of the building layout, if one is available in the public domain. The text is clear enough, but it takes a while to arrange the spaces geometrically in the mind, whereas a sketch would make the relationships among rooms, streets, and entrances more instantly clear.
I haven't come across any, in the public domain or otherwise, so far, but if I happen upon any... Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "The extension facilitated the transfer of mail, baggage and freight between trains and street level, with the offices of the freight company located at the Sassafras Street end of the station complex." – "Facilitated" is one of those words that make me wince, and "located" is often used across Wikipedia when it is not needed. Suggestion: "The extension eased the transfer of mail, baggage and freight between the trains and the freight company offices at the Sassafras Street end of the station complex."
I don't believe the sentence meaning would remain same; mail, baggage and freight are coming from street-level, not the offices. I guess a better wording (maybe a separate sentence?) is needed. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "The tunnel entrance is directly across the rotunda from the street entrance—a portion of which is now used as the kitchen for the Brewerie." – Although it's mentioned in the lead, this is the first mention of the Brewerie in the main text. Maybe adding a clause at the end, "a brewpub housed inside the station" or something like that would make this more instantly clear.
Replaced. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The quotation marks around "wainscotting" seem unnecessary.
Was directly quoting "wainscotting", but using the generic term "paneling" (no quotes) should work just as well. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

History

  • "When it was proposed in 1853 to standardize the track gauge to allow through traffic, a conflict ensued with Erieites dismantling railroad bridges and tearing up railroad tracks in the city in an effort to prevent the impending standardization." – "Erieites" looks like a made-up word, although the local reporters seem to use it, and the sentence hinges on one of those "with plus verb-form constructions" that aren't as clear as could be. Suggestion: "In 1853, a proposal to standardize the track gauge to allow through traffic met with resistance from Erie residents who dismantled railroad bridges and tore up tracks in order to prevent the change."
"Erieite" is the demonym for someone from Erie, but I'll admit that it does look odd for someone not from the area.
  • Is it possible to say which Erie residents tore up the bridges and tracks and why? I assume it was workers who feared job loss.
Short story: it probably wasn't just workers. Long story: The city passed an ordinance banning the bridges, and the mayor deputized a bunch of people to assist in tearing them down. Would that be relevant? Should that be included? Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Predecessor stations

  • "gentleman's" and "ladies' parlors" – It's best not to link words that are part of a direct quotation since the links were not part of the original. I think you could drop the quotation marks in this case. The link would then be OK.
Removed quotes. Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

More comments from Finetooth[edit]

Operations

  • "could patronage its news stand" – I've never seen "patron" turned into a verb. Better might be the more conventional "...could buy goods or services at its news stand...".
Actually, it can be a verb. Go figure... Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Decline

  • "It eventually truncated Philadelphia through service to Emporium,..." – This passage is puzzling. Does it mean that it continued to offer passenger service between Philadelphia and Emporium but not through to Erie, or does it mean that it continued to offer passenger service between Erie and Emporium but not through to Philadelphia. If the latter, why? What was special about Emporium?
I suppose I could word that better, but, basically, when direct train service from Erie to Philadelphia quit, you had to transfer onto another train in Emporium (where the line from Erie connected to the line from Buffalo to Harrisburg). Niagara ​​Don't give up the ship 23:25, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • The last two sentences of this subsection need an RS.

Renovation and restoration

  • "Since the 1990s, Union Station has also been "an incubator of Erie's modern [beer] brewing" with the predecessor of the Erie Brewing Company having been located in the station from 1994 to 1999, as well as a fine dining restaurant and beer bar after Erie Brewing had been established elsewhere." – I'm not sure what this sentence means. Did the Erie Brewing Company have a predecessor at the station? If so, what was it called? I also don't know if "after" means after 1999 or sometime between 1994 and 1999.

Amtrak

  • " The trolley only operates, however, at the scheduled arrival time of the eastbound Lake Shore Limited." – It would be good to give a reason for this. I assume that it has to do with the arrival times. What are they, ideally?
  • That's all I have. Please let me know if anything here doesn't make sense, and revert any changes I made directly to the article if you don't find them pleasing. Finetooth (talk) 17:08, 27 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 6 August 2015, 00:34 UTC)----


Hormuzan[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I need some advice on how I can improve it so I can later nominate it to become a GA.

Thanks, HistoryofIran (talk) 00:14, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments

  • Suggest making the lead more expansive
  • Do we know who his father was?
  • Generally, this is a bit hard to follow without background knowledge - suggest providing a bit more context for the reader
  • What is the source for the information about Jalula? Nikkimaria (talk) 13:09, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • I agree with Nikkimaria. The lead needs expansion.
Family and early life
  • However, this is most likely wrong
Avoid using "however" in formal writing.
  • According to Pourshariati
For one, avoid using "according to" whenever possible, and two, casual readers might not know what this is referring to, so explain or link, or both.
  • he was part of the Parsig (Persian) faction which played a major role
"which" ought to be "that", since this reads as a restrictive clause.
  • Hormuzan owned his native place Mihragan-kadag
Is that a country or region?
  • but order was soon restored by a certain Ruzbi
Drop "a certain".
The Arab invasion of western Persia
  • The first sentence of this section needs a citation.
  • raising an army which included
"raising an army that included".
  • The Parsig faction under Piruz Khosrow, Bahman Jadhuyih and Hormuzan. The Pahlav (Parthian) faction under Rostam himself and Mihran Razi, and a Armenian contingent under Jalinus and Musel III Mamikonian.
This needs some polishing.
  • During the battle, the Sasanian army was defeated, and Shahriyar, along with Musel, Bahman, Jalinus and Rostam, were killed. The Arabs then besieged Ctesiphon.
Needs a cite.
  • The Sasanian army was once again defeated and Mihran Razi was killed. Hormuzan then again withdrew to Hormizd-Ardashir and this time chose to stay there in case the Arabs should invade his domains.
Also needs a cite.
  • began raiding in Iraq
Was it called Iraq at the time?
  • who had been making incursions Fars and Khuzestan
I get the sense that there's a missing "into" here.
  • However, he soon stopped paying tribute
Avoid "however" in formal writing.
  • under a certain Hurqus ibn Zuhayr al-Sa'di
Drop "a cerain", and be sure you aren't using more anmes then necessary, because it's getting really difficult to follow all these characters.
  • Meanwhile, Hormuzan fled
As with "however", "Meanwhile" is too informal.
  • he was once again defeated
Wow. Lots of defeats in a short time. Did he win any major battles?
  • Nevertheless, he managed to reach the city
Avoid "nevertheless"
  • The Arabs then laid siege to the city
For one, it needs a cite, and for two, it's confusing because why are the Arabs laying siege?
  • Fortunately for Hormuzan
This is editorializing/POV. Don't sympathize with Hormuzan.
Conclusion

This is a nice little piece overall, and it was enjoyable to read. My biggest issue is that it has lots of names, so it gets a little difficult to follow what's going on. I think this is what Nikkimaria was talking about above. I also got confused over the many losses, so see if you can rework some of this narrative to make that aspect easier to understand. For example, after reading it I'm unsure if Hormuzan ever won a battle. Nicely done; keep up the great work! RO(talk) 17:20, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 30 July 2015, 00:14 UTC)----


77th Infantry Division (United Kingdom)[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review as the article has been completely overhauled over the last few months. Any and all comments are welcome to help further improve the article, and get it ready for a GA review. Kind regards EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 23:28, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • it was responsible retaining soldiers who had been on medical leave.
Should this be retraining?
Yes it should, addressed this.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Background
  • with the possibility of invasion again rearing its head for 1941
"rearing its head" is not very encyclopedic.
Reworded.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • allowed the War Office to begin steps "to create a better balanced army" due the large number of infantry units formed during the preceding year and a half.
Should this be "due to"?
Addressed.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Home defence
  • "Higher Establishment" and "Lower Establishment" formations
Is it worth explaining what is meant by higher and lower? Does this pertain to priorities, or quality of the units?
I believe it is worth explaining as both terms are used throughout the article, and help explain the roles this division undertook as an actual formation and its intended use as a phantom one.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
Training formation
  • additional training to new recruits to the regiment
This could benefit from a copyedit.
Made a change, does this work?EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • the 14th Durham Light Infantry was converted from a regular infantry unit "into a Rehabilitation Centre."
The quote marks seem unnecessary.
Removed, old habits die hard!EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Men who were "of low morale and poor physique, including repatriates and ex-prisoners of war" were sent to the battalion were they underwent medical, physical, and military tests.
Either paraphrase this to avoid the quote marks or attribute the speaker inline.
Addressed.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Additionally, the 11th York and Lancaster Regiment role in the new organisation was "to hold and retain officers and other ranks who had returned from long services overseas."[25]
Same here, this should be paraphrased or attributed.
Addressed.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Deception
  • This needs explaining. I think I get your drift, but it reads too much like insider/military buff lingo, which is okay for parts, but this sounds quite interesting if it were only a little easier to understand.
I have expanded this section some, please let me know what you think (as I want to copy the opening over to similar articles).EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
General officer commanding
  • I would work this into another section, as its too brief to justify its own header.
I could, although I have been attempting to standardize the British infantry division articles. In addition, another article - with a similar small scale section as this - has thus far passed its GA and A-Class review. I would prefer it stay, for the moment at least.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm seeing a harv error for ref#5: ([3]) and two harv errors in the references section, one of which is tied to ref#5, but it looks like Holt, Thaddeus (2004). The Deceivers: Allied Military Deception in the Second World War. Scribner. ISBN 978-0-743-25042-9 is not currently cited to in the article.
AustralianRupert has fixed the Churchill ref for me, and I have removed the Holt ref (I used it on similar articles, and copied it over here ... but didn't end up using it).EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)
Conclusion

This is a great little piece overall. Its well-written and well-presented, and other than a few minor spots reads pretty well for someone like me, who knows next to nothing about military topics. Nicely done. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 22:12, 19 August 2015 (UTC)

Thank you for your review. I have addressed some of your comments, the rest I will attempt to address tomorrow.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 02:58, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from AustralianRupert[edit]

G'day, just a quick one from me. The work by Holt is showing up as a harvn error with script I run as it doesn't appear to be specifically cited. It might be best to drop this one into a Further reading section. Cheers, AustralianRupert (talk) 00:55, 22 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for the fix, although I have removed the Holt ref as it does not really say anything on this division.EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 15:00, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

====Comments from Dank====

(Peer review added on Wednesday 29 July 2015, 23:28 UTC)----


Guatemalan Revolution[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because it was listed as a good article a few months ago, and I want to take it further, if possible. Any suggestions are welcome, but particularly with respect to any content not currently in the article which should be included.

Thanks, Vanamonde93 (talk) 17:27, 26 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from AustralianRupert: G'day, good work so far. Unfortunately, this isn't a topic I know much about, so I can really only make a few superficial comments. Anyway, I hope they help in some way: AustralianRupert (talk) 06:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

  • at five paragraphs, the lead is a little too long per WP:LEAD, which recommends no more than four paragaphs
  • in the References section, watch for consistency: sometimes your page ranges have "pp." and sometimes just "p.". For example, "pp. 222–225" v. "p. 73-76". Where there is just one page, "p." seems sufficient, but if it is a range, I'd suggest "pp."
  • I think it would make sense to adjust the headings of the "Notes and references" section and its subsections. For instance, it is titled "Notes and references", but its subsections are "References" and "Sources". As such, I'd probably just change it to two main headers called "Notes" (which would be for the short citations) and "References" (which would be for the full bibliographic details. That would conform with the example at WP:LAYOUT;
  • in the Sources section, the book titles should probably be presented with title case capitalization. E.g. "The blood of Guatemala: a history of race and nation" --> "The Blood of Guatemala: A History of Race and Nation";
  • in the Sources section, some of the works have places of publication and some don't (e.g. Chapman v. Grandin);
  • the duplicate linker checker tool identifies a few examples of overlink which should possibly be removed: Jorge Ubico, Jacobo Árbenz, United Fruit Company, Guatemalan Civil War, El Salvador, National Renovation Party, Manuel Estrada Cabrera, Great Depression, Caribbean Legion, Anastasio Somoza Garcia, Rafael Trujillo, Dominican Republic, Carlos Castillo Armas, Dwight Eisenhower, John Foster Dulles, Miguel Ydígoras Fuentes, Honduras, Puerto Barrios, and Greg Grandin.
  • Anyway, that's it from me. Thank you for your efforts so far, and good luck with taking the article further. Regards, AustralianRupert (talk) 06:22, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 26 July 2015, 17:27 UTC)----


Natural sciences and mathematics[edit]

Ocepeia[edit]

Doing a pre-GAN review, would like to get broad opinions on readability, level of detail, or any glaring omissions or weaknesses. The ideal article would achieve a balance of comprehensive coverage that is still accessible to non-scientist readers (with a nod to WP:TECHNICAL), and I could use some new eyes on this. Comments from editors with and without a paleontology background are equally appreciated. The majority of this article has been composed by myself and IJReid, and we welcome any feedback and constructive comments. Thanks, --Animalparty! (talk) 03:26, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

Happy to take a look.

  • "the skull of Ocepeia is the best and only known mammal skull from the Paleocene of Africa" If it's the only known one, of course it's the best known one; or have I misunderstood?
    • My reading from the source is that the skull is the only known, which makes the genus the best known (since skulls may offer much more details than isolated teeth or ankle bones. I'll try to clarify.--Animalparty! (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I know this is not necessarily something that the sources will comment upon, but I'm struggling to picture this thing- are we looking at something aardvark-like? A pig? A tapir? Even if comparisons have not been mentioned, is there any speculation on what the animals would have looked like beyond weight?
    • I haven't found such speculation, which may not exist in reliable sources, constrained by the fact that the animal is only known from skull material- posture and height are beyond the realm of known material. The handful of dental comparisons doesn't mean much, but the sources describe body mass and skull size as comparable to hyraxes and Meniscotherium, so squinting at those and taking in the skulls and reconstructions might be the best gestalt, even if approximate.--Animalparty! (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "fully-grown males features" This doesn't quite work
    • Clarified.
  • I think "robust" is jargon- it's also repeated a few times in the description, which jars a little.
  • In the description, be aware of your tenses jumping back and forth- features "allow it to be assigned", while "CT scans revealed", for example.
  • "The ancestral eutherian condition is having four premolars" I don't understand
  • "an large pneumatization of the skull bones" Typo?
  • "than the row of tooth" Jargon?
  • I'm on a poor Internet connection, so I don't want to check at the moment, but I'm a little worried about the possibility of close paraphrasing in the "Distinguishing features" section. Something to be aware of!
    • To be honest, I think this section is the one most in need of trimming- it adds little clarity and is somewhat redundant to other sections. I personally find it overly detailed for a general use encyclopedia, and probably would need to be greatly simplified to reach FA quality. However, the cited source is CC-licensed, so even a pure copy-paste would be within copyright. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "and placed the family in an undetermined (and possibly new) order questionably within Paenungulata" I'm assuming that they didn't name this order?
  • Should "Paleoecology" be a subsection of "Paleobiology"
  • "of the Paleocene, (59-60 MYA) which" Should that comma be after the brackets?
  • "slightly younger (more recent) in age" I think "slightly younger" is fine alone- there's no need for "(more recent) in age"
  • If we have one, a map showing the position of modern-day Morocco in the days of the Ocepeia would be a nice addition to the Paleoecology section. Even a reconstruction of the kind of habitat/a photo of a similar modern habitat.
    • I agree. Will work on this.
  • Your sources are, of course, excellent, but I'd recommend spelling out your journal names.

Based on this look through (I've not looked at the sources/images in detail due to the aforementioned connection- I'll drop back another time) I'd say that this would have very little trouble at GAC, beyond perhaps having to wait for a review. Nice work! Josh Milburn (talk) 16:30, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

And, in case it isn't obvious, I have no paleontology background, and only an "interested outsider" background in biology generally (though I have written some biology FAs here on WP). If you're looking for people who know a bit about paleontology and who might be willing to take a look at this article, Ucucha (talk · contribs), FunkMonk (talk · contribs) and Casliber (talk · contribs) spring to mind. Josh Milburn (talk) 16:36, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

@J Milburn: Thanks so much for your comments. I've made some changes already, and will use your feedback for more refinement. --Animalparty! (talk) 19:59, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from FunkMonk[edit]

  • Hi, I'll have a look at this soon. First thing, as I said elsewhere, as this is an animal only known from fossils, it may be a bit misleading to have a hypothetical life restoration in the taxobox (we know nothing about the external features of this animal). Fossils or restored skeletons would probably be more "neutral". FunkMonk (talk) 17:28, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
    • If I can chip in, I would normally (strongly) agree, but, given that this is a restoration from a recent peer-reviewed article in a well-regarded scientific journal, I think it may have a place there. Making the provenance more clear in the caption (as well as acknowledging any limitations) might make the use a bit more "valid". That said, I wouldn't be opposed to replacing it in the taxobox but placing it elsewhere in the article. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:21, 13 August 2015 (UTC)
Yeah, certainly more citable as it is from the paper, yet the artist and authors would have little to no more chance of guessing the colouration, hair density, ear and snout shape, etc., than any skilled paleoartist. Seems the extant phylogenetic bracket has led them to base it somewhat on a giant otter shrew.[4] Also, restorations in peer reviewed papers are sometimes inaccurate or downright ugly, weirdly enough (some recent examples[5][6][7]), so that alone doesn't guarantee much. If it had been a more recently extinct animal, the guesses would be much safer. But anyway, this is pretty much a pet peeve of mine, and will probably not have much bearing on whether other people support or oppose this article. Just a thing to keep in mind. I have added restorations to taxoboxes myself, but only when I didn't have photos or drawings of actual specimens. FunkMonk (talk) 19:30, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 10 August 2015, 03:26 UTC)----


Myrmecia (ant)[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I have the intention of promoting this article to GA in the near future, and at some point, FA. The article has received a copyedit, and helpful suggestions were provided from the copyeditor. I acknowledge that three clarification tags are present, but these issues will be fixed as soon as possible. I note this article is very big, but what can I say, they're my favourite group of ants.

Thanks, Burklemore1 (talk) 18:33, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

  • Comments from Dunkleosteus77
  • Comments from jonkerz

(Peer review added on Saturday 8 August 2015, 18:33 UTC)----


Perijá tapaculo[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because it has recently passed a GA nomination and I am considering taking it further. Described in March 2015, there is as yet little scientific data about this tapaculo, a rare passerine bird whose type specimen was caught by playing its own song back to it.

Thanks, Thine Antique Pen (talk) 14:45, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from JM

Nice subject- I've written FAs about birds and about recently described species, but I'm no expert!

  • "It is partially protected by the Chamicero de Perijá Nature Reserve in Colombia and the Sierra de Perijá National Park in Venezuela." Are these worth links? Don't be scared of red links!
Done
  • "Its irides are" I'm assuming that this is a typo?
Done - fixed
  • "measure nearly 58 mm" Why nearly? Why not just say what they are? ("nearly 6 cm" I could understand, as that's a fairly round number)
Done - used the exact figure
  • Could the taxonomy section not be bumped up a little? It sometimes comes before "description", sometimes after (I prefer the former) but it certainly should come above "ecology"
Done - I've put it above the description
  • Non-breaking spaces should be used when you're abbreviating genus names
Done
  • The information about its closest relative really belongs in "taxonomy"
Done - moved
  • "seven specimens showed that they fed exclusively on insects" Not really. "suggested" would be better- you'd need more to show that.
Done
  • " Its nests, which are built in underground cavities, have been found to have a diameter of around 12 cm (4.7 in) with a depth of around 14.5 cm (5.7 in) and a width of around 9 cm (3.5 in)." Diameter and depth I understand, but what is meant by width?
Done - I've clarified that the diameter and depth refer to the underground cavity its nests are built in, and width is of the interior of the nest
  • "Some individual specimens have been observed while feeding in dense thickets within 1 m (39 in) of the surface" The surface of what?
Done (replaced with "the ground")
  • "northern white-crowned tapaculo (S. atratus nigricans)" Unless our article on the subject is wrong, S. a. nigricans is a subspecies of the northern etc, not the northern etc simpliciter
Done - I've simply used "S. atratus nigricans" in the article
  • "but comparing their data proved inconclusive." Comparing it with what? Or were they two people comparing their own respective data?
Done - I've fixed this error
  • Why is the Watsa source not in the main reference list? You only cite it once.
Done
  • Are you committed to italicising Amphibians.net?
Not at all, although {{cite web}} automatically italicises the content of the website parameter. Perhaps it could be omitted?
  • Perhaps you could consider an alternative layout with both photos and the map in the taxobox and the habitat photo in the distribution section (especially as, if you shift "taxonomy", the distribution section would be lower). On larger screens, I worry this would be a little crowded.

Nice little article; it's great that we have the images! Please double-check my edits. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:56, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

I've started working on this. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 16:26, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

Have you seen that there's an article in the open access journal ZooKeys which discusses the species in passing here? There're even freely licensed images. Another structural suggestion: Perhaps keep the stuff about close relatives in the taxonomy section, but move how to distinguish it from other species (buffed with something from the ZooKeys article) into the description section. You could have a whole paragraph on how to differentiate it from similar species. Josh Milburn (talk) 19:16, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

@J Milburn: Thanks, I hadn't spotted it. I've moved the stuff about distinguishing it from other species to the description section and have expanded it using the journal. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 18:05, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
Is FAC the plan? If so, I'll try to find some time to see if I can help you squeeze any last bits out of the sources... Josh Milburn (talk) 21:08, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
FAC is indeed the plan. That'd be great. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 21:20, 26 August 2015 (UTC)
I've fiddled with the layout a bit and created (albeit not very well!) a more reflective map of the distribution of the species. I had to use {{clear}} to not mess up the ecology section when moving an image to the left, still unsure about that. Thine Antique Pen (talk) 18:55, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 8 August 2015, 14:46 UTC)----


Forces on sails[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because there is near constant, ongoing debate within the sailing community over the exact nature of the forces which act upon sails. As a result I believe that this article would benefit from scientific peer review.

Thanks, Chalexthegreat (talk) 01:45, 21 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from starship.paint

  • Not an expert, sorry Chalexthegreat. Some unsourced stuff which was not pointed out already: 1) Theoretical results require empirical confirmation with wind tunnel tests on scale models and full-scale testing of sails. 2) Role of wind section. 3) Net aerodynamic force section. 4) Contribution of lift to the progress of the vessel section.
  • Overall is simply a huge article with many unreferenced sections. Trimming may be useful. starship.paint ~ ¡Olé! 05:25, 8 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Jo-Jo Eumerus

Comments from HopsonRoad

  • Please note the rewrite proposed and under development in the Talk:Forces on sails/sandbox. The existing article has too many problems of structure and logic of development (general to specific) to fix piecemeal. User:HopsonRoad 14:48, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Note that a thoroughly revised version of this article has been stood up. The previous version is preserved in a sandbox reached from the Talk page. User:HopsonRoad 15:26, 7 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 21 June 2015, 01:45 UTC)----


Language and literature[edit]

Diamonds Are Forever (novel)[edit]

Diamonds Are Forever is the fourth in Ian Fleming's series of Bond stories. The novel contains no elements of true spy fiction, but instead sees Bond close down a diamond smuggling ring. This article has undergone a re-build recently, bringing in information from new sources, re-structuring the article along the lines of the previous Bond novel re-writes, and giving a few passages a brush-up to bring them in line with the MoS. A visit to FAC is the post-PR aim. Many thanks to all who care to constructively comment. Cheers – SchroCat (talk) 21:29, 26 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999
  • by the British → by British
  • Fleming's bio actually says English author?
  • British author Ian Fleming to feature his fictional British → Slightly repetitious of 'British'
  • in the UK → in the United Kingdom
  • in Las Vegas. → Link Las Vegas
  • Along the way Bond → Comma after 'way'
  • Within its storyline Diamonds Are Forever → Comma after 'storyline'
  • In 1971 it → Comma after 1971
  • the seventh Bond film in → the seventh Bond film of the same name in
  • ring running diamonds → I don't think 'running' is the most suitable analogy. Perhaps 'passing'? Can't use smuggling as you use it a few words prior
  • Sierra Leone to the United States. → The lead says to Las Vegas. Also, link them again as this is first mention in the main body
  • Link Tiffany Case again
  • There Bond → Once there, Bond
  • attack the jockey. → attacking the jockey.
  • 'plant' → I don't think you need to wrap it in apostrophe's, but link it instead
  • With Tiffany's help he → Comma after 'help'
  • I feel like Background and writing history should come before the Plot
  • By mid 1954 the author → Comma after 1954
  • Once there Fleming → Comma after 'there'
  • February 1955. → February of 1955.
  • The block quote shouldn't have quotation marks because its indentation already shows it's a quote
  • I reckon that the para beginning 'Although Fleming provided' could be merged with that starting 'He returned to London' before it to reduce the one line sentences.
  • following a near-fatal crash in which he was involved, → I'm not sure if you need the latter part of the sentence about being involved, as it does indicate that he was involved in the former part?
  • the gems as → Isn't a diamond a stone and not a gem?
  • In February 1958 Pan Books → Comma after 1958
  • —[57]the → I think there should be a space between the citation and 'the'
  • I think the Reception section could be two fuller paragraphs instead of three sparser ones.
  • I think the Adaptations section could be one paragraph.
  • Furthermore, I think more info is required on the adaptations, particularly the film. Perhaps highlight some differences and other info. Not loads, but just some context.

Hope my comments are constructive and help you. Please ping me if you have any questions.  — Calvin999 20:42, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • Bond closes down a diamond smuggling operation
Sounds like he was a foreman.
Plot
  • running diamonds from mines
Perhaps "running diamonds" is too colloquial; maybe not.
  • follows the pipeline
Some readers might envision a physical pipe. Maybe explain that this is a network, not a real pipe.
  • However, he disobeys his orders
I've been told on several occasions to avoid using "however" in formal writing.
Background and writing history
  • By mid 1954
Needs a hyphen.
  • The last sentence of the first paragraph is a doozy. I'd split it into two.
Plot Inspirations
  • A visit to the US by Fleming had been made on the RMS Queen Elizabeth
This could be better.
Characters
  • This growth arises through Bond's burgeoning relationship with the book's main female character, Tiffany Case as Bond falls in love with her
Tiffany Case ought to be set off with commas.
  • red-haired hunchback with "a pair of china eyes that were so empty and motionless that they might have been hired by a taxidermist".[37]
I'd drop the "china eyes" bit as offensive and not really that helpful to the reader.
Style
  • Eco sees this unconnected "cleverly presented" beginning as being similar to the opening of film
Similar to the opening of film?
Themes
  • detailing the events on the Queen Elizabeth".[49]
I assume those are stay quote marks following the Queen Elizabeth.
Publication and reception
  • The novel was serialised in the Daily Express newspaper from 12 April 1956 onwards—[57]the first of Fleming's novels to have done so
"To have done so" does not seem to match "was serialised".
  • Julian Symons, reviewing Diamonds Are Forever in The Times Literary Supplement thought that Fleming had some enviable qualities as a writer,
I think you need another comma before "though" to properly set off that parenthetical clause.
Adaptations
  • Fleming's original novel was adapted as a daily comic strip which was published in the Daily Express newspaper and syndicated around the world.
You either need a comma to precede the nonrestrictive clause that starts with "which", or change which to "that".
Conclusion

This is a really nice piece. There are some very minor issues like the ones I listed above, but overall this is pretty tight. I would explain what pipeline is though, as it's a bit jargon. Let me know when this goes to FAC, as I'd be happy to take another look then. RO(talk) 21:46, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley[edit]

I jotted the following down without reading the earlier comments, above, and so forgive me if I duplicate any of them.

  • General
    • I'd be inclined to refer to Tiffany Case as either "Tiffany" or "Case" after first mention, rather than switch between the two names throughout. Purely because it is instantly clear who "Tiffany" is, whereas with "Case" one might briefly think "now which character is this, again?", I'd go for her first name passim. This is fine for fictional characters (see, e.g., Nancy Drew, The Red Badge of Courage and other FAs on novels).
    • There are a few duplicate links – nothing serious but you might look at the second link to K Amis in the Style section, From Russia, with Love and Dr No in Themes, Dr No again in Publication history, and The Sunday Times in Reception.
    • Dr. No or Dr No? We have both at present.
  • Title
    • I see from the picture of the dust jacket that the book was published as "Diamonds are Forever", the capitalisation one would expect. I take it that the capitalisation of the "Are" in the article is down to the fatuous perverseness of the Manual of Style? Might be worth a footnote so that readers are not misled into thinking that the title is Diamonds Are Forever rather than the correct title.
  • Lead
    • To avoid the repetition in the opening sentence you might perhaps change "the British author" to "the English author".
  • Plot
    • "smuggle diamonds in their mouths, which he would extract" – this says, though you don't mean, that he extracts their mouths, not the diamonds.
  • Background and writing history
    • The block quote doesn't need the opening and closing quotation marks.
    • Was it really a manuscript or did he type it? The first edition was 215 pages long, and it's difficult to imagine that one could fit that much text on 183 handwritten pages. I can't say I like the word "typescript" all that much, but if that was what it was I think you should use it.
  • Development
    • "A visit to the US by Fleming had been made" – a bit contorted: how about "Fleming had made a visit to the US"?
    • "Gore, an advocate of the relaxation" – I'd call him "Arran" rather than "Gore" at second mention. And should it be single quotes round 'Boofy'?
    • 'maker of shoe buckles' – more single quotes that I think the MoS would have us replace with doubles.
  • Characters
    • You might give Cold War a blue link.
    • "who the latter can eliminate" – the syntax goes off the rails a bit here, and to avoid a starchy "whom" I suggest something like "who can eliminate them with relative ease".
    • "while Eco judges three of the villains—the two Spang brothers and Winter—who are physically abnormal, as many of Bond's adversaries were" – I think this sentence forgets where it's going before it gets to the full stop. We expect to learn what Eco's judgment is of the three villains, but we don't.
  • Style
    • "similar to the opening of film" – indefinite article missing, I think
    • Benson flips between past and present tense: he analysed but feels.
  • Publication history
    • Titles of newspapers: I'd prefer consistency of capitalising and of including the definite articles in the links: at present we have "the Daily Express", but "The Observer" and "The New York Times" etc.
    • "sales of Diamonds Are Forever, as well as Fleming's other novels, all rose" – I think the "as well as" means that the "all" is superfluous; contrariwise if you want the "all", the "as well as" should be just "and".
    • "following Prime Minister Sir Anthony Eden" – two points here: first it's a false title, failing The New York Times's "good morning test" (you couldn't conceivably have said to him, "Good morning Prime Minister Eden") and secondly I think it makes for smoother reading if you avoid the slight disruption the eye encounters between "Sir" and "Anthony" by piping him as Sir Anthony Eden.
  • Adaptations
  • "marked the final Bond film" – slightly odd verb. How about just "was"?
  • Notes
    • Note b: sorry to be pedantic, but "who" really has to be "whom" here.
  • Sources
    • Not that it bothers me in the slightest, but you have one ten-digit ISBN standing out from all the others, which are in the preferred 13-digit form. There are those who get aerated about such things. You want 978-1-85286-040-0 instead of 1-85286-040-5. And it wouldn't hurt to add an OCLC for the Pearson book (463251270, since you ask).

That's all from me. Another highly enjoyable and informative addition to the series. Pray send me a postcard when you get to FAC. – Tim riley talk 10:02, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 26 August 2015, 21:29 UTC)----


X2 (film)[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get it up to Featured Article status (I've already made some improvements, but some people think it could use some more), and I will need help. Specifically, I want reviewers to list any objections they might have, such as whether the plot summary is too long, whether the cast section contains unnecessary, intricate detail, and whether the prose needs improvement. If you have any problems with the sources, please list that too. I recently improved some of the sources, so I won't think you'll have a problem with it, though.

Thanks, SuperCarnivore591 (talk) 17:08, 24 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 24 August 2015, 17:09 UTC)----


Black American Sign Language[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to improve it to FA status, or at least as close as possible. I'm particularly interested in feedback on comprehensiveness, prose, and structure.

Thanks, Wugapodes (talk) 21:18, 23 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • I know it's called Black American Sign Language, but I can't help but feel "Black people" should be African Americans. The NAACP has negro in their name, but they don't use it to refer to those they help.
This is the term used in modern scholarship, most notably because Black doesn't necessarily equal African American. African American is a subset of Black people. "African American" denotes those whose ancestors came from Africa during the African diaspora, while "Black" denotes a large group of non-White people and includes Black Latin Americans (particularly from Hispanola), African immigrants such as Nigerian-Americans and Ghanaian-Americans, and so on. While the two are considered the same in colloquial speech, the terms have distinct meanings in this context. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • It is still used by signers in southern states despite schools being legally desegregated.
This is very misleading, because many schools are even more segregated today then they were before Brown v. Board of Education.
While public schools are still very segregated because of housing policies and district lines, Deaf schools are regional and so the rates of segregation at Deaf schools may be different than in the general population (no systematic study has been done to this effect though). For example, there is only one school for the deaf in all of Alabama. So saying anything else would be OR as all we know is that it is still used and that schools have legally integrated. We don't know to what to degree integration has occurred, but we know that it has legally occurred. This is a juxtaposition made by the sources, though no source has come to a conclusion on the significance. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
History
  • Even if you stay with "black", it shouldn't be capitalized.
Capitalization follows the APA style guide. Is there a wiki-specific MOS that outlines a contrary style to follow? Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Not to my knowledge, but are you certain that APA explicitly says to cap "black" when used in this way.? RO(talk) 22:30, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Yes. It says to capitalize both "Black" and "White" as they, like other racial and ethnic groups (e.g. Latino, Caucasian, and African American), are proper nouns, not adjectives. I don't have access to the guide at the moment for an exact quote and citation, but I can get it tomorrow. Wugapodes (talk) 03:38, 29 August 2015 (UTC)
  • however
Avoid using "however" in formal writing.
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • recalls being challenged with understanding
How about, "recalls the challenge of understanding".
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I see lots of good opportunities for redlinks, such as Dr. Carolyn McCaskill, Carl Cronenberg, and Dr. Platt Skinner, among others.
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Work has continued to be done on BASL, with the Black ASL Project at Gallaudet University publishing The Hidden Treasure of Black ASL, a book describing the development and features of BASL.[1]
This is a run-on.
Fixed. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Syntax
  • syntactic repetition
This is fascinating, but I'm not sure there is enough detail for casual readers. If you can source it, I'd add a little more here.
I'll look at the source again and see what can be added. There probably was a little more to it that I left out. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • constructed dialogue
You redlinked "constructed action", maybe this should be redlinked too.
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • These results were not reproduced in a later study into constructed action and constructed dialogue by McCaskill which found that Black signers
The nonrestrictive clause starting with "which" should be set off with a comma.
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • however there was a great deal
Avoid "however" in formal writing.
Lexical variation
  • Is there a main article for this? Is so link to it, if not consider a redlink.
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • the dialect spoken by African Americans and the dialect signed by the African American (Black) Deaf.
As I said above, I'd go with African American over Black.
African American English (AAE) is called AAE because African Americans speak it, but not all Black people do. For example, Nigerian Americans do not speak AAE, and neither do Black Latin Americans like Haitian Americans and Dominicans. AAE is largely specific to African Americans, but is not extensible to all Black people. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
  • A more recent study by McCaskill
Drop "more" as superfluous.
Done. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)
Conclusion

This is a great little article. My main concern is that there could be more detail, but I haven't looked at the available source material. My gut instinct is that this would be an issue at GA, so be sure to double check the sources before going there. Nicely done; keep up the great work! RO(talk) 16:57, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

@Rationalobserver: Thanks for the review! I've addressed your points above. Regarding the lack of detail, there is actually rather little data available on BASL. McCaskill (2011) is the first and only descriptive study of the dialect on a large scale basis. Previous work focused on limited populations or aspects of the dialect, but BASL has not been very thoroughly studied. Wugapodes (talk) 20:44, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 23 August 2015, 21:18 UTC)----


Philosophy and religion[edit]

Scientology[edit]

Article top-importance but C-quality article on a controversial subject. I could use advice from WP's best minds in improving it.

Thanks, Feoffer (talk) 18:28, 2 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 2 August 2015, 18:28 UTC)----


Simeon of Verkhoturye[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to hear your suggestions and comments. It would be interesting to know if the article is understandable for English readers, or is there something you would like to know?

Thanks, Orel787 (talk) 11:32, 24 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • (Russian: Симеон Верхотурский, born 1607, died 1642),
I think those commas ought to be semicolons.
  • The main feast day of St. Simeon is the 18 December (OS), or 31 December (NS).
That second article (the) is superfluous (not needed).
Biography
  • Legend has it that Simeon was born to a noble boyar family in the European part of Russia.
I might be wrong, but I'm not sure "Legend has it" is an encyclopedic turn of phrase.
  • (about 53 kilometers, or 33 miles, from Verkhoturye),
It's a good idea to put figures like this into the convert template, like this: {{convert|53|kilometers}}
  • You linked righteousness in the lead, so maybe do the same here at the first occurrence after the lead.
  • He died in Merkushino in 1642 and was buried in a graveyard by the church
Identify the church here.
  • Translation of the relics
  • The first paragraph in this section is uncited, so please source it properly. Same with the second half of the second paragraph in the section. Paragraphs should always end in a citation.
Sainthood
  • Legend has it
Maybe this is acceptable given the topic, but it seems to informal for an encyclopedia.
  • the church was burnt down by a fire
Since a fire is the only thing that can burn down a building, this is redundant.
  • The Brotherhood of the Righteous St. Simeon
It seems this is a monastery, but you don't make that explicit enough at the start.
It was a bratstvo, linked
  • The last paragraph of this section, and all others, should end with a citation.
  • Opening, withdrawal and return of the relics
  • The first, second, and last paragraphs of this section need citations.
  • "some hooligans of white guards, in spite of my order as archimandrite, took away my horses and left their nags, on which nobody could ride".
This quote is currently uncited.
  • on the feast day of St. Simeon with over fifteen thousand pilgrims gathering at the monastery
The proper verb form here is gathered, not gathering.
  • but the costly shrine was seized for the hungry
Dis the Soviets confiscate the shrine to feed the poor?
Of course not.
  • On 30 May 1929, the relics were seized from the monastery and given to a museum in Nizhny Tagil for anti-religious works.
What's an anti-religious museum/works? I'm not sure how this was used for anti-religious works. Please expand and explain.
I added a quote.
Conclusion

Not bad for a start, but it obviously needs a little TLC in the way of citations and copyediting. It's an interesting topic and the foundation of a fine contribution. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 19:09, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

Thanks. I made most of the corrections, I will do the citing later. Regards.--Orel787 (talk) 09:44, 14 August 2015 (UTC)
  • Quick comment: It's very difficult to judge the reliability of the cited sources because of the lack of details in the citations. What are you citing? Are they peer reviewed journals, newspapers, personal websites of experts, random blogs? Fuller citations (citation templates can be very useful) would help with this issue. Josh Milburn (talk) 13:32, 29 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 24 July 2015, 11:32 UTC)----


Aleister Crowley[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because it has been rated GA for some time now but failed an FA last year. I'm hoping to send it off to FAC again in the near future, so a peer review of it beforehand would be appreciated.

Thanks, Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:45, 16 July 2015 (UTC)

  • Comment: It doesn't seem that any of the points which I identified more than a year ago in an informal talkpage review have been addressed yet. I don't see much point in resuming the review, until this is done. Brianboulton (talk) 18:54, 19 July 2015 (UTC)
    • A fair point Brian. If I may, I shall copy-and-paste your previous comments on the article here, so that I may work on them. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:20, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "His father, Edward Crowley (1834–87), was trained as an engineer but never worked as one, instead owning shares in a lucrative family brewing business, Crowley's Alton Ales, which allowed him to retire before his son was born." Needs comprehensive rewriting. E.g.: "His father, Edward Crowley (1834–87), was trained as an engineer, but his share in a lucrative family brewing business, Crowley's Alton Ales, had allowed him to retire before his son was born."
    • I've changed this sentence to your suggested alteration. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:32, 26 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "At age 8" is an Americanism
  • "the preparatory Ebor school" → "the Ebor preparatory school"
  • "Inheriting a third of his father's wealth, he began misbehaving at school..." What is the causal relationship here?
  • "developed his interests" → "developed interests"
  • "Having adopted the name of Aleister over Edward, in October 1895 Crowley began a three-year course at Trinity College, Cambridge..." Again, how are these facts related?
  • Readers will be confused by the information that Crowley's tutor approved his transfer to a course that was not on the curriculum. So how/where did he study it?
  • Chess is a "sport"?
  • "Crowley also embraced his love of literature and poetry, becoming a particular fan of Richard Francis Burton and Percy Bysshe Shelley, and many of his own poems appeared in student publications The Granta, Cambridge Magazine, and Cantab." Again in need of a reconstruction job. There is particular awkwardness in the juxtaposition of the literary "embraced his love of" and the vernacular "a particular fan". I would suggest: "Crowley also embraced his love of literature and poetry, particularly the works of Richard Francis Burton and Percy Bysshe Shelley. Many of his own poems appeared in student publications such as The Granta, Cambridge Magazine, and Cantab."
  • "Another hobby was mountaineering" – this is redundant; his interest in mountaineering has already been establiahed.
  • The word "claim" or "claimed" appear to be much overused in the article. Try some synonyms, e.g. assert, declare, maintained, professed etc.
  • "Several biographers ... believed that this was the result of Crowley's first homosexual encounter, enabling him to recognise his bisexuality." I'd say "this experience", and rewrite the final clause: "which enabled him to..." etc
    • Changed to "experience", and changed the end of the sentence too. Midnightblueowl (talk) 12:41, 29 July 2015 (UTC)
  • "They broke apart because Pollitt did not share Crowley's increasing interest in Western esotericism, something Crowley regretted for years." The nature of Crowley's regret is somewhat ambiguously expressed here.
  • "as he considered" → "as he was considering"

Comment on images[edit]

Comment on images: I would be interested in offering a full review, but, for now, just a comment on some images; these are things which will needed to be dealt with before FAC; image problems can (quite rightly) sink FAC nominations.

  • File:Aleister Crowley 1902 K2.jpg- While this is definitely PD in the EU because of the date of the author, we need to have some idea of the first publication to be clear about if/why it's PD in the US.
    • I've been able to find a little bit more information about the image (exactly where it was taken etc) but not where it was first published. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:38, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • File:OTOlogo.png- This is a non-free image with a template rationale. The rationale is not appropriate for this use; if the image is required (and I'm not necessarily convinced it is!) it'll need a careful hand-written rationale.
    • I think that you're probably right about the necessity of this image. I have removed it from the article. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:47, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • File:Crowley unicursal hexagram.svg- The design looks complex enough to be copyrightable, to me. I am not clear why we should assume that this is PD.
  • File:Aleister Crowley's May Morn.jpg- This is a real problem. We're going to need some evidence of first publication and an indication of whether or not this is PD in the US.

You may remember that I had a bash at Crowley images in the past- I think this is something you're going to need to keep an eye on to stop problematic images sneaking through in the future. Josh Milburn (talk) 21:25, 21 July 2015 (UTC)

Prose comments from JM[edit]

  • "He married Rose Edith Kelly and they honeymooned in Cairo, Egypt in 1904" Both in 1904 or just the honeymoon?
    • Yes, this was both in 1904. Do you think that the prose requires alteration at all ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Oh no, I was wrong on that. My apologies. The actual wedding was August 1903. I shall amend the prose accordingly. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I wonder whether you are running into NPOV issues referring to his parents as "ultra-conservative" and "fundamentalist".
    • I think the terms are appropriate in these contexts; specifically the article describes the Plymouth Brethren as a form of fundamentalist Christianity (which it undeniably is) and the Exclusive Brethren were on the more extreme end of the Plymouth Brethren, thus warranting the "ultra-conservative" tag, although perhaps a more appropriate term could be found for the latter ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:49, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
      • Actually it might just be better if I get rid of "ultra-conservative" all together here. It doesn't really add anything and as you point out could raise some problems. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Following the death of their baby daughter in 1880, in 1881 the family" The family didn't have a daughter- the parents had a daughter.
  • Is your link to the right publication called The Cambridge Magazine? The linked publication seems to have been established a few years after Crowley left Cambridge.
    • According to the footnotes in Kaczynski, Crowley's poems appeared in various 1899 editions of Cambridge Magazine, so clearly this isn't the same magazine that the link send us to. I have de-connected the link accordingly. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:15, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "They broke apart because Pollitt did not share Crowley's increasing interest in Western esotericism, something Crowley regretted for years." He regretted the breakup, or Pollitt's lack of interest?
    • I've dealt with this issue in my responses to Brian's original comments. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "a piece of decadent erotica" is a little non-neutral, I feel. "that had to be printed abroad" is also sensationalist- better to simply say he chose to print it abroad.
    • I've reworded this to "a Decadent work of erotic poetry"; does that work ? The use of "decadence" refers specifically to the artistic genre of the work, rather than being a mere descriptor. I have also reworded the second part of this sentence so that it is less sensationalistic in tone. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:56, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "and the latter was a critical success" I'm unclear what you're referring to, here.
    • I've changed this to "although Jephthah was a critical success." Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:03, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "from the London rebels" Non-neutral? Also the next line.
    • I've changed this to the more neutral "London lodge members". Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:21, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • What was Why Jesus Wept? Another book of poems to woo Rose, or something else? Was it published? What year?
    • I've ammended the prose to the following: "While on his honeymoon, he wrote her a series of love poems, published as Rosa Mundi and other Love Songs (1906), as well as authoring the religious satire Why Jesus Wept (1904)." Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:19, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Arabic and Islamic mysticism." Ambiguous- "the language of Arabic and the mysticism of Islam" or "both Arabic mysticism and Islamic mysticism"? (There will be better ways to phrase this. Wikilinks may be sufficient.)
    • I've reversed the wording to "Islamic mysticism and Arabic", which I think is a good improvement and erases the problems. I have also added links. Midnightblueowl (talk) 21:57, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Crowley was astounded, for the exhibit's number was 666, the number of the beast in Christian belief." Too rhetorical
  • "According to later claims, on 8 April Crowley heard a disembodied voice claiming to be coming from Aiwass, an entity who was the messenger of Horus, or Hoor-Paar-Kraat." Later claims of his own? I feel that this is presented too uncritically.
    • I've changed the start of this passage to "According to Crowley's own later claims," to make this a little clearer. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:13, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Crowley was unsure what to do with The Book of the Law, and often came to resent it. He ignored the instructions that it commanded him to perform, which included taking the Stele of Revealing from the museum, fortifying his own island, and translating the book into all the world's languages. Instead he sent typescripts of the work to several occultists he knew, and then "put aside the book with relief"." Again, this feels a little uncritical. I wonder whether this paragraph could be reworked to say first that he wrote the book and then that claims were made about disembodied voices and such. Surely, per WP:UNDUE, we shouldn't be privileging the claim that Crowley actually heard the voices of deities.
    • I've changed the prose to the following: "Crowley claimed that at the time he had been unsure what to do with The Book of the Law. Often resenting it, he said that he ignored the instructions which the text commanded him to perform, which included taking the Stele of Revealing from the museum, fortifying his own island, and translating the book into all the world's languages. According to his account, he instead sent typescripts of the work to several occultists he knew, putting the manuscript itself away and ignoring it." I hope that that better reflects that this account rests upon Crowley's own claims. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:28, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Crowley was proved right" Non-neutral. According to the article, he made a judgement call that it was too dangerous, not a prediction that they would be killed. There's an interesting discussion to be had about proving judgements, but I don't think this article is the place to do it! (Also, I think the word "mutinied" is too metaphorical/prosaic.)
    • A very fair point. I have removed that particular wording regarding "proved right" but I'm not sure what to replace "mutinied" with. Any suggestions? Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
    • Perhaps "rebelled", but then that has very similar connotations to "mutinied"... Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:41, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • I'm assuming that the books without dates weren't published? If this is not correct, there seems to be some inconsistency. The Scented Garden and Snowdrops From a Curate's Garden are some examples, but I think there are others.
  • "after shooting dead a native who tried to mug him" A bit colonial. Why not just "a man"?
    • How about "a native man" ? I appreciate the colonial overtones of such wording but I think it is significant that the dead man was an Indian rather than a European colonialist, because that in part explains the reaction from locals. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
      • "a native man" would be better- "an Indian man" is another possibility. Josh Milburn (talk)
  • "before sailing to Hong Kong" If they all went, rather than just Crowley, how about "before they sailed to Hong Kong"?
    • I'm not quite sure if they accompanied him to Hong Kong or not. I shall look it up. Midnightblueowl (talk) 17:48, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
      • I've removed mention of Hong Kong as from the sources I looked at I cannot quite establish who exactly went to HK, whether it was just Crowley or his whole family. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:45, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "Heartbroken" Non-neutral
    • I replaced it with "Under emotional distress"; do you think that this works ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "He began short-lived romances with actress Vera "Lola" Stepp and author Ada Leverson,[69] and Rose gave birth to Crowley's second daughter, Lola Zaza, in February 1907.[70]" Not entirely clear what the two halves of the sentence have to do with each other.
    • Not a lot, I think. It just looks a little better to have them attached as one longer sentence than cut up into two very small sentences, no ? I shall replace the "and Rose" with "while Rose", which might help smooth things a bit with this passage. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:55, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "an influential essay on "The Psychology of Hashish" (1909)." First, I don't like the way you use the title as part of the sentence, and, second, in what way was it influential? Academic literature in psychology(?), among occultists, or in some other way?
  • "resulting in two further texts, "Liber VII" and "Liber Cordis Cincti Serpente", which was later classified in the corpus of Holy Books of Thelema." Unclear.
  • I'm struggling with the following sentences, too, and "In June 1909, when the manuscript of The Book of the Law was rediscovered at Boleskine, Crowley finally came to fully accept Thelema as objective truth.[75]" comes across as very pro-Thelema
    • Another good point (I'm not sure if that was my original wording or whether someone else has come along and made alterations). Either way, it needs changing. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:07, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "closest disciple and sexual partner" closest disciple and closest sexual partner, or closest disciple and a sexual partner?
    • I've switched the wording around to "sexual partner and closest discipline", which I think rectifies the problem. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:26, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "correspondences that borrowed from Mathers and Bennett" What does this mean? (Also, could we have a link to explain the term "Qabalistic"?)
  • "Francis Henry Everard Joseph Feilding" Is that one name or have you missed a comma?
    • That's one name. Of course it would be simpler to ignore the middle names and just say "Francis Feilding" but his name appears to be cited in full in various texts. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:53, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "In March 1909, Crowley began production of a biannual periodical that acted as the "Official Organ" of the A∴A∴, titled The Equinox, which was billed as "The Review of Scientific Illuminism"." Could this be rephrased?
    • Good idea. I've gone with "In March 1909, Crowley began production of a biannual periodical titled The Equinox. Acting as the "Official Organ" of the A∴A∴, he billed this periodical as "The Review of Scientific Illuminism"." Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:26, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
      • A quick comment on the new wording- the second sentence doesn't quite work. The current structure means that the subordinate clause "acting as the "Official Organ" of the A∴A∴" descibes "he" (IE, Crowley). You could fix this by restructure the main clause, so that the sentence is "Acting as the "Official Organ" of the A∴A∴, this [or "the"] periodical was billed [by Crowley?] as "The Review of Scientific Illuminism"." Alternatively, you could move the subordinate clause so that it reads something like "He billed this periodical, which was to become the "Official Organ" of the A∴A∴, as "The Review of Scientific Illuminism"."" Josh Milburn (talk) 12:04, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "both articles on occultism, non-fiction pieces, and artworks" "both" implies two
  • "Meanwhile, unable to stand her alcoholism, Crowley divorced Rose in November 1909, on the grounds of his own adultery." Non-neutral
  • "he performed the 19 Calls of Enochian magic" ??
    • I was hoping that the Enochian article talked about the 19 Calls but it isn't in a good state and only mentions them, so I think it better to simply remove "19 Calls" here rather than go into unnecessary information in explaining them. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "magical workings" ??
    • A "working" is a common term within occult literature to refer to a magical act. A "working" pertains to a specific, singular act (even one that takes many weeks) whereas a term like "ceremony" or "ritual" infers something that can be repeated again and again. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "and developed the spelling "magick" to differentiate what he practised from the tricks of illusionists" Again, this comes across a little pro-Crowley
  • "XI° level initiates" Undefined jargon
    • I've rewritten this as the following: "syllabus for those O.T.O. members who had been initiated into the eleventh degree." Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:16, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "the gods Mercury and Jupiter" Links?
  • "the working, among them Liber Agapé, a treatise on sex magic.[112] Following the Working" Inconsistency
  • " resulting in an argument in which Crowley cursed him.[113]" In the magical sense, I assume?
  • "In later years, detractors denounced Crowley as a traitor to Britain for this action.[122] In reality, Crowley was a double agent, working for the British intelligence services to infiltrate and undermine Germany's operation in New York. Many of his articles in The Fatherland were hyperbolic, for instance comparing Kaiser Wilhelm II to Jesus Christ; in July 1915 he orchestrated a publicity stunt – reported on by The New York Times – in which he declared independence for Ireland in front of the Statue of Liberty; the real intention was to make the German lobby appear ridiculous in the eyes of the American public.[123] It has been argued that he encouraged the German Navy to destroy the Lusitania, informing them that it would ensure the US stayed out of the war, while in reality hoping that it would bring the US into the war on Britain's side.[124]" Is there a clear academic consensus on these claims? The sources you cite don't seem ideal for such radical-sounding claims. (Also the later "aware of his intelligence work".)
  • "experienced past life memories" Claimed to, presumably.
    • Of course. I'll ensure that that is clearer in the text. Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "making various slanderous accusations against him, but he was unable to afford the legal fees to sue them. As a result, John Bull continued its attack, with the stories also being picked up by newspapers in North America and throughout Europe." This feels very pro-Crowley
  • What was To Man? The Heart of the Master?
    • I've provided explanations of both works in the article, as well as their dates of publication. Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:37, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • "There, prominent members like Karl Germer and Martha Küntzel championed Crowley's leadership, but others opposed it, resulting in a split in the O.T.O." The fact you name "prominent" pro-Crowley members but name no anti-Crowley members feels pro-Crowley.
  • "He then returned to Berlin, where he reappeared three weeks later at the opening of his art exhibition at the Gallery Neumann-Nierendorf." By "reappeared", do you mean specifically that he came out as not really dead?
    • Yes, but do think that we should alter the wording here ? Midnightblueowl (talk) 19:40, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
      • It's an odd situation- the current works, but I do wonder if there may be a better way to phrase this. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:12, 9 August 2015 (UTC)
  • " Thelema revolves around the idea that human beings each have their own True Will that they should discover and pursue, and that this would exist in harmony with the Cosmic Will that pervades the universe." Why "would"?
  • "Lord Boleskine" You used "Laird" further up the article
  • "exotic women" If that's not a quote from Crowley himself, I don't think we should use it. It's very eurocentric.
  • " that people "must not be ashamed or afraid of being homosexual if he happens to be so at heart; he must not attempt to violate his own true nature because of public opinion, or medieval morality, or religious prejudice which would wish he were otherwise."" This should be "a person" or "a man" rather than "people".
  • "Also in Britain, an occultist known as Amado Crowley claimed to be Crowley's son; these claims have been refuted by academic investigation. Amado argued that Thelema was a false religion created by Crowley to hide his true esoteric teachings, which Amado claimed to be propagating" Is Dave Evans (author of the cited source) an academic?
    • Yes, he was. From what I gather (mostly from here) he held a PhD in history from the University of Bristol, produced under the supervision of historian Ronald Hutton. While the book being cited was not published through an academic press, it was based on Evans' earlier doctoral work and was reviewed in several academic, peer-reviewed journals. Evans himself (before his untimely death a few years ago) also co-edited the Journal for the Academic Study of Magic and established the Academic Study of Magic list-serve, even though he never held a professional academic post. Midnightblueowl (talk) 22:22, 4 August 2015 (UTC)
      • That's good enough for me. If his book was widely reviewed, he's probably actually notable- or, at least, the book would be. To offer a FAC style source review: The Churton and Kaczynski biographies look fine, as these are people who hold academic posts in a related field. Same for Spence, even if the book title does seem a little sensationalist. Sutin has an academic post and St. Martin's Press is respectable, so definitely reliable. And, for our purposes, everything from OUP edited collections, peer reviewed journals or broadsheet newspapers are surely reliable. I will note, though, that page numbers and perhaps DOIs would be good for journal articles, while there's inconsistency on whether to list publishers/locations (I wouldn't bother). Acumen is now part of Routledge, but was certainly respectable, if smaller, beforehand, so that gives me confidence in Pasi/Godwin. Booth, Cavendish, Evans, Landis and Symonds seem to fall the next level down- not quite "academic works from academics", but decent enough for solid biographical information. DuQuette is worrying me a little- he's an occult writer publishing with an occult press. Similar with Moore; he's presented as an academic, but I don't know how to take it- a "new age" type press from an occult writer. I think you've done well to be selective with your reference list- I was initially worried that you were leaning on some pretty questionable sources, but provided you're not relying solely on the "next level down" sources for anything rejected/ignored by the academics and providing you're particularly with the used of the autobiography, I think the only questions concern whether and how DuQuette and Moore should be used. Josh Milburn (talk) 08:53, 5 August 2015 (UTC)
        • Ideally I wouldn't have resorted to using DuQuette, for it isn't an ideal (i.e. academic) source. However, he is a respected figure within the Thelemite community itself, and there has yet to be much solid academic research and publication on Thelemic belief; the vast majority of academic studies have focused on Crowley himself, rather than on the belief system which he promulgated. Whether or not DuQuette should be included as a reference is a difficult one, however, and something that I shall have to seriously consider before proceeding to FAC. Midnightblueowl (talk) 18:56, 8 August 2015 (UTC)
          • The question to ask is whether you're citing anything particularly contentious to DuQuette/Moore, or, even worse, using them for information which is rejected in, or conspicuously absent from, "better" sources. I certainly don't think that they're terrible sources which should be stripped from the article (and there will be plenty of sources like that about someone like Crowley) but they have to be used judiciously. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:12, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

Concerning the prose, I think that, in places, the article has a slight pro-Crowley/pro-Thelema leaning. Concerning the sources, I wonder whether there is more academic material out there from mainstream academic presses/mainstream peer-reviewed journals; while the reliance on biographies is inevitable, I think the incorporation of more academic work could be valuable. Josh Milburn (talk) 12:57, 28 July 2015 (UTC)

Many thanks for taking the time to read and review this article, Josh. As for the idea that the article carries a pro-Crowley/pro-Thelema leaning, I think that you are right. Certainly, a number of Thelemites have been active on this article over the years, although having looked at the wording of the page when I got it through the GAN system in October 2013 I can see that most of the pro-Crowley passages were still present then, and thus are probably the result of my own additions, so I'll have to take the fall for that one (perhaps a tad ironic, given that I am not a Thelemite and nor do I consider myself particularly 'pro-Crowley'). Certainly, you've done a good job of pointing out where a pro-Crowley slant has crept in and I hope that most of those instances have now been removed. Midnightblueowl (talk) 20:29, 8 August 2015 (UTC)

I'm going to have patchy internet access for a while, so may not be able to devote much time to responding to this peer review for the next week and a half. So if I'm not responding, it's not that I've forgotten about it, just that I'm not available! Midnightblueowl (talk) 14:05, 9 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 16 July 2015, 12:45 UTC)----


Social sciences and society[edit]

Center for Indoor Air Research[edit]

I want to get feedback on how this article can be improved, as I am hoping to bring it up to GA status in the future. Everymorning (talk) 00:25, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • Looks a little thin. Be sure it properly summarizes all the article's sections.
History
  • founded in March 1988 by Philip Morris, R.J. Reynolds, and Lorillard
Wikilink these companies.
  • This agreement required the tobacco industry to disband the CIAR
Why? This would be better if explained.
  • However, according to Alisa Tong and
Avoid using "however" in formal writing.
Stated mission
  • including the health effects of ETS
You haven't explained what ETS is in the article body.
  • However, in 1992
Avoid
Structure
  • "special-reviewed" projects
Who conducted these "special-reviewed" projects?
Funding of scientific research
  • many scientists, although unwilling to accept funds directly from the tobacco industry, were willing to accept funds from the CIAR.
This implies that scientists didn't know who funded CIAR. Was that the case?
  • This study was based on the hypothesis that particles transported indoors from outdoor air, rather than ETS, were responsible for a significant proportion of indoor aerosol concentrations.
You need to make the connection between ETS and indoor aerosol concentrations explicit, as this is confusing. Do cigarettes really contain aerosols?
  • However, after some of his studies found that this exposure
Avoid "however" in formal writing.
  • authored by Johns Hopkins
Wikilink Johns Hopkins.
  • that some cases of lung cancer previously attributed to passive smoking might actually be caused by other factors, such as diet.
The lead says that CIAR funded research on indoor air pollution, but this says that also studied diet as a cause of illness. Add this to the lead to better summarize the content of the article.
Conclusion

This seems like a work in progress, as I assume there must be much more detail than what's currently presented here, particularly negative reaction to the studies. For example, you mention the Tobacco Master Settlement Agreement, but you don't detail it's direct impact or explain what it is in the article. In fact you mention it in the lead, but not the article, which is wrong. Every detail in the lead must also be in the article body, so if it's not explained in the article it should not be included in the lead. I think this is a ways off GAN, but I'd strongly recommend another peer review after you make another attempt at comprehensiveness, before taking it to GAN. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 19:15, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 25 August 2015, 00:26 UTC)----


Norodom Sihanouk[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because…

Done a major expansion on the article from June 2015. At the present state, I am confident that it will pass the GA review stage. I think nominating it for FA review should not be an issue either, after I have looked through a number of FA nominations this year and I believe that I have safely meet the FA standards. I understand that articles are highly recommended to undergo a GA review and Peer review before nominating for FA. Comments on prose, sourcing, and other relevant issues are highly welcome to improve the article as much as possible.

Thanks, Mr Tan (talk) 03:53, 20 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 20 August 2015, 03:53 UTC)----


Murder of Ennis Cosby[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because… I created this article after being surprised it did not exist. If such a thing happened today, it would immediately have its own Wiki article with hundreds of editors updating it around the clock. Only one other person has edited this article since I created it. I would like to nominate it for FA, even though it's about an unfortunate event. It seems with all the drama and headlines surrounding Bill Cosby, people have forgotten about this tragedy.

Thanks, МандичкаYO 😜 05:41, 27 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • Subsequently, Markhasev was tried and convicted of first-degree murder and attempted robbery on July 7, 1998.
Words like Subsequently are rarely helpful in encyclopedic writing, but if I was going to use it here I'd include it after Markhasev; i.e., "Markhasev was subsequently tried and convicted".
  • He was sentenced to life in prison in August 1998
I would state "The following month, he was sentenced to life in prison".
  • when he admitted committing the murder and asked that appeals in his case stop.[2]
Per WP:LEADCITE, this citation belongs in the body, not the lead.
Murder
  • where he was working toward his doctorate in special education.
"working toward" might not be the best phrasing here.
  • He had graduated from Morehouse College in 1992, despite struggling with dyslexia, and planned to set up a school for children with learning disabilities.[1]
I'd rewrite this as, "Despite struggling with dyslexia, he graduated from Morehouse College in 1992, and planned to set up a school for children with learning disabilities.[1]"
  • Cosby was visiting friends in Los Angeles and driving north on Interstate 405 through the Sepulveda Pass when
I'd rewrite this so it isn't awkward to say he was "visiting friends and driving".
Aftermath
  • high number of calls asking how Cosby's memory could be honored
Do you mean to say, "the high number of callers"?

Media criticism

  • This might be better as "criticism of the media", because it sounds like the media is criticizing someone.
Rewards
  • A$25,000 reward offered by Los Angeles County was similarly withdrawn at the family's request.
Add a space before $25,000.
Investigation and trial
  • The first paragraph of this section needs a closing citation, as does the last sentence of the second paragraph. Always include one whenever breaking across paragraphs or sections.
  • The police received more than 800 tips they were investigating
This is kinda cluncky. How did they receive the tips they were already investigating?
  • He was ultimately apprehended in March after the
Since the last year given is 1989, you should include the year of his arrest here for the sake of clarity.
  • while some of his friends initially stated they did not believe he was guilty
I question the relevance of this statement. I'd remove it.
  • The grand jury was convened three months after the murder
I'd make the timeline clearer by not expecting the reader to figure out which month and year we are talking about. Don't make them do this much math.
  • Markhasev refused to tell them what had happened, but they stopped at a wooded area that matched the description of where the murder weapon was later discovered.
This is a little confusing. Is this how the friends realized what they had been involved with?
  • Markhasev told him he killed Cosby
Not sure of the relevance here.
  • testified in Cosby's two-week trial in July 1998
Shouldn't this be Markhasev's trial?
  • in which he admitted the murder
Try, "in which he confessed to the murder"
2002 confession
  • asking that all appeals in his case stop
Rewrite this so it's less clunky.
  • Markhasev wrote to Brodie that he had killed Cosby
I'd replace "wrote to" with "admitted to".
Conclusion

Not too bad overall. Some of the prose needs a little work, but nothing too major. RO(talk) 16:40, 13 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 27 July 2015, 05:41 UTC)----


Norodom Ranariddh[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because...

I have listed this article on GA review since February 2015 but there have been no editors that are willing to take this GA review. I have completed most of the work in February 2015, save for relatively minor edits and expansions thereafter. At this point of time, I have been trying to contact the subject of this person (H.R.H Norodom Ranariddh) to request for some of his portraits to be released under free licences such as cc-by-sa-3.0 or GFDL. I am confident that this article meets GA requirements, and as with many editors, the final goal would be to take this article to Featured Article status. However, I feel it would be better not to rush things as yet, as the nominator would need to check back on the nomination page on a regular basis, which I feel I am not quite emotionally prepared to do so due to other real-life commitments.

I would greatly appreciate reviews and feedbacks if there are any issues with the prose that maybe improved upon, citation issues to be in tandem with Wikipedia policies and guidelines such as Wikipedia:Citing sources, or any other relevant areas that maybe improved upon. Please feel free to make edits that you may deem appropriate. A review would be very much appreciated to close up any loopholes as it would be difficult for one editor to be able to address and identify every single issue.....

Hope to gather your feedback and assistance, thanks, Mr Tan (talk) 18:09, 2 July 2015 (UTC)

RE--Update: Nominated as GA. Will try to add a little more content before going for FA, although I have an awkward feeling that future reviewers may think the prose needs improvement before it can pass that final stage.... Mr Tan (talk) 09:09, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 2 July 2015, 18:09 UTC)----


Elmer Ernest Southard[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because… I'm hoping to take this through an FA nomination soon, but I have very little FA experience. After a GOCE request, I was surprised at the number of syntax issues that were identified, but I was glad to have them addressed. I'm interested in any feedback that will improve the article.

Thanks, EricEnfermero (Talk) 01:36, 19 June 2015 (UTC)

This looks pretty good at first pass. Enjoyable prose. My comments are below. --Animalparty! (talk) 06:13, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

  • For convenience to readers, I would recommend replacing <ref>Gay, p. 15.</ref> with {{Sfn}} or similar template, which puts a hyperlink between the footnote and the full citation.
  • Frederick Parker Gay is introduced only as "biographer", but later appears as a close confidant. I think few extra words would help clarify this relationship e.g. "Frederick Parker Gay", longtime colleague/friend of Southard and his posthumous biographer", especially since the biography is cited throughout.
  • He was influenced academically by a paternal aunt, a Greek scholar who had graduated from Oberlin College, and a cousin was a prominent attorney in Bath, England. Did his cousin influence him academically as well (in which case it should read "by... a cousin who was a"), or did he simply have a cousin who was an attorney (in which case the "who" would be left out, and the sentence should be rewritten for clarity.
  • Soon after receiving his medical degree, Southard studied briefly in Germany... How brief is briefly? A semester? A month?
  • The content about his medical degree is split into two paragraphs interrupted by chess. It would improve flow if "He received his medical degree in 1901" was closely followed by what he did afterwards.
  • Southard was a past president... Dates?
  • Although physiological theories of "autointoxication" were explored in U.S. psychiatry before 1940, Southard had long ago rejected them. This reads a bit confusing. "Autointoxication" needs some clarification, as it is new to the reader, and the hops from 1940 (after Southard's death) to "long ago" (from Southard's perspective) are confusing. Perhaps "long ago" could be replaced with a more specific date, as even wording like "much earlier" is vague (earlier than what?)
  • Southard saw an overlap of organic and functional conditions What does this actually mean?
  • ...out of Southard's hands... Somewhat of an imprecise WP:IDIOM
  • In a note,... To whom? When? Is it even necessary to mention the note or could it simply be stated that he had planned several works?
  • Serious attention to Southard's findings did not reemerge in the medical literature until the 1990s, and changes in diagnostic criteria complicate the application of Southard's findings to modern schizophrenic patients. The conjunction ("and") linking these two clauses is awkward. Perhaps "but", and/or more elucidation of Southard's views in modern contexts. In any case, this sentence migh fit better at the end of the paragraph, progressing from "shortly before his death" to after his death.
  • In 1931, Canavan identified a neurodegenerative disorder which became known as Canavan disease. Is this relevant to Southard's biography?
  • The 2nd external link (Southard Clinic, Massachusetts Mental Health Center is dead, as are a few reference links (Checklinks tool)
  • Ref 27 and 42 appear to be the same, although it might be helpful to indicate who is being cited, since the source contains both the 1919 Southard lecture and a 2007 introduction by Noll.
  • Also, Emil Kraepelin is listed in the infobox as an influence, but is never mentioned in text.
    • Thanks so much for your peer review. I have addressed a number of these and I will address the rest over the next few days. I learned something useful about reviewing as well. I know I've seen green text before, but I was not familiar with the Xt template. Thanks again! EricEnfermero (Talk) 03:41, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • After briefly studying in Germany
Did he earn a degree there, on fail to complete a program?
Early life
  • Boston Latin School, where his father, aunt and headmaster Arthur Irving Fiske sparked a lifelong interest in language and the meaning of words.
Did his father and aunt teach there, or were they students?
  • Despite a tall, solid build
How tall was he?
  • Southard received his medical degree in 1901
From Harvard I presume?
Appointments
  • undergoing aggressive surgery and recovering over several months.
What's an aggressive surgery?
  • Southard coined the word "cacogenics" for the study of racial decline.[20]
Racial decline? This would benefit from some expansion.
Professional contributions
  • His neuropathological perspective was eclipsed after his death by the "mind twist" hypothesis
It's odd to state this before stating that he died.
  • Southard said that this process
Avoid constructions like, "Southard said". Stated, believed, taught, theorized are all better choices.
  • At the end of the war, Southard returned to Boston State Hospital and it was reorganized.
This modifier is confused, because there are apparently two subjects in the second clause.
Influence
  • a tempting job offer
"tempting" is too informal.
  • Southard also mentored Karl Menninger
Did he mentor Canavan, because you didn't say that?
Personal life
  • mental-hygiene lecturer
What's a mental-hygiene lecturer?
  • Southard was described in his New York Times obituary
Again, it's odd to talk of his obituary before discussion of his death.
Death
  • following the postmortem dissections of Southard's brain and those of his parents
This comes out of nowhere, because we know nothing of his parent's deaths.
Conclusion

This is a nice piece overall. My biggest concerns are with the narrative, which is not as chronological as I would expect with a biography. I don't think you have to be slavishly chronologic, but I think the article would benefit from a clear dissection of things that happened before he died and things that happened after. My other major concern is that you seem to paint a picture that he wasn't the best student or scholar, but he earned so many of these accolades that it's confusing. Did he get his act together after the bad grades in med school, or did he achieve these successes despite a lackluster academic career? Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 19:53, 28 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 19 June 2015, 01:36 UTC)----


Carl Jung[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I am wishing to see what can be done to get it to at least a reasonable quality for GA status. The article is in a good condition, but take a look at the edition on the French Wikipedia (which has good article status) and compare it to the one here. Admittedly the frwiki version is stupidly long (~230,000 bytes!), but it an example of what we can get to.

Thanks, My name isnotdave (talk/contribs) 09:46, 7 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments by Ugog Nizdast[edit]

  • I'm at section Early years and notice that there is much sourced to his autobiography so I'm seeing things like "Jung said that one night he saw a faintly luminous and indefinite figure...a head detached from the neck and floating in the air", "he believed that, like his mother, he had two personalities" "As a boy he carved a tiny mannequin into the end of the wooden ruler from his..." . As a layperson, I'm already lost among all this details. Is it necessary or out of scope? Can we rely on a primary source such as an autobiography? Enlighten me.
  • The are many duplicate references which can be bundled together. Also, aren't there good biographies on him which can be used a source?
  • Aside from above, the whole Biography section starts off with (perhaps excessive?) coverage of his childhood versus stubby subsections of his later life. This explains it well: Wikipedia:Writing better articles#Layout. There are too many subsections. The Auto PR seconds what I said.
  • I think what's needed is redoing the entire article structure. Let me roughly give it a shot: Stubby subsections can be merged. Sections covering subarticles can be summarised and show the main link. Something like a main Biography encompassing Early years, Educations and early career, Relationship with Freud, Travels, Marriage and later life, and Death. A main Works section covering things like Introversion etc. Another main one for his views. Finally, the Legacy and In popular culture.
  • London 1913-14, there's a cn tag. There are at least two more tags total. -Ugog Nizdast (talk) 11:37, 17 June 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 7 June 2015, 09:46 UTC)----


Lists[edit]

List of Bitcoin companies[edit]

I've listed this List for peer review to find out what enhancements might be needed to make this a featured list. Thanks, -- Eclipsed (talk) (email) 19:21, 3 August 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Calvin999

Hi. I'm pleased you've listed this for a Peer Review prior to nomination at FLC, because it needs a lot of work! Immediate stand out problems are that the lead is very short, and does not give a detailed enough summary of what Bitcoin, and what the list is detailing. Further prose about specific things from the list would be helpful, too, as to give context and info about some of the companies, and notable, famous or important facts. As it stands, it does not meet section 1 of the FL criteria: "It features professional standards of writing.", mainly because there isn't actually much prose. Similarly, it does not meet section 2 of the criteriam either: "It has an engaging lead that introduces the subject and defines the scope and inclusion criteria.", you kind of set out to say what this list is, but there is no context or reason for it. What are you showing us? Another problem is that the list, well the whole article, is completely void of any sources, citations or references to back up and substantiate what it is exactly that you are presenting to the reader. Nothing in the article so far can be verified or checked to see if it's true. As such, everything here is original research, something which will not go down well in an FLC nomination and would most likely result in an immediate close. I would say it passes section 3a, as I am assuming that you've included all the companies in the list. I don't know enough about the subject, but in order to pass 3b, then the info here should not be a regurgitation of what exists in other articles. I'd say it passes section 4 for structure, as it's a nice, clean table and you've made the columns sortable. However, I would list the city then the country, not the country then the city. Unless you have separate columns for each? There's no red linkage, and you've included some examples of media. There's no edit warring recently and it seems quite stable, as you seem to be the main contributor. Thus, I think the first couple of sections of the criteria are what you need to focus on in order to get to the stage of nomination at FLC: the lead, good level of prose writing, and sources for everything you include (with properly formatted citations). There's a problem with one of the rows, it doesn't have a properly formatted box. Hope this helps. Please ping me if you have any comments of questions. Good luck.  — Calvin999 19:57, 25 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 3 August 2015, 19:21 UTC)----


List of Docklands Light Railway stations[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because… whilst it has been a few years I think this is mainly complete but I think it needs a bit of looking over. What should I trim from the history and what else should I include? Anything else?

Thanks, Simply south ...... time, deparment skies for just 9 years 15:06, 30 July 2015 (UTC)

Comments from RO[edit]

Lead
  • The network has been extended and the capacity of its trains expanded so that now nearly 70 million journeys made every year.[1]
"journeys are made every year"?
History
  • For over 200 years London's docks and wharves thrived on imperial commerce.
It's better to say "more than", than "over".
  • particularly tobacco, timber and skins
Does "skins" refer to animal hides?
  • and warehouses could be used by private enterprise
Were these sold at that time?
  • but put on hold by Norman Fowler in 1979
Readers might find it helpful to know who Fowler was.
Opening and extensions
  • Sites for stations at Carmen Street (later Langdon Park) and Pudding Mill Lane were safeguarded
What is meant by "safeguarded"?
Conclusion

Seems pretty thorough and well-written. I'm not sure the prose is all that engaging, but maybe its difficult to achieve that with material that tends to be a bit dry. Be sure parts aren't overly detailed, which might be contributing to reader fatigue. Its a nice piece overall that I'm sure represents the topic well. Nicely done. Keep up the great work! RO(talk) 17:12, 18 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 30 July 2015, 15:06 UTC)----


List of Dundee United F.C. managers[edit]

I've listed this article for peer review because I have recently completed the statistics in the table, written supporting prose and added references, and would like to know if there is anything else that can be done to improve it before nominating it as a featured list. Thanks, Jellyman (talk) 08:44, 4 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from Csisc[edit]

I thank you for your works about the managers of FC Dundee United... The work is excellent and I think that the work can be a featured list in the coming years... However, there are some points to clarify...

  • Managerial History: The managerial history of the FC Dundee United is just a series of achievement citations. There are minor information about Managerial Crisis of the exceptional FC Dundee United... As you know, all clubs suffered from crisis in the period of the famous crisis of 1929... There are minor information about this... You have to proliferate this part and involve more information and quotes about managers... For quotes, you can consult some media reports about the club...
  • Managerial Achievements: Managerial Achievements are not just sportive ones... You have to mention if the managers had succeeded to find new and important sponsors for the team... You have to mention if the managers had succeeded to give more recognition to this important team... You can even indicate the most influencing ones in the listed standings... I think that this will ameliorate the final output of the work and let it more eligible to get FA Status...

I think that these information are efficient to ameliorate more the work. However, if you have any questions to ask, feel free to answer me here.

Yours Sincerely,

--Csisc (talk) 10:40, 6 June 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, I'll see what I can come up with..! Jellyman (talk) 19:19, 10 June 2015 (UTC)

Comments from MPJ[edit]

My weakness is grammar, but my strength is lists and tables and formatting etc. so I took the table through the wringer to see what I could come up with

  • Yugoslavia sorts by "Serbia", which is the article name not the displayed name - need to use the "{{sort|Yugoslavia|" functionality to fix that.
  • Dates sort is off, anything with a day sorts first, then those with month alphabetically, it should sort chronologically at all times oldest-to-youngest or youngest-to-oldest
  • The "P" column does not sort correctly. it sorts 1, 12, 122, 2, 20 etc.
  • This may just be my browser but once I sort W or D or something twice the sorting is stuck? that may not be something you can fix but it may be due to the 2 colspan sections?
  • Speaking of the two colspans - the should sort the same way across the board, to me as "less than zero".
  • You have not defined the last field on the line for Willie Macfayden, in IE it looks off and could do with the non-breaking space character.

If this is going to be a Featured List at some point these need to be addressed. If you run into problems I can work with you to fix them.  MPJ-US  21:15, 29 July 2015 (UTC) Side note - Image "alt text" should not just be the same as the caption - the Alt text is for those that have pictures turned off or have vision issues and use aids to read articles. I believe they're supposed to describe the images?  MPJ-US  22:06, 29 July 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! Yeah, I'm afraid tables and stuff isn't particularly my strong point, but I'll have a go at fixing things... Jellyman (talk) 00:04, 10 August 2015 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 4 June 2015, 08:44 UTC)----


WikiProject peer-reviews[edit]