The peer review list on this page is automatically generated. Please do not edit this page to add or remove peer reviews. Individual peer reviews can be edited by following the edit section links next to the article titles, which are now stored on /archiveN pages from the very start (the term "archive" for these pages is purely historical). Please see the instructions below and report any problems on the talk page.

Wikipedia's peer review process exposes articles to closer scrutiny from a broader group of editors, and is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate. It is not academic peer review by a group of experts in a particular subject, and articles that undergo this process should not be assumed to have greater authority than any other. Nominators are strongly encouraged to make use of the peer review volunteers page, which lists users who are willing to be contacted on their user talk pages for review participation. Active Wiki projects or the revision history of related articles may also be consulted to find editors to help with review. For feedback on articles that are less developed, use the article's talk page or requests for feedback. For general editing advice, see Wikipedia style guidelines, Wikipedia how-to, "How to write a great article", and "The perfect article". Content or neutrality disputes should be listed at Requests for comment.

Shortcuts: WP:PR WP:REVIEW The path to a featured article Start a new article Develop the article Check against the featured article criteria Get creative feedback ← Apply for featured article status Featured articles

Nomination procedure Anyone can request peer review. Users submitting new requests are encouraged to review an article from those already listed, and encourage reviewers by replying promptly and appreciatively to comments. Nominations are limited to one per editor per day and four total open requests per editor. Articles must be free of major cleanup banners and 14 days must have passed since any previous peer review or unsuccessful FAC. For more information on these limits see here. To add a nomination: Add {{subst:PR}} to the top of the article's talk page and save it, creating a peer review notice to notify other editors of the review. Within the notice, click where instructed to open a new peer review discussion page. If there is no such link in the notice, see this. Complete the new page as instructed. Remember to note the kind of comments/contributions you want, and/or the sections of the article you think need reviewing. Save the page with the four tildes (~~~~) at the end of your request to sign it. Your peer review will be listed automatically on this page within an hour. Consult the volunteers list for assistance. An excellent way to get reviews is to review a few other requests without responses and ask for reviews in return. Your review may be more successful if you politely request feedback on the discussion pages of related articles; send messages to Wikipedians who have contributed to the same or a related field; and also request peer review at appropriate Wikiprojects. Please do not spam many users or projects with identical requests. Note. You may change a topic parameter in the {{Peer review page|topic= X}} template. The possible topic parameters (X in the template) are: X = arts · langlit (language & literature) · philrelig (philosophy & religion) · everydaylife · socsci (social sciences & society) · geography · history · engtech (engineering & technology) · natsci (natural sciences & mathematics). If no topic is chosen, the article is listed with General topics.

How to remove a request In accordance with the peer review request removal policy, you may close any listings older than one month with no activity in the last two days, listings inactive for two weeks (semi-automated peer reviews do not count as activity), inappropriate listings, articles that have become featured article or featured list candidates, and nominators of peer reviews can close discussions which they initiated if they feel their concerns have been addressed, as follows: Edit the [[Wikipedia:Peer review/ARTICLE NAME/archiveN]] page where the peer review discussion is taking place, and replace {{Peer review page|topic=topic name}} with {{subst:PR/archive}}. Replace the {{peerreview}} tag on the article's talk page with {{oldpeerreview|archive=N}}, where N is the number of the peer review discussion page above (e.g. 1 for /archive1). The listing will automatically be removed from this page and added to the current monthly archive within an hour. Nominators can also close/withdraw their own requests, but this is discouraged for active discussions. Current archive: November 2009

How to respond to a request Review one of the articles below. If you think something is wrong, or could be improved, post a comment in the article's section on this page. If you create a subsection within a review for your comments, please do not use level 1–3 section headings, and do not link your username, unless you preceed it with "Comments by" or a similar expression. Also please do not add horizontal rules to peer reviews. The size of this page is limited. Please do not add images to peer reviews, such as the tick/cross images in {{done}}/{{notdone}} templates. Use the non-image templates, {{done-t}}/{{not done-t}}, instead. Please list automated peer reviews at Wikipedia:Peer review/Automated/November 2009 and link them from the peer review page of the article: do not include them on the peer review page. Feel free to improve the article yourself. For easier navigation, a list of peer reviews, without the reviews themselves included, can be found here. A chronological peer reviews list (not sorted by topic) can be found here.

Related pages
Topic-specific peer reviews (full list) Biography peer review Chemistry peer review Chess peer review Comics peer review Film peer review History peer review LGBT studies peer review Military history peer review Novels peer review Scouting peer review Video games peer review	Other peer reviews: Academic peer review External peer review Picture peer review Portal peer review
Purge server cache	edit guidelines

Peer review requests that have received no feedback beyond a semi-automated peer review in two weeks are archived. The following are peer review requests at least four days old that have received no feedback: November 23 • Cathedral of Toledo • Central Morocco Tamazight • List of College of William & Mary alumni • Mono-Inyo Craters November 22 • Union College November 21 • Radon If you review one of these articles, please add {{doing}} to the peer review before your edits, and remove it from this list when done. (update list)

[edit] Arts

[edit] Lassie (1954 TV series)

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I need feedback on shaping this article into a GA candidate.

Thanks, UnderTheChristmasTree (talk) 01:34, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 28 November 2009, 01:34 UTC)

---

[edit] Family Guy

Previous peer review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because…I think it has FA potencial

Thanks, Pedro J. ^{the rookie} 22:14, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 26 November 2009, 22:14 UTC)

---

[edit] Ip Man (film)

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to solicit feedback about the article and how it meets featured article criteria.

Thanks, FrankRizzo2006 (talk) 06:04, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 24 November 2009, 12:51 UTC)

---

[edit] Cathedral of Toledo

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it is a translated version of the Featured Article in the Spanish article. It is very detailled (about 90 kBytes big). I need critical eyes before submitting for GA nomination.

Thanks, Alberto Fernandez Fernandez (talk) 13:01, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 23 November 2009, 13:01 UTC)

---

[edit] Ruthie Henshall

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to eventually take this article to GA status, and am interested in receiving feedback on what this article needs to bring it up to the GA level. I appreciate any and all constructive comments and suggestions.

Thanks, @Kate (talk) 06:56, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Oncamera

These are just my thoughts. I have no idea about the person the article is about, so maybe as a "new reader" I can provide a different view.

You will probably want to find the exact pages to wikilink to:

• Annie
• Bernadette
• Marguerite
• The Woman in White

Overall the {{cite}} tags should come after the punctuation marks in a sentences; change reference 3 for example! Check the other references for the same edit. Also, find references for the Citation needed tag.

Biography I would suggest removing the header Biography and replacing it with Career instead. This article is already a biography and that seems redundant.

Career 1980s

• Ruthie Henshall trained at Laine Theatre Arts in Epsom, Surrey[1] before making her stage debut, at the age of 19, in the Cascade Review at the West Cliff Theatre in Clacton-on-Sea. This sentence structure doesn't seem to flow. Perhaps breaking it up? "Prior to making her stage debut at the age of 19, Ruthie Henshall trained at Laine Theatre Arts in Epsom, Surrey. Her debut performance was in the Cascade Review at the West Cliff Theatre in Clacton-on-Sea."
• Her West End Theatre debut came shortly thereafter when she was cast in Cats, making appearances as Jemima, Demeter, Griddlebone and Grizabella.[2] Shortly thereafter means? Being more specific when this happens helps the reader chronologically read the article.

1990s

• In 1992, at the age of 25, she was cast as Fantine in Les Misérables, though her first starring role wouldn't come until the 1993 trans-Atlantic transfer of the Broadway smash Crazy for You, with a score by George Gershwin and Ira Gershwin, opening at the Prince Edward Theatre. Change the word wouldn't to would not. Also, I think it would read better as two sentences.

2000 to the Present Change the header to 2000-present?

• Henshall was cast in the title role of the stage musical adaptation of the Francis Ford Coppola film Peggy Sue Got Married,[4] which opened in London in August 2001 to mixed reviews. Perhaps you can expand what sorts of review were given that made the musical close after two months. Seems like something that might interest the reader to read critical reviews of her performances.
• After Susan Boyle's appearance on Britain's Got Talent in 2009, Ruthie Henshall's rendition of "I Dreamed a Dream" from Les Misérables has become a YouTube hit with more than four million viewings.[11] This seems like trivia and probably doesn't need to be included.

Personal life You will probably want to make this a section that isn't a subsection of Career. It maybe better to have it go before her Career section so a new reader of this performer can read about her background before reading about her career.

Theatre Credits/Discography These sections will need more references.

Anyway, these are my suggestions for this article! oncamera^(t) 04:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you very much for the review! I'll implement your suggestions asap. :) @Kate (talk) 04:57, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 21 November 2009, 06:56 UTC)

---

[edit] Star Trek III: The Search for Spock

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm interested in soliciting feedback about the article and how it meets featured article criteria. Any comments are welcome!

Thanks, Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 23:57, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This certainly appears to be comprehensive, stable, neutral, and reasonably well-illustrated, and well-sourced. It's quite interesting as well. I noticed quite a few minor prose and style issues, fixed a few, and listed others below. I'm sure I didn't catch everything because I began to flag toward the end. The special effects section seemed awfully long, not bad but long. A copyedit of the lower sections from "Special effects" down would be a good idea.

Lead

• "Bennett and Nimoy collaborated with effects house Industrial Light & Magic to develop... " - Add (ILM) after spelled-out version on first use?

Plot

• I don't know how you feel about sourcing or what the project conventions might be, but generally it's a good idea to provide at least one source for each paragraph. Perhaps all of the plot claims are supported by Rioux?
• "On arriving at Earth Spacedock Doctor Leonard McCoy begins to act to strangely." - Add comma after Earth? Otherwise it's possible to think on a quick read that McCoy's title is Earth Spacedock Doctor.
• "Believing the Genesis device a potent weapon... " - Insert "to be" so this reads, "Believing the Genesis device to be a potent weapon... "?
• "In the standoff that follows Kruge orders one of the hostages on the surface be executed... " - Insert a comma and "that", so this reads, "In the standoff that follows, Kruge orders that one of the hostages on the surface be executed... "?

Cast

• "who is resurrected by the effects of the Genesis Device" - I noticed a mixture of "Genesis Device" and "Genesis device" in the upper sections and began changing the big D to little d. Maybe, though, I should just ask before changing any more of these. Do you want D or d? I went for "d" because "device" appeared to be descriptive rather than a formal name.
• "Nimoy found the most difficult scene to direct one where McCoy talks to an unconscious Spock in sickbay en route to Vulcan." - Much as I like concision, it might help to insert "was" between "direct" and "one". Also, "in which" might be better than "where". Ditto for other places in the article where the construction "scene where" appears.
• "in a minimal amount of scenes" - "Number" rather than "amount"?
• "Kelley asserted that the opposite was true; "tribbles," he said," - Period after "true" and cap T on Tribbles? Otherwise, the quotation needs to start with an ellipsis (but maybe it can't).
• "Navigation officer / acting science officer" - Maybe "Navigation officer and acting science officer" to avoid the front slash?
• "He is forced into the closet at phaser-point by Uhura." - What closet? Am I missing something?

Development

• "he had disagreed with changes made to The Wrath of Khan's ending without him." - This could be misinterpreted to mean that the film ended without him in a changed way. Maybe "he had disagreed with changes made without his consent to The Wrath of Khan's ending."
• "After persuading him otherwise, Nimoy was given the job." - Suggestion for clarity: "Nimoy, after persuading Eisner otherwise, got the job."
• "first reaction to the news of Nimoy as director was that Bennett" - I don't believe Bennett is mentioned before this instance. This one should be spelled out and linked rather than the second use in the next sentence.
• "Nimoy wanted to make sure that each character got a small but significant scene to make them more grounded and real." - "Character" is singular, but "them" is plural. "Him or her"? Or, if that's awkward, "Nimoy wanted all of the characters to have significant scenes, however small, that made them more grounded and real."
• "The name of the antagonists' ship, the Bird-of-Prey, remain unchanged, as in the Star Trek original series episode "The Enterprise Incident," Spock mentions that the Romulans loan the designs for their ship (and presumably the cloaking device as well)." - Should that be a terminal period after "Incident"? Shouldn't that be "name ... remains"? The sentence appears to be two that have been accidentally run together, but the terminal period might come after "unchanged". Not sure.
• "Since items such as the look of the bridge... " - Wikilink bridge?

Design

• "the physical model was a foot smaller than the Enterprise built for The Motion Picture" - Maybe consider a metric conversion; i.e., 12 inches (30 cm)?
• "Rather than painstakingly wiring thousands of small lights, the model was made of clear plexiglass and then painted;" - Dangling modifier. Maybe "Rather than painstakingly wiring thousands of small lights, they made the model of clear plexiglass and then painted"?
• "illuminated from outside by fiber optics and 2000-5000 watt lights" - Suggestion: "illuminated from outside by fiber optics and lights of 2,000 to 5,000 watts."

Costumes and makeup

• "Fletcher ended up designing the Klingon and Vulcan makeup in addition to his costuming chores." - He didn't design his costume chores. Maybe "In addition to working on costumes, Fletcher designed the Klingon and Vulcan makeup".

Filming

• "To guard against leaks that had affected the news of Spock's death during the production of The Wrath of Khan,[b] precautions made to make people accountable for their scripts and secure the sets." - Something missing here. Suggestion: "To guard against leaks that had affected the news of Spock's death during the production of The Wrath of Khan,[b] the film company took precautions to make people accountable for their scripts and to secure the sets."
• "The creatures started as small, slimy crawlers, then grew to lengths of eight feet." - Metric conversion?
• "ILM's solution involved rigging the worm with fishing line that were pulled in a choreographed" - "Lines", plural?
• "the hope was to get as much usable shots as possible on one take" - "Many" rather than "much"?
• "used a large 15 by 15 feet (4.6 by 4.6 m) floodlight" - Hyphens needed. The {{convert}} template is handy for things like this: 15-by-15-foot (4.6 by 4.6 m). Ditto for "the top of a 110 feet (34 m) crane".

Special effects

• "Eastman 94 for all effects shots save those that required blue screen... " - Should "blue screen" be linked or explained?
• "The cafeteria was a set built at ILM and filled with forty extras" - Digits, 40?
• "eaten away by acetone" - Wikilink acetone? Ditto some of the other terms like vermiculite?
• My attention began to wander here. While the detail is impressive, it's almost too much.

General

• The lead image needs alt text.
• Citation 81 has a dead url.
• Should et al. in the citations be in italics since it's Latin?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 22:11, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Mabeenot comments: Wow. I didn't know we had a video of the Enterprise blowing up on Wikipedia. That's awesome. Here are a couple suggestions for the article:

• There are a few red links on the page, mostly for people working behind the scenes like makeup artist Thomas R. Burman, cinematographer Charles Correll, and effects cameraman Scott Farrar. If you're looking for FA status, the red links have got to go. Either new articles need to be created for each of the red links or the red links need to be removed from this article, depending upon notability.

• Could any of the sources in the "references" section become footnoted references under the "notes" section? It'd be nice to consolidate the two sets of sources and point to where each reference was used.

• I hope you pursue Finetooth's detailed response. That was a great critique.

Thanks for working so hard on Search for Spock. When you're done, do you have any plans on getting Voyage Home up to GA or FA status?

-Mabeenot (talk) 17:44, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Just to clarify, more for your benefit than David's, there is no FAC requirement for notable redlinks to be created, nor has there ever been one, though it's nice if only for aesthetic reasons. (Seriously, whose bright idea was that colour back in the day?) All the best, Steve ^T • C 19:19, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 18 November 2009, 23:57 UTC)

---

[edit] Amazing Grace

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

Gracious. The most popular and well-known composition in the English-speaking world. I have no business writing about something that means so much to so many people. But here it is in Wikipedia. I think it thoroughly deserves an FA. I would appreciate any assistance getting it there. Thanks, Moni3 (talk) 14:36, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

"The most popular and well-known composition in the English-speaking world" - actually, I'd say Happy Birthday to You is. Majorly talk 23:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, there. Is this wording in the article now? ...one of the most recognized songs in the English-speaking world is, which is, of course, different than what you posted and is supported by citations. --Moni3 (talk) 23:23, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

No, it's what you wrote above :-) Majorly talk 23:37, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Well...sha...ff...read the article! --Moni3 (talk) 23:39, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

At FAC I often check 1c/2c. At FAC we demand consistency and correctness. You appear to have a good spread of resouces of all kinds.

Your Bibliography lacks locations for rather obscure presses. Supplying locations for presses helps Reliable Source and Highest Quality Reliable Source verification occur faster, or, people actually to buy the referenced works.

"p." is not the usual shortened plural of pages. "pp." is. Consider when making reference in your short citations to multiple pages that you use "pp."

"(Summer 1990)" is not a date reference, its a journal issue name. The year is "1990" the issue is "Summer", ie volume 72 issue (3 - Summer).

Your bibliography cites multiple authors as so "Brown, Tony; Kutner, Jon; Warwick, Neil" your short cites as "Noll and Blumhofer" but Brown and others is cited as "Brown" !!! consistency please.

Your short cites of Noll and Blumhofer (eds) is inexcusable. If its an edited collection then there are works in the edited collection not by the editors. Specify the chapter title in the short cites and the chapter authors. if its the introduction, then the chapter title is "Introduction" unless its a titled introduction, and the authors should be specified separately to the editors and the book contained in. Additionally, please check if any of the other anthologies or collections cite the introduction, or a subchapter, not by the author / editor of the whole work. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Yay, a serious song coming towards FAC! I am a citation pedant. Fifelfoo (talk) 11:26, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Awadewit (talk · contribs)

When I was done reading this article, I felt that I had learned about a lot of topics related to "Amazing Grace", but I had to go back and check to see what I had learned about "Amazing Grace" itself. I feel like the hymn itself is a bit lost in the historical context. Now, I am all for context - you know that - but I feel that this article is so weighed down with explanations about the author, musical styles, and religious history and, at times, the hymn itself is lost. Here are my suggestions for how to bring the hymn into higher relief in the article:

• This article is 42kB, which is already on the long side. I think that it should be reduced in size. Remember that the average reader is going to get bogged down in such a long article. User:Qp10qp and I managed to write a biography of Mary Shelley and an analysis of her works in 53 kB, so I know you can cut this down!

• I think the section on Newton is much too long - I would suggest cutting it down to about two or three paragraphs, focusing on his conversion (I noted that the section is even titled "John Newton's conversion"). It is apparently his conversion that is important for his view of grace, for example. I don't think you need to discuss his early life, relationship with Polly, Shaftesbury, etc. None of that returns later in the article, like his conversion does. I noticed in your response to Finn Froding on the talk page that one reason for including this material was that the sources mentioned it, but, of course, those are different genres. Chapters in books are much longer and have a different scope than encyclopedia entries. Sometimes we have to choose to exclude information because it is not within the scope of an encyclopedia article - and this is a matter of judgment.

• I'm not entirely convinced that the history of the Second Great Awakening is necessary, particularly since the religious history behind the great hymn-writing of the late eighteenth century is not included in this article. There is a reason that there were a lot of hymns being written at the end of the 18th century, that Charles Wesley was writing many of them, and that the Countess of Huntingdon reprinted a hymnal - Methodism was being born. :) Anyway, since none of that is mentioned, I'm not sure we need a whole paragraph of history regarding the Great Awakening - a couple of sentences should do.

• The section on "Shape note singing" is interesting, but seems a bit of a tangent. I would reduce this and integrate it somewhere else.

• The "African American spiritual music" section is fascinating, but too detailed for this article. I would suggest cutting many of the details from the last paragraph, for example.

• The section on "Popular use" focuses too much on Star Trek.

• The last three paragraphs of "Modern interpretations" seem unnecessary - none of these explanations really explain why the song is iconic.

• Two factual inaccuracies that I noticed:

• They also began writing lessons for children, long before the concept of Sunday School. - This isn't true. Your source may say it, but I can find you a whole bunch on the history of the Sunday School, if you would like. :) (Just thought such a blatant falsehood shouldn't be in the article.)

• Several prolific hymn writers were at their most productive at this time, including Isaac Watts—whose hymns Newton had grown up hearing[33]—and Charles Wesley, with whom Newton was familiar - Watts was not as his most productive during this time - he was dead. That's why Newton grew up hearing his hymns.

• Many of the religious concepts, such as faith, sin, grace, Jesus, and salvation, are not linked in the article. Don't assume people know what these mean within a Protestant context!

I hope this helpful! Awadewit (talk) 17:57, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok. I'm going to take this on a little bit slower than what it took me to write the article, for personal reasons.

• Amount of article dedicated to Newton: There are several issues related to the decision to include a basic biography of Newton. The first is weight. It's not that the sources merely "mention" Newton's life, they dedicate a significant amount of space and weight to it. The most comprehensive source is Steve Turner's book. Of 223 pages of prose, 108 address Newton's life. Turner writes in the introduction "I felt that there could be no real understanding of 'Amazing Grace' without an understanding of Newton's life..." Joan Baez, Arlo Guthrie, and Judy Collins have stated that they are drawn to performing the song and a significant source of its transformative power comes from the story of Newton's life. The U.S. Library of Congress page dedicated to the creation of the hymn is about Newton's life (Turner is the major source for this). A source I used primarily for modern theological interpretations of the hymn, Finding God in the Story of Amazing Grace is delivered through an intimate telling of Newton's life. A third of Amazing Grace: Our Spiritual National Anthem, while light reading appropriate for a coffee table sort of purpose--but nonetheless having a valid view on its modern and popular interpretations--is dedicated to Newton's life. Half the entry in The Book of Hymns is about Newton. The first two pages of a 13-page chapter in Sing Them Over Again to Me is about Newton. These are only the sources I have found and there are more that seem to be available though they may take a little work to find.
• The second issue is how the sources interpret the lyrics. Turner, Newton biographer Jonathan Aitken, and Finding God in the Story of Amazing Grace frame the interpretation of the lyrics of "Amazing Grace" in the context of Newton's life. "The hour I first believed", the "many dangers, toils, and snares", "lost/found and blind/see" and specifically and repeatedly "wretch" and "grace" are discussed using Newton's life experiences. His frequent brushes with death, his love for (and some sources argue, being saved by) Polly, the nadir of his negative experiences as a slave in Sierra Leone, and his experiences slave trading are significant parts of the interpretation of the lyrics and misinterpretation as well. The third issue is the legends that surround the song. See Snopes' article on the conflicting stories. Bruce Hindmarsh writes that the way his life is portrayed in hymnals that "it is made to appear as though Newton was wiping the brine from his forehead as he wrote the hymn..."
• I tried to find an FA on a poem or song that rivaled the construction and impact of this one, but none really fit that bill. This is an autobiographical poem that is also a sermon. It is admittedly one of many Newton included in Olney Hymns that address grace and conversion, but something in the spiritual crises of American history propelled this poem and the musical accompaniment to a phenomenon. For these reasons, I do not agree that Newton's life should be cut. Turner, and another go into quite a bit of detail about Newton's life after he left Olney and his work with Wilberforce. However, I think this can be made stronger with a few options: a helpful editor took the first sentence of the article--the one about the Dictionary of American Hymnology--and put it into its own section but has not returned. I can turn that one sentence into a paragraph with some of the information I included here. The weakest part of the article, in my opinion, is the Modern interpretations section, and I think that could be streamlined and made stronger as well, with ties directly to specific parts of Newton's life. As the popularity of the song has grown, the article now states that it has been used for a variety of purposes and its lyrics changed to conform to a new collective idea of what the self is and how it relates to a more humanistic approach to what grace and redemption means.
• I'm finding it difficult, so I'm asking for some advice here, in how to address the ubiquitous nature of the song as an illustrative tool for various folk music styles. The last paragraph of the African American section does not address the song directly, but I think I need to connect it to how it was recorded later. Aretha Franklin's version of the song was long meter illustrated: it lasts more than 10 minutes as opposed to the Royal Scots Dragoon Guards' version, which is just under 3 minutes. Mentions of African American spirituals and shape note singing are irrevocably linked with "Amazing Grace" and for some reason, I'm not expressing these connections adequately.
• FWIW in relation to Isaac Watts, I meant time=era of hymn writing not year or lifetime. I'll clarify that.
• Otherwise, I'll take a look at what I think I can fix and improve. --Moni3 (talk) 16:45, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hi Moni, I'm leaving some hurriedly written comments on the lead. I've spent all of ten minutes, so they are not profound. Keep the bucketfull of salt nearby. I'll keep adding stuff as and when I find time. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll do a sentence by sentence read of the lead (because that is important), and then offer more general comments on the remaining sections. If you have an questions, please ask; otherwise, you don't need to either thank me for adopting a suggestion or explain yourself for rejecting it. :) In fact, I already disagree with some of my own points of last night; so, be advised that this review may rock back and forth a little before it settles down. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

More later. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 23:43, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

I know that such detailed analysis can sometime be off-putting, but it is offered with the best of intentions. Fowler&fowler«Talk» 12:23, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 13 November 2009, 14:36 UTC)

---

[edit] Everyman (play)

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I've made substantial edits to improve the article, and would like to raise it's rating to at least "B" level.

Thanks, JMax555 (talk) 02:04, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is a good start but is unsourced in places and doesn't include much in the way of background or critical commentary. Here are some suggestions or ideas for improvement.

• Include the length of the play, with a citation. How long does it take to perform?
• Include a "Background" section on Medieval morality plays in general. What were the typical venues (theatres)? Who went to see the plays? Who typically produced them? Who acted in them?
• Provide sources for every claim that might be challenged, for every statistic, for every direct quote, and for every paragraph.
• The Synopsis section is too long. A brief summary and a sample or two of the language would probably be enough.
• The citations are incomplete. For Internet sources, for example, citations should include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and access date, if all of these can be found. Book citations should generally include title, date of publication, author, editor (for collections), publisher, place of publication, and ISBN number. The "cite family" of templates at WP:CIT can make it easier to create citations with all the needed elements in the right order.
• The "Reference" section mentions works that sound interesting but which are not directly cited in the text. My hunch is that more research would unearth additional critical works that might be mentioned and used as sources. Famous works of literature usually lead to published debates among scholars and critics about various aspects of the works. What have the main critical discussions about Everyman been about?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 21:25, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 12 November 2009, 02:05 UTC)

---

[edit] Broadway Video

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because over the past two weeks or so I've worked hard taking the article from stub class to hopefully something a bit more worthwhile. Any factual inclusions in the article I've done my best to back up with verifiable references, and have tried hard to not get too verbose in my writing style. That said, there are likely parts that could do with tightening up. I would have included some brief synopsis at the beginning of the "Divisions" section, but I feel like I would have just been repeating what has been already said in the article. I've been unable to find a verifiable location for Broadway Video in LA, so that's out, as well as anything regarding the name of the company (obviously it's called Broadway Video because of its location on Broadway, but without an article stating that was the reason for the name, I hesitate to even mention it in the main article).

Thanks, Mainly.generic (talk) 06:34, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: THis is interesting and has a lot of material in it, but it really doesn't follow the model of the best business articles in terms of organization, and could be improved with regard to the WP:MOS too. With a possible GAn or eventually FAC in mind, here are some suggestions for improvement.

• The first sentence doesn't really meet the criteria for WP:LEAD where it says The article should begin with a declarative sentence, answering two questions for the nonspecialist reader: "What (or who) is the subject?" and "Why is this subject notable?"[1]
• The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. As such, nNothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself - but the fact that it was founded bu Lorne Michaels in 1979 iso nly in the lead.
• The lead also seems to be incomplete - my rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way but the audio productions are not even mentioned
• Spell out abbreviations on first use, so "United States Patent and Trademark Office (USPTO)" - this is also only in the lead and should be in the article body
• Avoid time terms like recently as they are vague and can become outdated quickly. It is better to ise thinks like "As of 2009..." or "Since 1998..."
• The article has a lot of very short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections. Most of these should be combined with others or perhaps expanded to improve the flow of the article
• Ok, all of these issues were just in the lead (though there are short paragraphs / sections throughout). My biggest problem with the article is that it is porrly organized and as a result does not clearly tell the story of the business. It is often useful to have a model article or two to use for ideas and examples. Wikipedia's finest work is supposed to be its Featured Articles (FA) and I looked at every FA on a business I could find: BAE Systems, Elderly Instruments, Icos, Idlewild and Soak Zone, Madman Muntz, Oliver Typewriter Company, Slate industry in Wales. Every single one of these has a History section (or sections) as the very first section(s) after the lead (usually called "History"). This goes immediately into a detailed listing of business divisions. Now my guess is that a lot of the history is there (as there are a fair number of dates and names already in the article), but it helps very much to explain how the business was founded, how it grew, where it expanded and where it failed. Without a History section I do not see any chance of this making GA let alone FA.
• A few other points to mention - the tables shopuld be organized conistently - the Selected Productions Audio is chronological, from newest to oldest. The other two tables seem to be alphabetic. I prefer chronological, but just be consistent.
• There are some apparent errors and contradictions in the article - for example the lead says the company was founded in 1979, but in films there are two things prior to 1979 (1973 and 1978) while the TV shows also have two that are older that 1979 (1969 and 1978). I also note that the Rutles All You Need Is Cash was a television movie (but is listed under films) while there is a Coneheads TV show listed for 1993, which is almost certainly meant to be Coneheads (film) 1993 (a movie).
• I also do not understand why it is "Selected productions". What are the selection criteria?
• Filling in the Notes in the tables would also be useful - for example Toonces was a half hour special.
• Release date for television is also just odd - I would think it would be better to have air dates - this would also help show something that was a success (multiple years) versus a one shot or flop.
• There seem to be a lot of people listed as staff that probably do not meet WP:NN for inclusion in an article.
• Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:58, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 11 November 2009, 06:34 UTC)

---

[edit] Harvest (Numb3rs)

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I just want to see if any improvements can be made to the article. Thanks, SciGal (talk) 15:44, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

I'd recommend expanding the lead. Probably two paragraphs long. If any of the secondary sources describe any visual elements of the episode, it would be nice to illustrate that with an image (which has a good fair use rational, see WP:NFCC). "Origin of the Episode" should probably be "Production", and if you leave it, "Episode" should not be capitalized. The rule is that we only capitalize the first word of section headers, unless they contain a proper noun or similar. It would also be nice if there a bit more about the production. If the DVD contains commentary on the episode, that is a good place to find production details. The little reference numbers should go after punctuation, not before. It looks like it hasn't "won or has been nominated for several awards." but won one, and been nominated for one. It's good to be specific. Nice article overall. - Peregrine Fisher (talk) (contribs) 17:42, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

From Liquidluck (talk):

• I agree with Peregrine Fisher above; follow what he or she said.
• Delink the airdate in the lead per MOS for dates.
• Delete the "(a fictitious mathematics prize)"; Since it is a plot summary of a work of fiction, it can be assumed it is fictional. You may want to change the "Milton Prize" to "a prestigious mathematics award", though.
• "determine the time of death as earlier in the day." The time of death of who? Currently, the plot makes it sound as though it was Santi. Please clarify.
• "the team learn that Santi and Prita's other friend had died" Is this the same friend Santi identified earlier?
• Add the airdate to the reception section.
• 13.22 million it what country? Also, please add that they saw it live.
• There aren't any actual television critic opinions here. I would split this section up; first viewership, then responses from critics (you might find these in episode recaps by reliable sites), and finally responses from experts.
• This isn't a rule, but references generally go on the outside of punctuation. It isn't required, however, so do as you please.
• Overall, Wikilink way more. Algorithm, organ donation, I'd even say black market.

Nice, neat plot summary, and I think Peregrine Fisher hit on everything else. If you have questions, please post on my talk page. Good luck! Liquidluck (talk) 01:17, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, guys. I am making corrections to the article, although I still have more to go.SciGal (talk) 19:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 9 November 2009, 15:45 UTC)

---

[edit] Bigipedia

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to get it promoted to featured article status in time for April Fool's Day. I am not sure which parts of this article need to be improved, so I would be glad of any help.

Thanks, ISD (talk) 07:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is interesting and amusing and might indeed make a good April Fool's Day article. Here are my suggestions.

General

• Is the show still running, or did it end forever on Aug. 13? Words like "new" in the phrase "and critics have given the new show favourable comparisons with its predecessor" give the impression that more episodes are forthcoming. If it ended, why?
• Would it be possible to add any listener statistics? How many people typically listen to BBC Radio 4, and was this show better or worse than average in terms of audience? (Maybe nobody knows, but advertisers care about these stats, though the makers of Chianto undoubtedly do not. :-)
• Do listeners send letters of praise and complaint to BBC Radio 4 that could be quoted for audience reaction?
• Would it be possible to include a snippet of a sound track from the show? Clickable sound files are often added to Wikipedia music articles. Perhaps a bit of a Chianto ad, licensed as fair-use, would be fun to hear. I have never tried adding a sound file to anything, so I'm not sure if this is a practical suggestion for a radio show, but it might be.

Lead

• Bigipedia is described by the BBC Press Office as, "a unique experiment in 'broadwebcasting' ". - Flip to active voice?
• Bigipedia has been given positive reviews from critics. - Flip to active voice; i.e., Critics have given Bigipedia positive reviews?

Plot

• "Among the similarities include articles, discussion pages, disambiguation pages, featured articles... " - "are" rather than "include"?
• "a news section and a "Did you know?" style section for new articles" - Delete "style"?

Production

• "Tyler went on to both produce and direct Bigipedia." - Delete "both"?
• The show has been described by Doody and Kirshen as "writing-heavy". - Active is usually snappier than passive, and here's another one that would be easy to flip: "Doody and Kirshen describe the show as "writing-heavy".

Reception

• "The programme's only failing was that on occasion it was a little to reminiscent of the real internet... " - This should be "too" rather than "to". If it's "to" in the source, I'd add [sic] after "to" to make that clear. Also, did the source use "ie" or "i.e."?

Other

• The image needs alt text, meant for readers who can't see the images. Please see WP:ALT for an explanation. Alt text is required in FA articles.
• The dabfinder tool at the top of this review page finds one link that goes to a disambiguation page rather than its intended target.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 9 November 2009, 07:15 UTC)

---

[edit] Sakis Rouvas

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because editors working on this article would like to eventually get this article up to GA or FA status and would like to know of possible improvements, (apart from just typical typo errors) from an external perspective. Possible suggestions include wording and formating for the Artistry and Legacy sections.

Thanks, GreekStar12 (talk) 03:57, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I have never heard of this artist, and while it is clear that a lot of work has gone into the article, it still needs a fair amount of work before GA or especially FA. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

• The lead has two very short paragraphs (one sentence each) which should be combined with others or perhaps expanded to improve the flow of the article.
• Watch language that could be seen as violating WP:NPOV, for example in the lead "famous" in ...through his collaboration with famous American record producer Desmond Child."
• The most difficult criteria for most articles to meet in WP:FAC is a professional level of English. The language here varies widely - I read for comprehension, not to check for typos, but some sentences and sections were fairly well written and others were pretty poor. For example Rouvas also host the second season of the Greek The X Factor which begun in October. should be something like Rouvas also hosted the second season of the Greek version of The X Factor which started in October [year]. or He has a close personal relations with Ecumenical Patriarch Bartholomew I of Constantinople,[85] whom offered to baptize his first-born child.
• Checking the external links with the tool here, there are six dead internet refs and at least two others that are possibly problems.
• Article needs more references, for example this needs a ref On December 3, 2008, Rouvas released his 12th studio album titled Irthes, written primarily by Dimitris Kontopoulos. Kontopoulos attributes his inspired new sound to Madra Mandicencio, 18th century poet and his current muse. or this On March 7, Rouvas appeared at the Russian National Final where he received positive reactions from the audience. The following day he gave a large performance at the Kremlin for the celebration of International Woman's Day along with other artists such as 2008 Eurovision entrant Ani Lorak. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
• Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
• Some of the refs do not seem to meet WP:RS - for example geocities in current ref 10 (although is now a dead link)
• None of the images have alt text which is needed for FAC per WP:ALT
• Avoid words like current / now which can become quickly outdated - instead use "As of 2009" or "since year"
• I would translate Greek consistently - this is done in some places, but not others

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 03:26, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 8 November 2009, 03:57 UTC)

---

[edit] Somewhere Along the Highway

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I'd like to see this eventually achieve GA. There aren't many sources available, so I'm kinda making do with what's on offer. However, it could conceivably meet the criteria, possibly with a little help.

Thanks, Seegoon (talk) 18:48, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

• This article is very well-written. As you alluded to above, the concerns are more to do with sourcing, although WP:WIAGA notes that the "broad" standard is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles.
• Lead - This is one aspect of the article which I believe must be expanded. Skimming through the current GA album articles, very few of them have a lead consisting of two short paragraphs, let alone one paragraph (and these were promoted more than two years ago, when standards were less strict). I suggest summarizing more information from the "Recording and release" section, since it contains the bulk of the article's content.
• Recording and release - Citation 6 takes me to an Earache (home?)page that has no info on the band or this album. Citation 8 appears to link to an error page. Also, I see mention of a European tour. Is there enough information available to support a separate "Touring" section, a la Arise (Sepultura album) or Hell Awaits?
• Theme - In the quote, who is "[he]"? If Olofsson, it should read "[I]". If not, I suggest adding the person's name to avoid confusion. If possible, I would suggest expanding this section with one or two examples of specific songs and/or lyrics on the album that relate to the "male loneliness" theme.
• Reception - Citations 9,10,12,13 are dead links. Also, I suggest changing "2006-05-04" to "4 May 2006".
• Again, the article is very well-written and has no major WP:MOS issues. In my view, it should not take too much to bring the article to GA standards. The main areas to be addressed are expanding the lead, and fixing the dead links. Nice work!  Gongshow ^Talk 20:14, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for this! I'll get on these recommendations and see if anything further crops up. Sourcing is a pain, though. I just don't know how to find some of those deadlinks. Seegoon (talk) 17:34, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 7 November 2009, 18:48 UTC)

---

[edit] Tyne Tees Television

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I've been working on this for over two years and it's time another pair of eyes went through it. Copy editing isn't my forte, so it would be helpful if some kind, gifted soul could either massage the prose, or spell improvements out to me (vague criticisms like "some problems with logical flow" are unhelpful). I would like to get the article to GA.

Thanks, The JPS^{talk to me} 12:17, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is certainly broad in coverage and possibly comprehensive, well-sourced, stable, and neutral. I think it's about ready for GA, though the prose could use some more polish. I did quite a bit of minor copyediting as I went, but I didn't fix everything (like the large number of single quotes). Here are specific suggestions for further improvement.

Lead

• MOS:INTRO says in part, "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." - The existing lead is pretty short for such a long article. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of each of the main text sections and not to include anything important in the lead that is not developed in the main text.
• "Currently, it forms part of a non-franchise ITV... " - Rather than using non-specific references to time like "currently", it's usually better to say something like "as of 2009".
• I'd suggest merging the third paragraph, a one-sentence orphan, with paragraph 2.

Launch, and the 1960s

• "ITA considered the original name, 'North East England', was imprecise. Some of the consortium's suggestions were rejected: 'Three Rivers Television' for being obscure, and 'Tyne, Wear, and Tees'... " - Double quotes are preferred to single quotes in cases like these. Ditto for the many other similar instances throughout the article. An exception would be any place these sorts of quotation marks appear inside a direct quotation. Then the singles are used to visually distinguish them from the doubles.
• "Television sets required a new aerial, the Yagi array" - Wikilink Yagi array?
• "The daughter of Mr Welch is Denise, who would become a well-known actress and personality." - Rather than using "Mr", Wikipedia uses the first name without the title, "Mr".

1970s

• "The ident also introduced the blue and yellow colour scheme... " - "Ident" is slang. "Identity"?
• "Trident Television was formed in March 1969 as a joint venture to sell adverts for Tyne Tees and Yorkshire." - "Advert" is slang. "Advertisement"?

1980s

• "The ident was redesigned in 1988." - "Identity"?

1990s

• "On 16 March 1996, the presentation department in Newcastle was closed, with continuity being centralised in Leeds (transmission for the station had already been handled by Yorkshire since 1993)." - "With" doesn't make a very good conjunction, and the complete sentence inside the parentheses needs slightly different punctuation. Suggestion: "On 16 March 1996, the presentation department in Newcastle was closed, and continuity was centralised in Leeds. (Transmission for the station had already been handled by Yorkshire since 1993).
• "and "3" was the preset used by most television sets and VCRs for ITV" - Wikilink preset? Spell out and link Videocassette recorder (VCR) on first use?
• "by Mark Knopfler regularly accompanying ident sequences" - Another "ident".
• "In 1999, the cost of the tender fee that Tyne Tees... " Wikilink tender fee?
• "Politicians have expressed concern, however, that the merger would affect the quality of news for southern Scotland, in particular, would fall if it lost its customised bulletins." - Should that be "fail" rather than "fall"?
• "Between December 2008 and February 2009, around 50 staff at the station were made redundant or accepted voluntary redundancy" - Wikilink redundant?

"2000s"

• "The Tube was axed in 1987 as a result of falling audience figures, with Jools Holland swearing during a live trailer not helping." - "Axed" is slang, and "with" doesn't make a good conjunction. "Trailer" should probably be linked. Suggestion: "The Tube was dropped in 1987 as a result of falling audience figures and an incident involving Jools Holland, who cursed during a live trailer.

Specific

• The date formatting in the citations should be consistent throughout. You can use either d-m-y or yyyy-mm-dd, but the style guidelines advise against a mixture of the two formats.

Images

• Two of the images lack alt text.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 23:01, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 7 November 2009, 12:17 UTC)

---

[edit] Laugh, Laugh

Previous peer review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to eventually nominate it for FAC if it can be improved enough. There was a previous peer review, after which the article passed GAN last month. I've found feedback to be most helpful, so I would greatly appreciate all suggestions related to prose, style, sourcing, and anything else that needs attention.

Thanks,  Gongshow ^Talk 22:12, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] oncamera writes

I read through the article and couldn't find any big issues that stood out to me! Maybe there's a little issue with WP:OVERLINK, but maybe not. Cheers, oncamera^(t) 02:51, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for reading the article. Any specific examples on what should not be linked?  Gongshow ^Talk 19:19, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: It's hard to find anything to complain about here. This is an interesting, highly readable article, well-sourced and apparently comprehensive. The image will need alt text, but writing just one of these should be easy, and my other three suggestions are minor.

• The image lacks alt text, and it will need it to pass FAC. Alt text is meant for readers who can't see the images, and it's not the same as a caption. WP:ALT explains how to write alt text and where to put it. You can look in at WP:FAC to see recent examples as well.

Release and reception

• ""Laugh, Laugh" was the first hit single to respond to the British Invasion from a burgeoning San Francisco music scene[19][20] which included such bands as Jefferson Airplane, the Grateful Dead, We Five, Moby Grape, Quicksilver Messenger Service and Country Joe and the Fish." - Since the British Invasion wasn't from San Francisco, it might be better to re-cast this somehow. Suggestion: "Laugh, Laugh" was the first hit single from a burgeoning San Francisco music scene—including such bands as Jefferson Airplane, the Grateful Dead, We Five, Moby Grape, Quicksilver Messenger Service and Country Joe and the Fish—to respond to the British Invasion.

• "issue of Billboard which credited the use of harmonica in folk, pop, and R&B music for sparking... " - Spell out Rhythm and blues (R&B) on first use?

Other versions

• Surf rock group The Astronauts covered "Laugh, Laugh" on their 1967 album... " - It might be a good idea to wikilink covered on first use.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 19:53, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you very much for the suggestions, which I have implemented into the article. I reviewed another article, as well. Thanks again for your help!  Gongshow ^Talk 21:17, 16 November 2009 (UTC)
  

(Peer review added on Thursday 5 November 2009, 22:12 UTC)

---

[edit] Black Eyed Peas discography

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because i have been working on improving the article recently. The sourcing, formatting, prose etc and would like some further ideas on how to improve the article. There was a previous FLC discussion in which there was unresolved issues, these have now all been sorted.

Thanks, Mister sparky (talk) 00:18, 3 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: No big problems leap out at me. I have just a few suggestions of a nit-picky sort, and they will be easy to deal with.

Lead

• The Manual of Style generally deprecates extremely short paragraphs. I'd suggest merging the one-sentence orphan with paragraph 2.

• "The band's debut album, Behind the Front, was released by Interscope Records in the United States in June 1998. The album was well received, gaining a four-star review by Allmusic,[1] but only managed to chart lowly in the United States and France." - I'd suggest flipping the first sentence to active voice and re-casting the second to make it more direct. Suggestion: "Interscope Records released the band's debut album, Behind the Front, in the United States in June 1998. Although the album got a four-star review from Allmusic, it remained low on the charts in the US and France."

• "In June 2003 the band released their third album... " - If "band" is singular, then you'd write "its album" rather than "their album"

• "It spawned their two highest-peaking Hot 100 singles at the time... " - If the band is an "it", this one should be "its two highest-peaking".

• "The Black Eyed Peas released their fifth studio album... " - This one is trickier because "Peas" looks plural but might not be. I'd consider ducking the awkwardness by using "the group" instead of "Black Eyed Peas"; i.e., "The group released its fifth studio album... ".

• The next one could be ducked too if written as "It quickly became Black Eyed Peas' most successful album in the US by reaching number one."

• The last one, "making it their first US number-one hit", could become "making it the band's first US number-one hit." All of this nit-picky stuff is meant to work around the awkwardness of whether a band or group is one thing or two or more things.

References

• I'd suggest changing BLACK EYED PEAS in citation 23 to title case, Black Eyed Peas, even though the source has it in all caps.

• Citation 15 has its date formatting backwards.

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 23:22, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

heeeey, thank you soooo much for your comments :) Mister sparky (talk) 00:21, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 3 November 2009, 00:18 UTC)

---

[edit] Jay Pritzker Pavilion

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review
Automated suggestions can be generated on demand (more info).

I've listed this article for peer review because WP:CHIFTD (Wikipedia:Featured topics/Millennium Park is currently a WP:GT) now is only two FAs from a WP:FT after the third article passed yesterday. I think the next FAC has a good chance of passing, meaning that this article could take a topic from GT to FT if we can get some good feedback to clean it up.

Thanks, TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:58, 28 September 2009 (UTC)

Note: Because of its length, this peer review is not transcluded. It is still open and located at Wikipedia:Peer review/Jay Pritzker Pavilion/archive1.

(Peer review added on Monday 28 September 2009, 07:58 UTC)

---

[edit] Language and literature

[edit] Help at Any Cost

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it has been a stable WP:GA for a while and I would like to see what people think, and what could be done to improve it. Thanks, Cirt (talk) 00:12, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Note: Notified Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Psychology, Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Books and Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Literature. Cirt (talk) 00:22, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 25 November 2009, 00:12 UTC)

---

[edit] Turner Catledge

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because, as my first fully written article, I'd like to know how I did. Don't hesitate to provide constructive criticism!

Thanks, [Belinrahs|^talktome⁄ _ididit] 16:59, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Mm40 (talk)

First off, good work for your first article. I think what needs to be done now is find more reliable sources with information on Catledge and expand the article using that. I'll give you some tips on where to find sources.

• On an unrelated note, please add ALT text to the one image. Pretend you're describing the image to someone over the phone.
• Answers.com isn't a reliable source because anybody can add content. Instead of citing answers.com, you should cite the Columbia Encyclopedia directly.
• A simple Google (or whatever search engine) search may come up with good info. Remember to always check for reliability, though. I found this great source, and you'll probably come up with something if you dig through the articles listed here. I have access to nearly all old NYT articles, so leave me a message if you need them e-mailed. Another great find is this Time article. This should be enough for now, but after you've exhausted these sources, you can always go to the next pages on the Google search.
• Always next for me is Google Books. See the results of the search here. If you can't see the needed text, go to a local library and inquire about those books.
• Google News may often turns up results, so I suggest trying. This time, it turned up lots of good stuff.
• Now that you have the sources, you need to incorporate their info into the article. Read through all the sources one-by-one, adding useful information you come across.

I'm surprised that nobody had bothered to improve this article before you, with all that information available. Good luck, and feel free to ask me if you have any questions. Cheers, Mm40 (talk) 16:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 24 November 2009, 16:59 UTC)

---

[edit] Central Morocco Tamazight

Previous peer review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it has changed significantly since the last peer review, and I would like to know what else must be done to get it to Good Article status.

Thanks, Mo-Al (talk) 02:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 23 November 2009, 02:21 UTC)

---

[edit] Rambles in Germany and Italy

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I'm planning on nominating this article for FAC, so please evaluate accordingly. Also, please weigh in on Auntieruth55's suggestions regarding the "Risorgimento" section here. I would like several opinions on this matter. Thanks! Awadewit (talk) 02:24, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This beautifully written article was a great pleasure to read and will sail through FAC, I am certain. My comments below, except the ones about shrinking or expanding the "Risorgimento" section, all deal with trivial matters that should cause you no sleepless nights.

Lead

• "Rambles was not reprinted until after the rise of feminist literary criticism in the 1970s provoked a wider interest in Shelley's entire corpus." - Delete "after"? The meaning seems clear without it.

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Risorgimento

• " ...rather than as 'Italians' (it was not until the late nineteenth century that Tuscan Italian became the national language). " - Terminal period after "Italians" and capital "I" on "it"? (This reflects my preference that complete sentences, even those appearing in parentheses, be fitted out with terminal periods.)

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Part II

• "We read, to gather thought and knowledge; travelling is a book of the Creator’s own writing, and imparts sublime wisdom than the printed words of man." - Is the word more missing from this part of the quote; that is, "... imparts more sublime wisdom than... "?

• It was supposed to be "sublimer". Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• "After leaving Kissingen, they group travels through the area around Weimar... " - Either "they travel" or "the group travels".

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• "They continue on to Berlin and Dresden... " - Delete "on"?

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

History of the travel narrative

• "The Grand Tour was celebrated as educational travel when it involved exchanging scientific information with the intellectual elite, learning about other cultures, and preparing oneself to lead." - Perhaps, to avoid using "oneself", "preparing for leadership"?

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• "That is, they claimed to have experienced the true culture of an area and their reactions to it were specifically personal, as opposed to the generic guidebooks, in which the response is specifically impersonal." - Comma after "area"?

• This is optional, I think, and I wanted to emphasize the difference between the authentic discourse guidebooks and generic. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Rambles as a travel narrative

• "she specifically attempted to differentiate her work from these by expressing a particular political point of view" - Perhaps end the sentence after "these" to avoid repetition of "a political point of view", which appears in the quote in the next sentence.

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Travel narratives by women writers

• "Rather than scandal-ridden young woman of her youth, which she wrote about in the Tour, she is now a demure, respectable, middle-aged woman." - Missing word? "Rather than the scandal-ridden young woman... "?

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Italian politics

• "arguing that they in particular "ought to sympathise in [the Italian’s] struggles... " - Plural possessive, "Italians' "?

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Her audience both wanted to support the revolutionaries, especially exiles living amongst them, such as Mazzini, but they were also fearful of the violence of the Carbonari and its nationalist ideology." - "Among" rather than "amongst"? Also, delete "both"?

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Memory and healing

• "Shelley writes about this process in Rambles, using the trope of a pilgrimage; she believes and traveling to Italy and revisiting the scenes of her youth will cure her of her depression... " - Should this be "she believes that traveling to Italy... "?

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

References

• A few page ranges in the citations need en dashes rather than hyphens.

• I was going to run the dashbot right before FAC. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

• The dabfinder tool sees three links that go to disambiguation pages rather than their intended targets.

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Simplifying or expanding the Risorgimento section

• I found this section to be quite helpful to an understanding of subsequent sections, and I would have no comments to make about its size and scope except for your specific question and the link to Auntieruth55's suggestions. Later sentences like "He was young—not yet 30—and had participated in a failed Carbonari rebellion against Austria in 1830–31; as a result, he was in exile" become much more meaningful and interesting in light of the background material provided in "Risorgimento" than they would if merely linked to other articles. The background material also helps readers to understand the material in "Italian politics'" and Shelley's focus on a kind of reform, "political gradualism" or "peaceful mediation", that would appeal to her British readers. My feeling is that the article would be weakened by shortening the Risorgimento section. On the other hand, making it much longer might be a mistake of a different sort—wandering off on a tangent. If I were the author, I think I would ask Auntieruth55 for specific suggestions about possible expansion. What exactly should be added? Are we talking about a few words, a new sentence or two, or something more substantial? Finetooth (talk) 18:54, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

• Ok, thanks. Will do. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

I hope these comments prove helpful. Finetooth (talk) 18:06, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your kind words above and your eagle eye. Awadewit (talk) 02:21, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I recall helping a little bit with the map for this earlier. This seems more than ready for FAC to me, but here are some nitpicky suggestions for improvement.

• Per WP:LEAD and WP:MOSQUOTE, the one word direct quotation of "poor" in the lead should havea reference (although this seems a bit silly)

• It looked silly. :) Since it is cited later, I don't think it is necessary to cite here. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• In the 1840 section would it make sense to add how many total children they had to Although Percy Shelley and two of their [four] children died there, ...? I know this is also in the lead, but I think less detail in the lead is OK

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• Same section, it is a fair distance from Baden-Baden to Lake Como - should the article somehow indicate this, perhaps something like "After crossing Switzerland, the group spent two months at Lake Como in northern Italy, where Mary relaxed ...?

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• 1842–44 section: This is a bit awkward Drawn largely from her correspondence with her step-sister Claire Clairmont,[37] Mary Shelley’s last published work, which was dedicated to travel writer Samuel Rogers, was released on 1 August 1844.[38] I also wondered if "during her travels" should be added to it, so Drawn largely from her correspondence with her step-sister Claire Clairmont [during her travels],[37] ... but that makes it even more awkward - could the bit be added and the sentence split perhaps?

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• Should the very long quotation at the end of the first paragraph of the Description of text section be identified by author? Something like "According to Orr..." as a preface?

• It is not important who said it, so I don't think so. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• OK, I wasn't sure if this was a well known scholar or not. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• In the Travel narratives by women writers section: Would moving increasingly later in the sentence read better? After the mid-1790s (partly as a result of the French Revolution), Britain experienced an "antifeminist reaction" and increasingly women were [increasingly?] discouraged from writing on so-called "masculine" topics.[75]

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• Since people often read the captions before the rest of the article, would it help to add "her daughter" to Mary Wollstonecraft's Letters Written in Sweden, Norway, and Denmark strongly shaped [her daughter] Shelley's Rambles.

• Done. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• Memory and healing section: Is this a typo? Should it read "lie" instead of "like"? ...The treasures of my youth like buried here."[103]

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• This quotation is in the article twice (Part III and Memory and healing sections). I think that is OK, just noting it: I was agitated again by emotions—by passions—and those the deepest a woman's heart can harbor—a dread to see her child even at that instant expire—which then occupied me.[55]

• I hope that is ok - it encapsulates a lot about the book. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• I really don't see a problem with it - sort of an inline pull quote as it were. I just noticed the repetition and thought I'd mention it, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• Since this was her last book, should her death be mentioned explicitly? Perhaps a sentence at the start of the third paragraph of Reception?

• The book isn't really connected to her death, though, so I don't think so. Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• OK, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• I thought the article did a good job on the Risorgimento (sp?) and would not change it (addressing the AuntieRuth comments)
• This is not part of the review, but I find it odd that she did not have much sympathy for Germany, which was also a divided nation at the time. Since I use a German word for my username, I might not be neutral - also Germany had not yet had its Revolution of 1848 when she traveled there. I guess that Italy is a much more romantic place too...

• I wonder if she was unduly affected by not speaking the language? :) Awadewit (talk) 19:46, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• On further consideration, I don't think there was much of a German resistance movement or Diaspora until after 1848 (when you have people as diverse as Karl Marx and Carl Schurz as refugees in other countries). The Prussians were exerting a lot of influence in other parts of Germany at this time, but they were not seen as "foreign" in the way that the French were in Italy. So she doesn't speak the language, doesn't have the past associations and history with Germany, and in her time in France she did not encounter lots of German politcal exiles / refugees (but all these are true for Italy / Italians). So I guess it makes more sense than I originally thought. Thanks for yet another enjoyable and enlightening read. Let me know when this is at FAC and I will gladly support, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:06, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I originally found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 22:15, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

• Besides that second image (scary!), I liked the page. There are some image issues, but I don't really care too much about placement, sizes, etc. The history of travel narrative tends to get a little off topic, but that happens (you could just dump the information into the travel narrative page and summarize in 3 paragraphs or so). Besides all that, it reads as FA level. Ottava Rima (talk) 17:17, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for taking time to review the article - I have the extended discussion of travel narratives because I thought readers would be unfamiliar with the genre, but if I need to cut it down, your idea is a good one. Awadewit (talk) 21:18, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Almost-instinct

Lead

• "Issued in 1844, it is her last" - mixing tenses?
  • Mixing tenses is fine sometimes, but it has to be logical. To me, this is logical, since we have to say "it is her last", not "it was her last" (it still is her last publication - it never ceased to be). Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "The sites that Rambles describes are similar to those of other travel books of the time" - doesn't seem to mesh quite, though can't identify any error
  • I just rewrote the whole sentence and eliminated that part: "Shelley differentiated her travel book from others by presenting her material from what she described as "a political point of view"." Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "tradition of her mother, Mary Wollstonecraft, and Lady Morgan" - there's a tiny ambiguity here (are we talking about 2 ppl or 3?) "tradition of Lady Morgan and Mary Wollstonecraft, her mother" would avoid this
  • Adopted recommendation. Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "Shelley's aim was to arouse sympathy in England for the Italian revolutionaries, such as Gatteschi" - lose the "the"?
  • Done. Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• In that paragraph mixture of tenses: "challenged", "aim was ", "She rails", "She describes" - just checking that's ok?
  • Fixed up - the past in the past tense and literature is described using the literary present. Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "Shelley's political commentary on Italy was specifically singled out for praise, particularly since it was written by a woman. However, for most of the nineteenth and twentieth centuries, Shelley was known only" - feel the need for an extra word or two somewhere, eg "..was generally known.
  • Added "usually". Awadewit (talk) 01:40, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Risorgimento

• "Prior to the nineteenth century, Italy was divided" would prefer something like "From xxx until the 19th..." or "By the start of the 19th....": currently suggest that Italy had never previously been anything other than "duchies and city-states"

• Added "From the middle ages until the end of the nineteenth century" Awadewit (talk) 01:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Giuseppe Mazzini, a Carbonari who was exiled from Italy" - just checking this plural-looking word is correct for a single person?

• Good catch - changed to "Carbonaro". Awadewit (talk) 01:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "These nationalist revolutionaries, ironically with foreign support" - I can see the irony, but actually its pretty typical for other countries to interfere like this (eg French in US), so the word feels a bit naive to me

• Removed. Awadewit (talk) 01:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

1840

• Put the pre-1840 info into the pluperfect tense eg "Mary Shelley and her husband Percy Bysshe Shelley had lived in Italy from 1818 to 1823" maybe? [I do mean "pluperfect" don't I? I remembering from Latin lessons when I was nine]. Especially as you go into it later in paragraph "Mary Shelley had always wanted"

• Changed to the pluperfect. :) Awadewit (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "since none of them spoke German, the group was forced to remain together" makes it sound like they actively wanted to get away from one another, when presumably you mean that they had no opportunity to etc etc?
  • They did want to be separated, so I've actually written what I wanted to say. Awadewit (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "reminisced about how she and Percy had almost rented a villa with Lord Byron" - where? there?
  • Added "at the lake one summer". Awadewit (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "in Italy] I might live – as once I lived—hoping—loving—aspiring enjoying" inconsistency of dashes?
  • That is copied exactly as Shelley wrote it. Awadewit (talk) 01:52, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

1842–44

• "She also spent time sitting at Percy Bysshe Shelley’s grave in Rome" something about this bothers me, in the context, but can't work out why. I think I'm wanting to know if it was a series of regular visits, or one long one
  • Changed to "paid numerous visits to" Awadewit (talk) 02:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "He was young—not yet 30—and had participated in a failed Carbonari rebellion against Austria in 1830–31; as a result, he was in exile" would prefer something like "He was young - not yet 30 - and in exile, following his participation in ...." to get rid of slight ambiguity ("He was young....as a result, he was in exile")
  • Excellent suggestion. Awadewit (talk) 02:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "Moskal points out that "the strength of [Shelley’s] devotion overturned her previous resolve not to publish again" - can you "point out" an opinion?
  • Changed to "argues". Awadewit (talk) 02:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• I know that you're writing in American English but "she wrote Moxon" really jars English eyes. Would "she wrote to Moxon" be possible in American English?

• Actually, the article was recently "translated" into BE. :) Added "to". Awadewit (talk) 02:04, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

More to come! No need to reply here on any of these points almost-instinct 09:19, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

I have to reply. :) Awadewit (talk) 02:05, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Next batch:

Description of text Part 1

• "Shelley becomes ill in Germany and again pauses at Baden-Baden to recover her health" - the "again" is confusing me
  • Me too - removed. Awadewit (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)
• "After recovering her health and her spirits, the group proceeds..." - it sounds like the group recovered her health
  • Rewritten: After Shelley recovers her health and spirits, the group proceeds to Italy where she is overcome with nostalgia Awadewit (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

History of the travel narrative

• "Over the course of the eighteenth century, the Grand Tour became increasingly popular; travel to the Continent for Britain’s elite was not only educational but also nationalistic. All aristocratic gentlemen took similar trips and visited similar sites, often devoted to developing an appreciation of Britain from abroad" - I feel that the structure of these two sentences could be rejigged so that the point I think you're making about the "nationalistic" element is made more straightforwardly. Even just replacing the semi-colon with a fullstop and the fullstop with a colon would help my progress

• Spilt the first sentence into two. Awadewit (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "During the Napoleonic Wars, the Continent was closed to British travellers" - Entirely closed? Largely closed? So closed as to make any attempt pointless? A qualifier would stop me wondering

• It was closed because of a French blockade of the ports. No attempt to travel there was worth the trouble. Awadewit (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "and the Grand Tour came under increasing criticism, particularly from radicals such as Mary Shelley's father, William Godwin, who scorned its aristocratic connections" - I feel a better word than connections might be available: "aristocratic connections" are those I imagine a person, not a thing, having

• Changed to "associations". Awadewit (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "That is, they claimed to have experienced the true culture of an area and their reactions to it were specifically personal, as opposed to the generic guidebooks, in which the response is specifically impersonal" - It feels odd to be comparing people ("they" the writers) with books ("generic guidebooks")

• Good catch - changed to That is, they claimed to have experienced the true culture of an area and their reactions to it were specifically personal, as opposed to the writers of generic guidebooks, whose response was specifically impersonal. Awadewit (talk) 21:16, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Rambles as a travel narrative

• "Although Shelley even dedicated Rambles to Rogers, her preface acknowledged Lady Morgan" - I found this a little chewy

• Changed to: Although Shelley dedicated Rambles to Rogers, her preface acknowledged the influence of Lady Morgan, whose travel work, Italy (1821), had been vocal in its criticism of Austria’s rule over Italy and had been placed on the papal list of prohibited books. 21:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "In order to make her politics more palatable to her audience, however, Shelley often uses the analysis of literature and art to make her points" - would this be better without the "the"?

• Removed. Awadewit (talk) 21:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Shelley's travel narrative...is a part of the Romantic emphasis on the individual" - is there a better way of phrasing this?

• Changed to: Shelley's travel narrative, with its "informal" and "subjective" focus on her personal experiences, reflects the Romantic emphasis on the individual. Awadewit (talk) 21:24, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Travel narratives by women writers

• "Mary Shelley violated the mid-nineteenth century taboo on women discussing politics" - is "on" the right word? "against"? "about"?

• Changed to "against". Awadewit (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Wollstonecraft is described as asking "men’s questions" when she is curious about her surroundings and both Lady Morgan’s and Elizabeth Barrett Browning’s travel narratives received hostile reviews because they discussed political issues. Both Shelley and her mother, Mary Wollstonecraft" - Two "both"s in quick succession

• But one is at the end of a paragraph and the next is at the beginning of the next paragraph - this is ok, I think. Awadewit (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Also like her mother...Shelley emphasised her role as a mother in the text" seems a bit clumsy.

• It does - ew! Changed to "maternal role". Awadewit (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Italian politics

• "In writing about the Italian situation, Shelley was also advocating" - you've been using the present tense ("Shelley’s stated aim in Rambles is to raise awareness" "On a general level, she articulates" etc) up to now in this paragraph (mostly!)

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 21:35, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

National character

• "It was, in fact, how political events affected the people that Shelley was most interested in describing in Rambles." - I had to read this sentence three times before I got the right end of the stick

• Simplified to: It was how political events affected people that Shelley was most interested in. Awadewit (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "she did so again" - again, are you going to be consistent with your use of the present tense?

• Fixed. Awadewit (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Shelley's trips to Italy were a way for her to revisit memories of her deceased husband, Percy Shelley, and the children they had buried there. Moskal argues that Shelley needed to "expiate" her survivor guilt.[102] Shelley writes about this process in Rambles" - which process? I'm a little unsure what exactly you're referring back to?

• The expiation of her survivor guilt - I'm not quite sure how to make this clearer, as the "this" does refer back to the proper antecedent. Awadewit (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

Memory and healing

• "using the trope of a pilgrimage" - this means nothing to me, I'm afraid. I'm, like, totally "huh?"

• Is it trope or pilgrimage you don't understand? Awadewit (talk) 21:41, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

• I don't know what a trope is (yes, I've been told before) and I can't work it out from the context. That does help? almost-instinct 22:01, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Some of these points are so petty that I embarassed to be making them! almost-instinct 23:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

You shouldn't be embarrassed at all - this was an excellent review! Awadewit (talk) 21:42, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 7 November 2009, 02:24 UTC)

---

[edit] Everyday life

[edit] Redcliffe Padres

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I want to get this up to good article status over the holidays and just would like a general guideline of content to be added and edited.

Thanks, JRA_WestyQld2 ^Talk 05:20, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from NatureBoyMD

• The lead should be longer (about 2-3 paragraphs per WP:LEAD).
• Dates should be unlinked.
• From the perspective of an American who is very familiar with baseball in the U.S., the article is often confusing. What is PCYC? Major grades? Minor grads? This information needs some explaining.
• Baseball terms (run batted in, home run, etc.) need to be linked at first occurrence.
• The history section needs to be expanded. There is a lot of info about the 2008-09 season, just a little about seasons before that, and really nothing prior to 2001.
• En dashes need to be used for date ranges (ex 2008–09). Sometimes the article uses dashes or a solidus (that's a "slash" to you and me).
• Consider hard coding the roster, so you can symbols/terms that apply to Australian baseball (if different) and so there isn't a link to other MLB team rosters.
• Watch the use of "currently". Use "as of [date]" instead.
• More references are needed, especially for the "notable players" section.
• There needs to be some inclusion criteria for "notable players". Why are they notable?
• See also sections are unnecessary when the terms are already linked in the article.
• A good copyedit for grammar, punctuation, and style is in order.
• External links generally come after the reference section.
• The references need to be formatted using the same style and include all possible information (author, title, source, publication date, access date, etc.)
• Is it possible to find a better logo in .png or .svg format? The present image is a stretched and distorted .jpg.

This may be more than you are looking for, but I feel compelled to list everything that stuck out to me. Let me know if you need more information or need something clarified; I'll be happy to help. -NatureBoyMD (talk) 01:48, 21 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 20 November 2009, 05:20 UTC)

---

[edit] Nathan Horton

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to bring this article up to featured article status. Thanks, Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 00:11, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

• Lenghty review:
• Infobox should should include the Rampage as a former team. Generally any pro team (AHL, ECHL, Euro, etc) is included there.
  • Done.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• In the opening paragraph I would include that he also played for San Antonio. I would make the first paragraph a brief summar of who Horton is, what teams he played for, stuff like that. The second paragraph can then explain some things he's done, like his OHL totals (which should probably mention whether that is a career total or not), and what type of style he plays (scorer, checker, etc). It would probably be better to leave stuff like first goal/point to later in the article; the lead is a summary of the article, trivial information is not exactly a summary.
  • Done.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• Staying with the lead section, link rookie, as people unfamiliar with hockey or sports in general will have no idea what that means.
  • Removed while I re-did the lead.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• "during the locked out 2004-2005 season only 21 with the San Antonio Rampage of the American Hockey League (AHL)." This sounds a little awkward. Perhaps something like "only 21 games with the Rampage duirng the locked out season."
  • Removed while I re-did the lead.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• "The following two seasons, saw Horton play the full 82 games for the first time in his career, during which he had his career–high in goals and assists." No need for the comma after seasons; also confusing as I don't know what season he played 82 games in, or when he had his career highs. That should be clarified somewhat.
  • Removed while I re-did the lead.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:17, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• Include something about his playing career before joining the OHL. Even a sentence that acknowledges him playing in Thorold is suffice.
  • Done.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• Is there any reason he didn't want to play for the Ice Dogs? Going on that, Hockey's Future has not passed as a reliable source in FA nominations before, so I would look for something else that makes that point. There might be a newspaper or something that mentions his stance on going to Mississauga.
• Mentioning him scoring 3 goals against the Greyhounds seemingly has no context here, nor a date. If it just to show that him and McGratton played together, they were teammates for part of the season, so why single out that one game?
• "To begin the 2002–03 season, Horton missed 13 games out of 22 but still ended up scoring 9 goals with 18 points during that span." As a read this, I understand that he missed 13 of the first 22 games. If thats the case, you should perhaps make that distinction. And is there any particular reason why he was gone, an injury or anything? If so, that should be included.
• There is an overuse of the word "considered" in the 2003 NHL Draft section. Consider using a different word, like "regarded," for at least one of those uses.
• Reading the source on the Messier quote, it doesn't sound like is responding to Keenan's comments, and really offers nothing to the article other than that Messier is some 20 years older than Horton.
• I see no mention of when he made his NHL debut. That is usually an important event that should be noted.
• "Staal matched the feat ... at 183 days younger than Horton." Using "at" there makes the sentence awkward. Something like "Staal matched the feat and surpassed Horton as the youngest player to score; Staal was 183 days younger than Horton was when he scored." Along the lines of that, but this example doesn't exactly sound to great either.
• Move ref 20 to the end of the sentence; it looks weird where it is now.
• Its unlikely that Tony Miniaci will have an article written about him, so the link can be removed, just to minimize the red in the article.
  • Done.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• If he returned to the Panthers in March, why does it say above that he was out for the season? This obviously wasn't the case, so shouldn't be there.
• Mention that the 2004–05 NHL season was cancelled, as a lock-out doesn't necessarily mean it was cancelled (just see the 1994–95 season).
• Not every NHL player signed with an AHL team. Just say that they were forced to play in different leagues.
• Comma after Rampage
• "Despite having not signed with the Rampage until October 29..." can be simplified to "Despite not signing with the Rampage until..."
• When did he assist on Campbell's goal, in the game where Horton scored?
• "Horton scored both of the Rampage's two goals..." No need to say "Rampage's two goals," as "both" denotes two.
• "In only 21 games for San Antonio..." "Only" here is a weasel word, and is best removed.
• "the first games of the season, Horton was tied for the team lead in goals" How many games are "the first games?"
• "who the Panthers had not lost to in regulation since the 2004–05 season." Sicne there was no 2004–05 season, this should be changed.
• "Horton assisted on all goals that Jokinen recorded." How many goals did Jokinen score?
• Bruch Garrioch doesn't need to be linked.
  • Done.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• "Peter DeBoer who first saw Horton play at seven years old said..." Change to "Peter DeBoer, who first saw Horton play at seven years old, said..."
  • Done.--Giants27(Contribs|WP:CFL) 21:25, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
• "but failed to record a stat." Change stat to point; stat could mean anything, and he certainly recored some sort of stat in the game.
• Since the playing style is only a sentence long, I would consider either trying to expand it (which could be difficult), or incorporating it elsehwere in the article, like the lead or some other section. Keeping it at one sentence will be a problem in a FA nomination.
• Again, the personal life section will have to be expanded if brought up for a FA nomination. Consider adding something about where he was born and raised, when he started playing hockey, who his parents were, siblings, hobbies, anything like that.
• Going over the references, Hockey's Future and Hockey Fights are almost certainly not going to pass for reliable sources. Hockey's Future has already been tried, and looking over Hockey Fights, I don't have much faith in it working either.
• That all said, the article looks good. With some fixing up, it shouldn't have trouble making it to Featured Article. Good luck with it. Kaiser matias (talk) 19:08, 27 November 2009 (UTC)
  

(Peer review added on Friday 20 November 2009, 00:11 UTC)

---

[edit] McCormick Tribune Plaza & Ice Rink

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because WP:CHIFTD is getting very close to having the bare minimum number of articles. If Jay Pritzker Pavilion does not pass WP:FAC, this one may. I thought I would get some feedback to clean it up. After getting most of the articles about features cleaned up, then we can go back and clean up the general Millennium Park article.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:12, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: As requested, here are some suggestions for improvement. Since I have some experience with other articles in the Millennium Park series, some of these will be nade in comparison with those articles.

• Article needs a copyedit - for example in the lead there is Opening in 2001, it was the first attraction in Millennium Park to open.[2] which could be made tighter as something more like It was the first attraction in Millennium Park to open, in 2001.[2] Or in the second paragraph in the lead, these two sentneces could be combined For four months a year, it operates as McCormick Tribune Ice Rink, a free public outdoor ice skating rink. It is generally open for skating from mid-November until mid-March.
  • Specific issues fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
• Compared to other Millennium Park articles, there is very little on the design and construction of the feature. Who was the architect? Who were the contractors? I also note that there is one sentence that could be moved from Details to much earlier in the History Although the rink was budgeted for $5 million, it was constructed for only $3.2 million, making it one of the few Millennium Park attractions to cost less than was initially budgeted.[34]
• I was also surprised that there was no critical reception infromation / section as such. I guess the people watching could be a part of such a section. Perhaps the appearance the Watherman film could too?
• Have there been reviews of the Grill as a restaurant? Does the Grill serve food in the winter (is it then considered part of the indoor seating / dining area)? Could a bit more on the year-round restaurant be added?
  • Added review content.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:37, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
• Also since the AT&T Plaza / Cloud Gate is elevated realtive to the rink, how do people get up there from the rink, or down to the rink from the Bean? I know the park has won accessibility awards, but can't see ramps in the images.
• I like the images, but wonder if File:Millennium Park Ice Skating.jpg would be a better lead image, since it actually shows people skating (swap it and the current lead rink image, which also is very nice, but shows no humans / skaters)
• Again, knowing some of the past issues with images of copyrighted art, I wonder about the four images where Cloud Gate is in the background. Not sure at what point it becomes a fair use image. My guess is that less is better.
• Most of the Details section seems to me like it could be in the Operations section - lobby, rental of skates, chiller system, Park Grill in off season. The dimensions of the rink could be added to history (if there is not much on construction, can at least start with the budget as noted before, then tell the reader how big it is).
• Operations says the rink is open from 10 AM to 10 PM, then Details seems to imply longer operating hours Alcohol is allowed in the McCormick Tribune Plaza when the park is open (6:00A.M. to 11:00P.M. daily)[32] This is one of several places where things are repeated in Details (another reason to merge it) - the bathrooms are also repeated here, and the seating is repeated too - just realized the seats on Park Grill are given as 150 and 300. Can't both be right.
• Since it is fairly short, not much else to say. I can try and copyedit this too (and reorganize a bit if wanted) but obviously there is no rush (since Pritzker Pavilion is second in line for FAC and about ready and this would come after that)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:18, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Travel day today. Plane departs from O'Hare Airport in 3 hours. I am about to leave. I will look at these later, but surely not in the next few hours.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 13:39, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Travel safely and have a Happy Thanksgiving! Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:10, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

O'Hare now gives 20 minutes of free wifi. Holla!!!!--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 16:09, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 19 November 2009, 01:12 UTC)

---

[edit] The Chronicles of Riddick: Escape from Butcher Bay

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because of a recommendation from JimmyBlackwing, the copyeditor of the article. So with some help with fellow editors, I could get Escape from Butcher Bay to FA status. Thanks, GamerPro64 (talk) 00:19, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by David Fuchs

• General
  • There are some dabs you need to address.

Done. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:55, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• • The alt text could use some work; there's spelling errors, issues with tone (contractions) and some very awkward wording (blood spatter over the hands doesn't translate to "blood spatter on walls", for instance.) File:CREBBRiddick.jpg is missing Alt text, however I'm going to suggest that it be removed for better compliance with WP:NFCC. If you're going to justify keeping it, it needs a much better FUR (and probably a better and larger image is necessary; you can barely see what's going on in the image, and you can push the size without going over .1 megapixels.)

  I need a second opnion on removing the picture. GamerPro64 (talk) 00:13, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

  • I say remove it. A free picture of Vin Diesel could easily be placed in Development; combined with the box shot, I'd say it's good enough to get Riddick's appearance across to readers. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 03:02, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

  O.K, I removed the picture. GamerPro64 (talk) 20:05, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

  I think I fixed tthe alt text in the pictures. Also, Jimmy, I tried getting a picture of Vin Diesel on the article but I have trouble with having alt text on it. GamerPro64 (talk) 03:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

  If you show me which picture you're using (there's two in his article), I can help write the alt text. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

  Well, the one that I like more on the article is File:VinDieselMarch09.jpg. GamerPro64 (talk) 21:57, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

• Prose
  • "The designers of Escape from Butcher Bay sought to avoid making the game a "see-the-movie-play-the-movie" experience, in contrast to other film tie-in games." First off, quotes in the lead have to be sourced (WP:LEADCITE); secondly, this quote does jack for my understanding. "Play the movie?" I'm assuming it means it's not a fully interactive game experience, but it's better to explicitly state what they are talking about.
    • I reworded it. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
      • It's fine in the lead now but it's still a tad unclear in the body. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
        • Now fixed, I think. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I probably sound like a broken record in these video game peer reviews, but... accessibility, accessibility, accessibility! I think wiki-editors have been spoiled by internal linking, so that they don't explain terms in the text. If you don't give at least a one-bit description, readers have to click away from the article... and it's doubtful they may come back. "In Escape from Butcher Bay, the player takes the role of Richard B. Riddick and attempts to escape from a prison called Butcher Bay.[1] " Who is Riddick, besides the protagonist? "Unlike many first-person shooters, the game contains no heads-up display"... what's a heads-up display (especially considering it's really nothing more than a butchering of head-up display, people might be confused.)
  • There's a lot of weaselly, passive voice throughout the article, that leads to repetitious and uninteresting prose. "The player may interact with the prison's residents,[9] from whom quests may be received; the player earns information, tools and other rewards by completing quests.[10] Violent conflict often occurs between the player, inmates and prison guards.[1][9] The player may attack with Riddick's bare hands, or with improvised weapons such as shivs and clubs. Punches can be strung together to create combos."
    • Quests are only sometimes received from inmates. Most of the time, it's just idle talk. Also, talking to inmates is usually an option, not a requirement. Rewording it to active voice removes the intended meaning. I'll have to fix the other one; "the player attacks" should be fine. I don't see how any of it is "weaselly", though. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 23:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
      • My concern is that the sentences are all structured the same and sound repetitive. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
        • I've been working on the prose for awhile, so I can't tell what you mean; I'm too close to the wording. Could you point out a few more specific examples? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
      • I switched a few sentences, where appropriate, to active voice. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 07:29, 19 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "With Johns' help, Riddick eludes the guards and tricks them into killing the warden. The two then steal a ship and escape the prison." Wait, what? Why would the bounty hunter help Riddick?
    • This is more of an issue with content than prose. As I remember it: throughout the game, Johns gets screwed over by the prison officials; he eventually gets fed up and helps Riddick escape. It doesn't make sense here because that subplot isn't mentioned. GamerPro: is it possible to add it in? JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

More comments when possible. Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 19:59, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• • "tarbreeze intended the game to feature more role-playing elements, but they were removed due to feedback from Diesel and game testers. Starbreeze senior producer Peter Wanat referred to the game's role-playing elements as "RPG-lite", and said, "We tried to limit the number of really hard or really intricate RPG elements, and that was a choice because we wanted the game to be playable."" Lots of repetition of elements... maybe something like "components" or another synonym to mix it up?
    • I decided that the "RPG-lite" comment was covered by the full quote, so I axed it. And I changed the word's first appearance to "systems". The repetition should be gone, now. JimmyBlackwing (talk) 19:17, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I see that they produced a developer commentary for the directors cut of the game. Methinks that might add to the comprehensiveness of the development section, no?
  • Pet peeve for reception sections; it's generally best to list critics, not just publications, ex. "Douglass Perry of IGN" or similar. While they are representing their publication, it's still one critic's view (it also helps avoid confusion if you're reviewing different versions of the same title.) Speaking of which, are there a couple of reviews of the directors' edition that could be included?

Der Wohltemperierte Fuchs^(talk) 16:00, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Done with adding names of reviewers. I will now look for quotes from the director's edition. GamerPro64 (talk) 03:54, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 18 November 2009, 00:19 UTC)

---

[edit] Guitar Hero: Van Halen

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

Looking to get a peer review, as this is a strange release: the commercial product is not available until Dec but promotional copies with GH5 were sent out already, so there's some reception, but not a complete one.

Thanks, MASEM (t) 15:26, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is a good start but needs more work to make it accessible to readers who know nothing of these games. Here are a few suggestions.

• The image needs alt text. WP:ALT has details.

Lead

• The current lead says nothing about critical reception. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of each of the main text sections.
• "The game content was developed by Underground Development, with the primary engine code developed by Neversoft and Budcat Creations. The game is published by Activision Blizzard." - Active voice is usually more crisp than passive. These two sentences would be easy to flip to active, thus: "Underground Development produced the game content, while Neversoft and Budcat Creations developed the primary engine code. Activision Blizzard published the game."

Gameplay

• I think more background information that explained the nature of the game, how it is played, and its relationship to the songs would be helpful. How does someone win? Can one person play the game, or is it a multiple-player game? What are the songs for besides listening?
• "The game does not feature the additions that are present in Guitar Hero 5, such as drop-in/drop-out play" - Should "drop-in/drop-out" be explained or linked?
• "are playable avatars in the game for the Van Halen songs" - Wikilink avatar?
• "The band is represented by their current looks... " - "The band members are represented by their current looks... " to avoid "band ... their"?
• "these outfits are also included for Wolfgang Van Halen" - Maybe "an older outfit"? His age wouldn't affect his current outfit.
• The "citation needed" tag should be addressed.
• "notes that the lack of such material was not due to any demands or requests made by David Lee Roth... " - Just plain "Roth" will do since his full name appears just before this sentence.

Reception

• "Early reviews of the promotional version of the game received as part of the Guitar Hero 5 before its retail launch were negative of the game." - Tighten by deleting "of the game"?
• "IGN's Eric Brudvig rated the game a 4.9/10, citing problems with the lack of relevance of Van Halen relative to the culture of the 2000s, including having their avatars based on their older appearance rather than of that during the 80s, the lack of songs from Sammy Hagar's period in the band, and the lack of features since introduced with Guitar Hero 5, and ultimately saying those that got the game free through the promotion "got what they paid for". - Too complex. Split into two complete sentences.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 02:22, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 14 November 2009, 15:26 UTC)

---

[edit] John Beilein

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it is detailed enough to be a WP:FA. I would like to get more feedback.

Thanks, TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 03:49, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

N.B. In some of my editorial efforts, I have been noted for being excessive in use of citations. In this article, at times in Beilein's career where he was in a two newspaper town, I often included both citations.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 07:08, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

• Hi, Tony, I haven't peer-reviewed one of your articles recently, so I'll try this one. Will report soon. Brianboulton (talk) 17:50, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I'm not sure how helpful this review is going to be, but I'm doing my best. Basketball isn't my field of expertise, but here goes.

• Lead
  • "The 2009–10 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball season is his third year at Michigan..." A season cannot be a year. Suggest: "The 2009–10 Michigan Wolverines men's basketball season is his third at Michigan..."
    • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • What is the "Division 1 level"?
    • Is the link good enough?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Since "Coach of the Year" seems to be an accepted award, it should be capitalised (as here)
    • I have linked Coach of the Year.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • He's won this "numerous" times - but you only give three instances. If these are examples from a bigger number you should say so. Otherwise, say he's won it three times.
    • I count four times, but they are different types of Coach of the Year recognitions at different levels of play. I will change numerous to four though.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 01:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • What is the NCAA Tournament? (yes, I know, ignorant Brits, but there's quite a few of us)
    • Linked.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
• Early college coaching career
  • This sentence is somewhat intrusive, placed where it is: "Beilein first applied to coach Division I basketball at Canisius in 1987."[9] The information should be placed at the end of the section, as part of the lead-in to the next phase of his career.
    • I have clarified that he was not hired the first time he applied. The sentence is in the correct chronological place.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I would expect the section to end with information about his second, and evidently successful, application to coach at Canisius, rather than the somewhat flat statement about him unsuccessfully seeking other jobs.
    • I don't know how much you want to see, but I added a bit.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:33, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
• Canisius
  • What is the first sentence about? How is Beilien compiling a record for the 1991-92 season when he doesn't join te college until 1992?
    • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:44, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Dodgy grammar: "In 1992, Beilein arrived at Canisius College, which was also the first position at which he hired assistant coaches." Needs to be something like: "In 1992, Beilein arrived at Canisius College as head coach, and was able for the first time to hire assistant coaches."
    • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:57, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • No spaces around mdashes (I fixed this in the lead, not elsewhere)
    • Fixed.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "team into a team" is repetitive. Use a word like "outfit", "line-up", "squad" etc, for the second mention of team.
    • Changed the first one instead.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 03:59, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Second paragraph: after the words "Coach of the Year" the text becomes very confusing. Who were "the number one seeded team", and what is the relevance of this sentence to Beilien? What does "The conference earned three NIT invitations" mean? I am equally lost with the rest of the paragraph. No doubt it all makes good sense to followers of American basketball, but it needs to be understood by the rest of us.
    • How is it now.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:24, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Who are the "Golden Griffins" - is this a nickname for Canisius?
    • I have added a sentence to the LEAD that includes all the Division I school nicknames.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:09, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "...and it continued to have never won the conference tournament." Very awkward phrasing. Perhaps "and it continued its record of never having won the conference tournament.
    • O.K.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I'm having great difficulty trying to follow a tournament structure that I don't understand. As I've said, it's probably clear to those that know these things. However, one thing that bothers me is that Beilien, the subject of the article, is pretty well invisible in this section, which is basically a record of his team's results and little more. Perhaps we could do with fewer results and more about Beilien's coaching methods, and why he was successful.
    • I have detailed what I can about his style. I will probably await sports discussant at FAC in the future.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:37, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
• Richmond, West Virginia and Michigan sections
  • I don't see much purpose in my commenting on these sections, which mirror the Canisius material in largely presenting team performances under Beilien, with little about the man himself.
    • See current FA Steve Bruce. His managerial career section does not talk about him much as a person. Coaches are written about in depth personally unless they have extraordinary accomplishments. I think this is sufficiently broad for FA consideration.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:34, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
• Coaching style: disappointingly brief. I would have expected something about the influences on Beilien which helped him develop his particular coaching style, also indications of how the style has changed and developed over his fairly lengthy coaching career. Also, please note that "notoriety" implies fame for the wrong reasons; Al Capone was "notorious". In this case it might be better to say that Beilien has gained "recognition" rather than notoriety.
• Personal life: I'm unhappy about this section. I think there are WP:BLPNAME issues, and also issues about the relevance/trivia of some of the information. Most of the final paragraph adds little of value to the article.
  • Could you just consider the issues above and strike as is appropriate.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I'm sorry, Tony, if I haven't been able to provide much help. I've done my best, but it really isn't my area. I hope that you can pick up something from the review, however, and I wish the article success. Brianboulton (talk) 00:22, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thanks for your perspective and attention.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 04:43, 24 November 2009 (UTC)
  • I've struck the issues which are clearly resolved. As to the others, my lack of familiarity with the sport makes it difficult for me to comment constructively, so I'll leave these to be resolved by more knowlegeable reviewers. I hope I've been of some help. Brianboulton (talk) 11:36, 25 November 2009 (UTC)
    

(Peer review added on Saturday 14 November 2009, 03:49 UTC)

---

[edit] Apolo Anton Ohno

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've worked this page to a GA and now looking for possible improvements in hopes of getting the article to FA. The biggest concern, something brought up during the GA nom, is the referencing of the table of scores in the Dancing with the Stars section. I have tried to find references for each score, but have been unsuccessful in that. I'm not sure what to do with that table! Anyway... any feedback or comments are appreciated. Thanks, oncamera^(t) 02:28, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is interesting and generally well-done. The problems I noticed have to do with prose and style issues. Sorry, I can't help with the refs for the table, but the claims do not seem especially controversial (though the information isn't common knowledge and must have come from somewhere). Here are a few suggestions.

Heads and subheads

• To avoid repetition, something like "Beginnings" would make a better subhead under the head, "Career" than "Early career". Under "2002 Winter Olympics", deleting "Olympic" from "Olympic qualification race controversy" would avoid repeating "Olympic". The next subhead in that section could be shortened to "Games". The subhead for section 2.6.1 could be shortened to "Trials".

Lead

• "competitor and a five-time medalist (2 gold, 1 silver, 2 bronze)... " - Numbers from one to nine are generally written as words, and bigger numbers are written as digits except at the beginning of a sentence. In this sentence, you use "five" but also 2, 1, and 2. Better would be "competitor and a five-time medalist (two gold, one silver, two bronze). Ditto for other instances in the article.

Early life

• "Ohno's parents divorced when he was an infant, so he was raised by his father." - "And" would be a better choice since "so" suggests that being raised by his father was the inevitable result of a divorce.
• "Ohno has stated by the time he turned 13 years old, he would attend parties with older teenagers if he did not have competitions on the weekends". - Insert "that"? Change to straight past tense? Suggestion: "Ohno has stated that by the time he turned 13 years old, he attended parties with older teenagers if he did not have competitions on the weekends".

Early career

• "When he was 14 years old, Ohno became interested in short-track... " - Wikilink short track?
• "His father wanted to encourage Ohno's developing skills... " - Perhaps "His father wanted to encourage Ohno to develop his skills... "?
• "...so he successfully advocated for Ohno's acceptance into the Lake Placid Olympic Training Center in 1996 to train full-time for short track, despite being underage." - Since Ohno's father wasn't underage, perhaps this would be better: "and, although Ohno was underage, he got him admitted to the Placid Olympic Training Center in 1996 to train full-time for short track."
• "he won a gold medal in the 1500 m, a silver in the 300 m, and came in fourth in the 500 m." - Should "meter" be spelled out in the main text? How do other speed-racing articles handle this?
• " He participated in no training from April to August 1997... " - Tighten to "He did not train from April to August 1997... "?

Olympic qualification race controversy

• "By removing Biondo from the competition, Smith finished in second place and allowed Davis to win." - Since Smith didn't remove Biondo, this sentence should be re-cast.
• "The final verdict was that O'Hare's claims went unproven in the arbitration case, all three were absolved of guilt, and the claim was dismissed." - Tighten by deleting "in the arbitration case"?

The Games

• "Ohno was in second place with three laps remaining, and on his third attempt to pass on the final lap, Kim drifted slightly to the inside where Ohno raised his arms to signal he was blocked." - Since Kim wasn't making an attempt to pass, this sentence should be re-cast.
• "thousands of accusatory letters, many of which were death threats" - "contained death threats" rather than "were death threats"?

After Salt Lake

• The Manual of Style advises against sandwiching text between two images on opposite sides of the page. In addition, the Olympic skates photo overlaps two sections. An easy fix for both problems would be to move the skate image up into "The Games" section.
• "At the second event in South Korea, an estimated 100 riot police stood guard at Incheon International Airport to prevent harm from happening to Ohno stemming from fears of a lingering negative reaction from the 2002 Olympic Games disqualification controversy." - Since Ohno didn't stem from fears, perhaps re-cast as two sentences, thus: "At the second event in South Korea, an estimated 100 riot police stood guard at Incheon International Airport to prevent harm from happening to Ohno. Their concern stemmed from a lingering negative reaction from the 2002 Olympic Games disqualification controversy."
• "Ohno was unable to defend his World Cup title reign from the previous three seasons" - Delete "reign"? Or change to "Ohno was unable to extend his World Cup title reign to a fourth season"?
• "winning the 1000 m and 3000 m races." - When the race names are used as adjectives, they should be hyphenated; i.e. "winning the 1000-m and 3000-m races."

Post-Olympic hiatus and return

• I'd recommend combining the two first paragraphs because they are so short.
• "In 2009, Ohno won his 10th national title,[4] and qualified for the world team; however, unable to defend his championship, Ohno finished fifth in the overall rankings at the 2009 World Championships in Vienna, Austria: he placed second at the 1000 m, and won gold with the 5000 m relay team." - Too many things tacked together. Two sentences would be better.

Olympic trials

• "were the one through top five finishers at the trial" - Tighten by deleting "one through"?

Performance

• In the table, what does "Safe" mean in the Results column? Should this be explained in a footnote?

General

• The images will need alt text, meant to explain the image content to readers who can't see the images. WP:ALT has details.
• The dabfinder tool at the top of this review page finds two links that go to disambiguation pages rather than their intended targets.
• The link checker finds six dead urls in the citations.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 03:48, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments: Thank you for the thorough review of this article. I went through and made changes to the article per all of your suggestions. However, as for this one:

• "he won a gold medal in the 1500 m, a silver in the 300 m, and came in fourth in the 500 m." - Should "meter" be spelled out in the main text? How do other speed-racing articles handle this?

There are hardly any well-written speed-racing articles, so after reading WP:STYLE Unit Names and Symbols to use m instead of meter as along as I included the nonbreak in it i.e. 100 m. Since there are multiple uses of meter throughout the article, I didn't know if it would be redundant/distracting to the reader to constantly see the word. I think it makes sense to write meter out as m instead. Also, in response adding alt to the images, I wasn't sure how to add it to the image in the infobox template, so I might have to ask someone if they know how to add it to the template itself or something. oncamera^(t) 03:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Your explanation about "m" vs. "meter" makes sense in the context of this article. I added a |image_alt = parameter to the article's infobox just now so that you'll be able to add the alt text. You are right in thinking this is a bit tricky; the parameters in the infobox differ from the parameter for most of the other images. If you ever have to do alt text for a map in the infobox, it's |map_alt = . Best of luck with the FA pursuit. Finetooth (talk) 05:06, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Another thought. Do you want to add the "persondata" info to the bottom of the article? WP:Persondata has an explanation. I have a script that can do most of the work (not much, really) automatically by cloning data from the infobox. Just let me know if you'd like me to run it on this article. Finetooth (talk) 15:38, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the alt_image to the infobox, but I don't see the alt text when I turn the images off. Do you have to make the change to the Template:Infobox Speed Skater itself? I don't know how to edit that! If you would like to run your bot for the Persondata, that would be helpful. oncamera^(t) 16:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Puzzling. I'm not seeing why the alt text doesn't show up. I'll keep thinking about this and perhaps ask for help. I added the persondata by copy-paste of the template from WP:Persondata. (For some reason, the script did not work.) You can see the persondata in edit mode. Only four bits of data were relevant. Finetooth (talk) 17:15, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Sorry, flummoxed. I don't see how to fix the alt text. Finetooth (talk) 17:53, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for adding the Persondata template. I will look for other help with the alt tag in the infobox! Thanks for trying, oncamera^(t) 18:10, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I see that someone has fixed it and that the solution is a variant that I didn't try. :-) Glad you found help. Now that the technical problem is fixed, I have another observation. The alt text is not the same as the caption; if you can imagine a blind person listening to the alt text being read out loud by a machine, you will have a good idea of what the alt text should say. For example, "The skates Ohno wore at the 2002 Olympics" won't be of much help to a blind reader. Something like "A pair of silver skates with gold-colored blades are mounted in a display case" would be better. You can improve on the other two alt texts as well. Finetooth (talk) 19:45, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

I went and edited the alt texts again according to that logic; it's better now. Thanks for the advice, oncamera^(t) 03:49, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Saturday 14 November 2009, 02:28 UTC)

---

[edit] Watford F.C. season 2009–10

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

This is the first time I've requested a peer review, but basically I'm looking for general advice on where I can take this article.

Content wise I'd be grateful for any of the following: grammatical feedback, comments on whether the prose is of appropriate length and correctly weighted, whether I am missing any sections, and whether there are any areas where I have possibly gone over the top.

I very warmly invite any feedback, regardless of your knowledge of the sport. What a football (or baseball, basketball, tennis) fan thinks is essential might appear to be useless minute detail to a casual reader, so in that respect I would very strongly welcome even brief opinions from people who have little interest in football/soccer.

I'm also quite new to wikipedia, so I'm curious as to whether it would be worth nominating this as a good article in the near future, or if because of its nature I'd have to wait until May or June. My personal opinion is that the article is stable, as the only major additions are updates of statistics, or changes made in direct response to consensus at WT:FOOTY or the season article task force.

Thanks in advance, WFCforLife (talk) 03:00, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This makes sense to an outsider (me), seems broad in coverage, neutral, illustrated, verifiable, and not filled with unnecessary detail. Since I'm an outsider, I can spot jargon that other outsiders might not understand. (As I review more and more football articles, I am learning the jargon, so I'm not quite the utter newbie I was a couple of years ago.) Most of my comments have to do with jargon and how to make the material a bit more accessible to readers unfamiliar with the sport, and I have a few thoughts related to the Manual of Style guidelines. My impression is that this will likely be ready for a run at GAN in May or June but probably not before because the ongoing story will certainly change and could even change greatly by then.

Lead

• The lead should be a summary of the entire article such that a reader who could read only the lead would understand the essence of the topic. It's going to be hard to complete the lead until the end of the season, because the stats are going to change, and other more dramatic things (injuries, awards, championships) may happen. Perhaps you could add a kind of interim third paragraph that summarizes the statistics to date and then update that paragraph perhaps once a month through the end of the season. Just a thought.

• I agree that this should be done. I think that "As of 20 November 2009" would be too arbitrary, and I don't think backdating to October would be particularly useful, so I'll work on this at the end of the month.

• "There were many changes at the club from the previous season, with Malky Mackay becoming the new manager, and several first team players including Player of the Season Tommy Smith and Hungary international striker Tamás Priskin leaving the club." - "With" doesn't make a very good conjunction. Slightly better might be: "The club changed in many ways from the previous season; Malky Mackay became the manager, and several first-team players including Player of the Season Tommy Smith and Hungary international striker Tamás Priskin left the club."

• Wikilink or explain striker for readers unfamiliar with the sport?

Background

• "Watford finished the 2008–09 season in 13th place in the table." - Would it be helpful to add when exactly the season began and ended? Should "table" be wikilinked or explained?

• "Previous manager Aidy Boothroyd left the club "by mutual consent" in November 2008... " - It's hard to tell scare quotes from direct quotations. If "by mutual consent" is a direct quote from a source, it needs a citation to the source. On the other hand, scare quotes express doubt. Is there some reason to doubt that Boothroyd agreed to leave?

• It seems that part of the terms of his settlement are that he can't answer that question directly, but when interviewed in August 2009 he was quoted as saying "If I had stayed we would have done an awful lot better than finishing 13th." 1 Not sure if that could be considered a reliable source though. As good a fansite as it is, it's still a fansite, so I'd need to make a compelling argument to use it. Hopefully the source I've added will justify keeping the scare quotes in. WFCforLife (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

• "lifting Watford away from the relegation zone in the closing weeks of the season" - Wikilink or briefly explain relegation zone?

• "He subsequently joined Reading in June, with Watford receiving an initial £500,000 in compensation." - Another "with" as a conjunction. Suggestion: "When he subsequently joined Reading in June, Watford received... ".

Pre-season

• "The first team began with matches at local sides... ". - Should "sides" be linked to teams?
• "The club's final pre-season fixture... " - Perhaps write "fixture (scheduled match)" to make the jargon clear to wide audience?
• "and club record signing Nathan Ellington" - Not sure what this means. How could a player sign a club record?

August transfer window

• "handed a first competitive start to 17-year-old academy right back" - Wikilink right back or add "defender" in parentheses after "right back"?

September to December

• "Leicester equalised late in the game, with the match ending 3–3." - Suggestion: "Leicester equalised late in the game, and the match ended 3–3."

"3,389 Watford fans travelled to Reading, managed by ex-Watford manager Brendan Rodgers" - Write out the number in words or re-cast the sentence to avoid starting it with digits, per the Manual of Style.

• "despite a red card for Ellington" - Explain or wikilink red card?

• "Watford responded with a 2-0 home win over Preston in their next match, with Cleverley joining Graham as the club's joint highest scorer of the season." - Another "with" conjunction. Perhaps: "When Watford responded with a 2-0 home win over Preston in their next match, Cleverley joined Graham as the club's joint highest-scorer of the season."

Friendlies

• Add a footnote explaining "friendlies"?

• This is a very good point, but didn't see how this could be done in practise. There is no logical place to insert a link to the note, and full-sized text would be inappropriate in my opinion. Instead, I've inserted "friendly match" into the prose, allowing me to wikilink it.

Management and coaching staff

• The external link to Watford F.C. should be converted to an inline citation.

• Removed altogether, it was redundant.

Out

• "£2m" - Spell out "million"?

Notes

• Wikilink yellow card in note 4?
• Wikilink pitch in note 5?
• "million" in note 10?

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 18:04, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the feedback, it was fantastic and exactly what I was hoping for. I've made all of the changes in the way you have suggested, except for where I have left notes. WFCforLife (talk) 02:43, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 9 November 2009, 03:00 UTC)

---

[edit] The Final Fantasy Legend

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to make a solid push for FA status, and want to know everything I need to fix and rewrite. The plot still needs some citing, but I plan to take care of that during this process. Just basically hit me with all you can.

Thanks, Kung Fu Man (talk) 15:26, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This seems comprehensive, neutral, stable, and well-sourced. The images look fine, but you may have trouble persuading reviewers that four fair-use images in one article follow copyright law. My main concerns are with prose and Manual of Style issues. Quite a few of the sentences are inelegant, wordy, or confusing, and problems with subject-verb agreement recur throughout. I did some copyediting as I went, and I have quite a few specific suggestions for improvement. When you've fixed everything you can, another copyedit would be in order. You might be able to find a copyeditor via the list at the bottom of WP:PRV.

Lead

• "The four heroes controlled by the player may be one of three character classes, each with their own unique paths of customization." - Tighten to "The four heroes controlled by the player may belong to one of three character classes, each with a unique path of customization"?

Gameplay

• "Initially, the player is limited to the World of Continent to explore, and given access to later worlds as they climb the Tower." - Since "player" is singular, should this say, "as he or she climbs the Tower" rather than "they"?
• "Like other Final Fantasy related games, travel across the world map screen and hostile areas is occasionally interrupted by random enemy encounters." - Flip to active voice, thus: "Random enemy encounters sometimes interrupt travel across the world-map screen as in other Final Fantasy games"?

Classes

• "and monsters, each with their own strengths and weaknesses" - Since "each" is singular, this should be "with its own strengths... ".
• "Monster-class characters are dependent of its sub-class, and as a result vary greatly." - "Characters" is plural, but "its" is singular. In addition, the sentence doesn't seem logical. Should the sentence read, "Monster-class characters are dependent on their sub-classes, and their statistics vary greatly"?
• "Abilities gained differ slightly between male and female mutants, with females having an initial boost to abilities over males." - "With" doesn't make a very good conjunction. Would this be better as "Abilities gained differ slightly between male and female mutants, but females start with more abilities"?
• "The amount of equipment that can be placed on any one character at any time depends on their class." - "Character is singular" but "their" is plural. If you don't want to use the awkward "his or her" construction, it's possible to use plural or to re-cast the sentence. Suggestion: "The amount of equipment that can be placed on any one character at any time depends on the character's class."

Equipment and abilities

• "When used in combat, attack spells/abilities are will damage a target by an elemental type, non-combative spells/abilities inflict status ailments such as "blindness" on a target with different effects for each or give the user some beneficial effect, and healing spells/abilities restore a target's HP, and can be used outside of combat." - This sentence makes no sense. In addition, the front slash is almost always awkward as a connector. Perhaps "healing spells and abilities" would be better. Ditto for the other front-slashed noun combinations.

• "Resistances and weaknesses are abilities active throughout combat, and give the user a resistance or weakness to one or more types of attack, represented by an "O" or "X" next to the type accordingly, or nullify the effect of a status ailment." - Awkward. Suggestion: "Resistances and weaknesses are abilities that are active throughout combat. They give the user resistance or weakness to one or more types of attack, or they cure an ailment."
• "In order to be used during combat, these must be equipped onto a party member... " - "Equipped onto" isn't standard English. Perhaps this would work: "In order to use equipment during combat, a party member must possess or acquire it. Each piece of equipment requires one weapon slot."

Combat

• "the player selects an action for each player character from their equipment or skills to attack" - "Player" is singular; "their" is plural.
• "In the event the player attempts to run and fails... - I'm not sure what this means. Do the players (game operators) literally run or attempt to run?

Versions and re-releases

• "in March 2002 a Japan-exclusive port was released under the Japanese title... " - Should "port" be explained?
• "The concept art and graphics were redrawn by Toshiyuki Itahana, and cutscenes were added." - Wikilink cutscene?

Reception and legacy

• "The one-eyed monster featured on the Japanese box art would appear in the sequel as a character named "Teacher", and later became the series' mascot" - "Appeared" rather than "would appear"? Ditto for other places in the article where straight past tense would be more direct than a conditional verb form.

Images

• You may have trouble convincing image reviewers that four fair-use images in one article follow copyright law.
• The images lack alt text, meant for readers who cannot see the images. WP:ALT has details.

General

• The dabfinder tool at the top of this review pages finds eight links that go to disambiguation pages instead of their intended targets.

References

• Titles in all caps in the Reference section should be re-written in title case; e.g. ""PRESS START 2008 -SYMPHONY OF GAMES" in citation 59 should be "Press Start 2008-Symphony of Games". This is true even if the titles appear in all caps in the source documents.
• Page ranges take en dashes rather than hyphens.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 23:14, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 5 November 2009, 15:26 UTC)

---

[edit] Bob Willis

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm eventually hoping to go for FA, and I want a peer review of this first draft to iron out initial problems before moving for GA. I am aware thus far that the Commentary section needs expansion, the context of his career needs expanding in areas where only his scores etc. are discussed, and it needs a copy edit for grammar and spelling.

Thanks, SGGH ^ping! 13:58, 4 November 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I'll do as much as I can; so far I've checked out the lead and the first couple of sections, and done some copyedits. Some points for attention:-

• Lead
  • Remember that your potential readership includes those who don't speak cricket-ese, and won't understand terms that sound natural to you. Thus:-
    • "...325 wickets at 25.20" needs to be expanded to "325 wickets at 25.20 runs per wicket"
    • "8/43" needs to become "8 wickets for 43 runs". These longer formulations can be discarded after the first couple of times, when you can reasonably assume your readers know what you mean by the shorter versions
  • Don't rely on the link to explain "Ashes series". Add "against Australia" the first time an Ashes series in mentioned.
  • "national notoriety" means famous in a bad or detrimental way. This whole sentence needs to be reconstructed, along the lines: "He nevertheless continued to find success, taking a career best eight wickets for 43 runs, one of the all-time best Test bowling performances, in the famous 1981 Ashes series against Australia."
  • Suggest begin second paragraph: "In addition to his Test matches, Willis played 64 One Day International matches (ODI) for his country,"
  • Add an explanation of List-A, e.g. "a prolific List-A (one-day) cricketer,..."
  • He captained England "in", not "through" 18 Test matches - the 18 games were not consecutive.
  • "He formed a noted commentary partnership with Botham, however contrasting styles found Willis as a second string commentator from 2006 onwards." As written the sentence is not grammatical (comma should be either semicolon or full stop), but more importantly, it doesn't make its point clearly. "Contrasting style" doesn't seem a reason for demotion. How about something like: "He formed a noted commentary partnership with Botham; however, Willis's relatively low-key style, in contrast to Botham's ebullience, meant that from 2006 onwards Willis tended to be used as a second string commentator."
  • Last sentence, I'd say "broadcaster" rather than repeating "commentator".
• Early life
  • "at age six" is too American. "...at the age of six."
  • Something wrong with the grammar here: "His father was an employee of the BBC, and Willis an elder brother named David, and a younger sister, with whom he played cricket in the garden." Missing word or words? Needs fixing.
  • "...an avid schoolboy footballer..." I don't think "footballer" is adequate, seeing there are so many football codes. Best specify: "an avid schoolboy soccer player."

This article is written in British English, would that mean it ought to stay as football? SGGH ^ping! 10:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

The term "soccer" is quite OK in British English. Brianboulton (talk) 22:51, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

• County debut
  • "In 1968, Willis joined Middlesex and Surrey Young Cricketers in Pakistan to further hone his skills." How did this come about? As written it sounds as though Willis simply attached himself to a cricket tour for his own purposes. I imagine, however, that he was invited. So I suggest: "In 1968, Willis accepted an invitation to join Middlesex and Surrey Young Cricketers on tour in Pakistan, and used this opportunity to further hone his skills."
  • As this article is about cricket, can I request consistent use of English dating, i.e. 26 August not August 26?
  • "He played several further Second XI matches through May and June,..." We seem to have jumped a season here. We've just learned that he played for Surrey Seconds on 26 August and again two days later. So the next sentence should begin: "In the 1969 season Willis played several Second XI matches through May and June,..."
  • 6 August, not August 6 (take other requests for Eng dates as read), and give the year: 6 August 1969.
  • "Scotland were touring England that season and had already beaten Warwickshire when Willis took three wickets for 13 runs from 13 overs in his first innings, and two for 37 in his second, to help Surrey to victory by an innings and 97 runs." This is telescoping too much information into a single sentence, and also gives the wrong impression that Scotland were the major touring side that summer. In fact Scotland rarely play first-class matches. My advice would be to run on from the previous sentence thus: "before his first-class debut on 6 August against a touring side from Scotland. The tourists had already beaten Warwickshire when they faced Surrey, for whom Willis took three wickets for 13 runs in Scotland's first innings, and two for 37 in their second, to help Surrey to an easy victory."
  • Specify 22 first-class wickets, and 15th in the national first-class bowling averages

Changed the first, the second says "15th in the national averages for that season's County Championship" which specifies that it is the County Championship (i.e. not all FC matches) SGGH ^ping! 10:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

• • "Surrey came third that year." Say what they came third in.

Referenced to previous sentence SGGH ^ping! 10:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Second paragraph: needs to be date specific. Thus: "Willis had thus earned a second season at Surrey, and in 1970 played 14 Championship matches,..." etc
  • "280-5" → "280 for five wickets"; the rest of the innings score summaries in the paragraph can stand.

That's all I can do for the moment. I will try to get back later this evening, otherwise tomorrow. Brianboulton (talk) 21:49, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

I have sorted all your helpful comments, apart from the two under which I have made comments. Thanks for your help, it is useful to have a detailed run through. Cheers, SGGH ^ping! 10:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Continuing

-

• International beginnings
  • A footnote needs to explain that until 1997 English international cricket sids toured under the colours of the Marylebone Cricket Club

I can't even find that information in the Marylebone Cricket Club article. Will chec, SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• • I suggest that all not out scores are written as, say, "142 not out" rather than "142*" which non-cricketers won't understand.

General practice in other cricket FAs I have seen is to use "not out" for the first few examples, or * wikilinked to not out, and then use * for all remaining instances. I think this is what this article does too. SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• • In the second paragraph I suggest you preface the second sentence: "In the two remaining Tests, Willis took three wickets at the Adelaide Oval..." etc
  • Last sentence needs amending: there were two Tests played in New Zealand in Feb-March 1971. Willis played in the second, which was drawn.

Sorted, he only played one of them, the second. SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• Surrey to Warwickshire
  • The term "five-wicket haul" needs explaining to non-cricket people
  • "He was not selected for the 1972 Ashes series in England, and instead travelled to South Africa as part of DH Robins' invitation XI. The Robins tour in question was January-February 1973 when the Ashes season was long over, so his participation in the tour was an entirely separate venture, not an "instead".

My meaning was he spent the same winter season in SA. Will fix. SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Robins has a Wikipedia article and can be linked.

Ah,Derrick Robins, I have been looking for him. SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• • This doesn't make sense: "The West Indies, the more powerful team of the period,..." It would be grammatical to say either "The West Indies, one of the more powerful teamS of the period", or "The West Indies, the most powerful team of the period". However, neither of these statements would be remotely true. In 1973 West Indies had not won a Test series since 1966-67. They had lost series to England (twice), Australia (twice) and India, and had drawn with New Zealand twice. They had won none of their previous 20 matches. In other words, they were considered one of the weakest of the international sides at the time. The 1973 tour to England, however, proved a turning point for them.
  • "He did, however, make his ODI debut..." There's no "however" here. Simply, "He made his ODI debut..."
  • Jargon needs rewording: "Willis went wicketless and at 5.5 an over..."
• West Indies, sub-continent and Australia
  • Problem again with "top Test side". You could call them "rapidly-improving"
  • "he took only one wicket,[41] followed by three in the second,[42] and 1/100 in the final match." Why the change in representing his bowling for the final match?
  • Wikilink bowling average unless this has been done earlier.

I will link it in the lead. SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• • "Pakistan touring in early August, and Willis featured in one Test – taking one wicket for 133 runs – and one ODI where he took one wicket caught and bowled as Pakistan took a seven wicket victory." A very untidy sentence, needs serious attention.
  • "He played 13 Championship games for Warwickshire that season," - specify the season
  • "He was, however, playing with a growing injury and requiring several painkilling injections." How many "-ings" in a singlr sentence? Needs rephrasing.

I've done what I can, but the prose needs a lot of serious attention and I don't have the time at the moment to keep doing it. I'm away for five days from Sunday and I've got a great deal to do before then. It really does need someone with cricket nous to run through the rest and put the prose to rights. Plenty of good stuff here, given time and attention. Brianboulton (talk) 00:18, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments, very helpful. SGGH ^ping! 23:04, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Wednesday 4 November 2009, 13:58 UTC)

---

[edit] Suzuki Hayabusa

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm hoping the article can be brought up to the standards of GA or even FA with a reasonable amount of additional work. It would be useful to Wikipedia:WikiProject Motorcycling to have at least one article on a model of motorcycle that can serve as a guide for what we'd like to see for the hundreds of other articles we have on individual bike models.

The article is fairly global in scope, with the main topics not touched being:

• The Ben Roethlisberger motorcycle crash [1], with perhaps some additional mention of other celebrities with custom Hayabusas. To me that topic is a little too lacking in substance, and the custom section does mention that celebrity customers boost sales, without dwelling on it. The coverage on his bio page Ben Roethlisberger#Motorcycle accident seems sufficient, also.
• Female speed record holders such as Trillium Muir and Leslie Porterfield [2] [3]. There are other pages that can cover them in depth.
• The prominence of the Hayabusa in Sportbike Motorcycle Drag Racing could be included, but I think perhaps efforts there should be focused on improving the page Sportbike Motorcycle Drag Racing itself rather than Suzuki Hayabusa.

Any guidance on these topics or anything else is most appreciated.

The other burning issue is the copyright status of some of the photos of custom bikes. In the Commons Custom Hayabusa category there is one image nominated for deletion [4] and another in the parent Hayabusa category [5]. The problem is the use of copyrighted and trademarked logos or characters, which you can see in the photos over there is very common on custom bikes. I can see the reasoning there, but for me it creates a dilemma. If I wanted to include a selection of customized bikes to show the range of styles, I'd want several that use copyrighted material.

If I put them here on Wikipedia, could I argue Fair Use on any one photo? I'd have to be saying I think that one is indispensable for purposes of discussion and criticism, but that's not really the case, is it? I could remove the Spider-man or Alien bike and use Superman or Transformers in its place, so there is no single image that can't be substituted. I don't need a specific one, but to properly illustrate the topic, there needs to be a few. What I'm hoping to have is 4 or 5 examples on Wikipedia and at least a dozen at WikiMedia Commons, to best give the reader a good survey, but I'm not certain what the best way to do that is. Purging all potentially infringing photos of custom bikes would give a distorted view of the custom scene; at least half the bikes I've seen use somebody's logos or characters without permission.

I've listed this under Everyday Life because that includes motorsport and other forms of recreation. Other relevant categories are Engineering and technology and Social sciences and society.

Thanks, Dbratland (talk) 22:01, 2 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Midgrid (talk · contribs)

• Is there an article detailing the progression of fastest production motorbikes, like Fastest production car? If not, it could be worthwhile creation for the WikiProject.

• ⌛ Doing... I've added Fastest production motorcycle to Wikipedia:Requested articles/Applied arts and sciences/Transport#Motorcycles, and it's on my own to-do list as well.

• On the copyright issue, perhaps these two discussions concerning a car modified to resemble a Pokémon character may be of use.

• Thanks!

• I think the image used in the lead infobox, whilst aesthetically pleasing, doesn't show enough of the bike itself. I presume the fact that the photo was taken at Bonneville refers to the bike's reputation for top speed, but this isn't immediately apparent.

• ✗ Not done ...yet. I'm going to wait for more feedback on this. Some other editors seemed happy with it. My defense would be that the two infobox pictures serve the purpose of being a basic illustration of what the bike looks like, while the lead photo tries to cover more broadly what the article is about: the quest for speed, motorcycle competitions, and customizing your bike, and it shows a rider. The inanimate bike isn't notable solely on its own volition, but because of rider/consumers who made it notable.

• The sentence in the lead that begins with "Media reported values from 299 to 303 km/h for the speed agreement..." sounds a little awkward to me. I believe that it should be changed to "The media reported..." or "Media-reported values ranged from...".

• ✓ Done Reworded as "Media-reported values for the speed agreement in miles per hour were consistently 186 mph, while in kilometers per hour they varied from 299 to 303 km/h, which is typical given unit conversion rounding errors." I realized I never mentioned the consistency in the mph number, they always get that right but disagree about what that converts to.

• It seems a bit odd to me that the precise speed record and its gain from the previous record are given in the lead, but not the main body of the article, especially given the presence of the sentence "No previous motorcycle has broken the production model top speed record by such a margin".

• ✓ Done Changed to "No previous motorcycle has broken the production model top speed record by such a margin, 10 to 14 mph (16 to 23 km/h), depending on which measured speeds the source was relying on for the CBR1100XX and the GSX-1300R."

• I believe that some more technical terms can be linked in the first and second generation infoboxes; at the moment the comparison between the engine and transmission/suspension fields is quite striking in this respect.

• ✓ Done

• What does "∅" mean in the engine field of the first and second generation infoboxes?

• ✓ Done That's supposed to be the diameter symbol, representing Bore (engine), but I see now that ∅ is more correctly the empty set. I was trying to reduce clutter but it only adds confusion.

• I think the use of the phrase "speed king" might be a touch on the informal side for an encyclopaedia.

• ✓ Done

• "...the Hayabusa's handling was considered excellent for a machine of this class". Are hyper sport bikes usually difficult to ride? Could do with a little clarification here.
• "Bragging rights" could be linked, as there is an article on it(!). It depends how idiomatic the phrase is, which is something I'm not too sure about. There are a couple of other phrases that I would consider to be borderline in this respect, such as "losing face", "[speed war continuing] underground", referring to the bike's internals as being "under the skin" etc.

• ✗ Not done I'll solicit more feedback to get a better sense of how obscure these idioms are.

• The sentence "The agreement between them and the other brands has never been officially acknowledged by the manufacturers, though media sources report it via unnamed informants, and by testing the top speed of motorcycles known to be capable of exceeding the arbitrary maximum" could do with a citation.

• ✓ Done The citations just before and after this sentence are the main sources for this -- I just repeated the refs on the sentence as well as in the neighborhood.

• "...so 2001 and later Hayabusas had a steel instead of aluminum rear subframe, adding 10 pounds...". The weight gain should be converted, as the other weights in the article already are.

• ✓ Done

• "...US$13,425 in 2009 dollars" reads awkwardly due to the repetition of "dollars". I would recommend changing the phrase to something like "at 2009 prices". Is there any information available for other countries?

• ✓ Done and ⌛ Doing... There are very spotty sales figures. The data is mostly in proprietary market research reports that cost $500 to $2000. You have to just try to find a newspaper article that mentions sales. I'll add any I come across.

• I think it would be useful if the "Performance and measurements" tables were sortable, so the range between claimed values can be identified more easily.

• ✓ Done

• "Competition in the hyper sport bike segment...". Surely "market" would be a more suitable word?

• ✓ Done

• "This increased competition led to Suzuki lightly revising the GSX1300R for the 2008 model year, but delivering a large horsepower increase by fine-tuning the old engine's head, pistons and exhaust." The wording needs to be improved, as it first glance this sentence apparently contradicts itself. I would suggest changing "but delivering" to "which nevertheless delivered".

• ✓ Done

• "A redesign meant to strengthen the appearance without departing much found approval when presented to dealers and focus groups." Another sentence in which the wording could be improved. Departing much from what?

• ✓ Done

• "The target was to produce at the crankshaft more than 190 brake horsepower (142 kW)...". I would prefer "The target was to produce more than 190 brake horsepower (142 kW) at the crankshaft...".

• ✓ Done

• "Design of the new Hayabusa was done by Suzuki's Koji Yoshirua...". I would reword this to "The new Hayabusa was designed by Suzuki's Koji Yoshirua...".

• ✓ Done

• The first instance of "custom", in the planning subsection of the second generation section, should be linked to Custom motorcycle.

• ✓ Done

• "Engine changes were an increase in stroke by 2 mm..." could be changed to "Engine changes consisted of an increase in stroke by 2 mm...".

• ✓ Done

• The technical revisions section for the second generation is written in a mixture of past and present tense, and there are quite a few unconverted units in there as well.
• I found a couple of sentences separated by three spaces when correcting typos; there may be more elsewhere in the article.

• ✓ Done

• The burnout image should be cropped to remove the border.

✓ Done.

• Are any Japanese sales figures available? I imagine that Suzuki's home market would be of great significance. On a similar note, is there any evidence of whether or not the Hayabusa has affected Suzuki's total bike sales since its release?
• In India, why is the Tata Nano directly comparable to the Hayabusa? One is a microcar, the other a hyper sport bike.
• "Another top modification...". Again, this is a bit informal: I would prefer "favoured" or "most popular" instead.
• I would move the Commons link for custom Hayabusas to the bottom of the page, with the other Commons link.
• "The very popularity of lengthened and lowered Hayabusas means boundaries must be stretched and rules broken in order to get noticed." What does this mean, exactly? That some of the custom bikes are illegal? Could do with some clarification.
• "Lotus Seven-based Megabusa" makes it sound as if the vehicle is a bike based on the car. I would recaption the image "Megabusa-engined Lotus Seven".
• The paragraph on land speed records could do with an introductory sentence, along the lines of "Hayabusa engines have been used in motorcycle land speed record attempts".
• I would put the Japanese character 隼 in brackets. To be honest, I don't think that section belongs in the article in its current state: the information about the bike deriving its name from the bird could be included near the beginning of the article, and the remaining information moved to the dab page, with the hatnote moved to the top of the article.
• Does citation [39] cover the whole table or just the 2010 row? If it's the former case, then I would recommend putting the citation in a more general place, perhaps along the lines of the qualifying and race tables in this article.

That's just about all I can think of. I hope these comments are useful!--Midgrid(talk) 23:20, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks! I think I can do most of these tomorrow as soon as I'm feeling better (: .--Dbratland (talk) 19:20, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 2 November 2009, 22:01 UTC)

---

[edit] Philosophy and religion

[edit] Religion

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

STOP! Don't read this article!

Before you look at the dismal shape this article is in, I want you to imagine for me what questions you might have about the idea "religion", and what you would expect to see in an article about "religion". Reading this article will only confuse you. I have looked at it many times and it always confuses me. It is the center stage of a wonderful mixture of esoteric POV pushers, including individuals who have told me on the talk page that scholarly discussions of current issues in religious studies are far less important for the sake of a good "religion" article than promoting their personal POV battle. So, don't even look at it-- imagine it, as it exists in Platonic form, the Featured Article in your head. ANYONE reading this paragraph is welcome to add their comments here even if they don't want to do a full peer review. I am open to rewriting this from scratch.

Even after you look at it, please suggest radical revision. For example, who determined that a section called "religion and superstition" should be prominent in the article, instead of placed under "Related forms of thought"? Why is there no section named "religion and society", or "religion and politics"? I'm asking these questions myself, as a past contributor, because I'm only one voice and I want your input.

Alright, go ahead Shii (tock) 21:39, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: Taking you at your word and commenting without looking at the article, I'd expect it to address the basic "who, what, where, when" questions. The "what" would involve an extended definition of the word, "religion". Since the definition must come from reliable sources, it might actually turn out to be "definitions", and it might be necessary to report on major controversies involving the definitions. The "who" would involve naming and very briefly describing the most notable individuals and groups involved in religion(s). (This might be done as a table). The "where" would involve the geography of religion(s), possibly illustrated by a map. The "when" would involve the history of religions, perhaps reduced to a timeline. The topic is so enormous that I'd never attempt it myself. I don't see how it could be done except as a bare-bones summary of the who-what-where-when type, presented in a clinical way, without bias. Finetooth (talk) 05:28, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments! I think the point of the topic being enormous is quite important. I just realized that writing paragraph-long summaries of subjects like "religion and superstition", "religion and society", or "religion and politics" is an immense task that this article should not even try to cover. I'll have to bring that up on the talk page. Shii (tock) 21:37, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Further Finetooth comments: You are most welcome. I waited two days and then read the article, and I have just a few other thoughts, mostly about form but one about content.

Biased content

• "The word "religion" as it is used today does not have an obvious pre-colonial translation into non-European languages. The history of other cultures' interaction with the religious category is therefore their interaction with an idea that first developed in Europe under the influence of Christianity." - On the face of it, this is an extraordinary claim sourced to a single author. It would be easy to object to this claim on grounds that it seems to suggest that before colonization by Western nations, other nations and cultures had no religion. Other writers might well disagree, and, if they do, they should be represented here too. This claim might be interpreted in some other way, but it segues into a discussion of the meaning of Christianity, and a reader might wonder why an article on religion in general has so quickly become a discussion of one particular Western religion. In the first paragraph of the discussion of Christianity, a sentence says, "What we would call religion today, they would only call "law". Big oops! Who is "we", and who is "they"? Whatever else the article might be, it isn't neutral if it divides the world into "we" and "they". I think the working definition at the beginning of the article needs to be broad enough to encompass all religions in all times and places. I don't think you can start with the Romans or simply the etymology of the English word, "religion" without introducing a Western bias from the start.

Form

• The lead should be a succinct summary of the whole article. If you imagine a reader who can read nothing but the lead, you can envision what the lead needs to be. A good rule of thumb is to at least mention each of the main text sections. This lead isn't a summary at all but rather an extended definition. I'd suggest moving the definition into the first main text section. Then the lead could be wholly re-written as a summary or abstract.
• Large chunks of the article are unsourced. A good rule of thumb is to include a source for every set of statistics, every direct quotation, every claim that has been challenged or is apt to be challenged, and every paragraph.
• Bolding is used sparingly in Wikipedia articles. Most of the extra bolding in "Specific religious movements" should be removed. Please see WP:MOSBOLD for details.
• The editing tags that challenge certain sections or statements need to be addressed.
• Images should be placed so that they do not displace section heads or overlap sections.
• Lists such as the one in "Myths" should be rendered as straight prose.

I hope these comments prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 22:22, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 9 November 2009, 21:39 UTC)

---

[edit] Kanhopatra

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

The article passed GA recently in October. The GA reviewer User:Nemonoman not only gave the article a through review but also copyedited the text and improved the article in the course of the review. This article about a Hindu saint-poet, who was a courtesan by profession and a prostitute's daughter. Only 30 of her poems have survived and little is known about her history. We know her only through legends and few poems left by her. Though the Prose size (text only) is 10 kB (1737 words) "readable prose size", IMO it is comprehensive due to the above reasons. I want the reviewers to examine the text for FA criteria WP:FA?. It was difficult to get English references that narrate her tale in detail, so references from Marathi dailies and magazines are used.

Thanks a lot, Redtigerxyz ^Talk 05:30, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Quick comment: I haven't read the complete article yet, but looking at the sources, I think objections with regards to FAC criterion 1c may be raised. In particular, the following points would need to be clarified:

• Why is a newspaper article a authoritative enough source on the subject to be cited ~20 times. If you can argue that Madhavi Kunte is some sort of expert on the subject, then this should be ok.

If you notice the reference used for the legend, in places the reference is used with other references that tell the same legend ([1][10][11]) In these cases, [1] can be removed. Maharashtra Times is the Marathi newspaper owned The Times Group, who publishes the Times of India.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Ditto for the Lokpraha (redlink!) article.

An red link does not meet that newspaper may not a reliable reference. It is a Marathi magazine published by Indian Express Group, which runs the The Indian Express, which runs Loksatta in Marathi. NOTE: Lokprabha article is hosted on Loksatta site. Other prominent Marathi newspapers like Samana and NAVSHAKTI and magazines like Maher do not have wiki-articles. The Mumbai University lists Prahaar, Maharashtra Times, Loksatta, Samana as the top media in Mumbai. [6]--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

The articles on Kanhopatra in Marathi newspapers are from special Ashadhi Ekadashi (the biggest festival of the Varkaris) columns that newspaper run around the time of the festival. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:24, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• Are the Vithoba temple websites reliable sources for biographical information on the subject, or should they be regarded as reliable sources only for the devotees' POV, in which case they need to be cited with attribution.

As said there is no "reliable" history of Kanhopatra, her history is mingled with her legend - devotees' POV. It depicts a version of the traditional tale. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:20, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Why is this website a reliable source ? Who is the publisher ?

Temporarily removed. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Same question for this website.

This reference can be replaced with the movies or movie cassette cover as the reference as they provide the same information. This reference was added to avoid trouble of the reader to go and find the movie cassettes. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Sellergren lists Ranade (1988), Tulpule (1979), Vanita (1989), Ghanananda and Stewart-Wallace (1979), and Abbott and Godbole (1934-1935) as sources on Kanhopatra (and related saints). The article references Abbott and Godbole but doesn't use any of the other sources.

Ranade (Ranande, R.D. (1999) [1933]. Mysticism in Maharashtra. Motilal Banarsidass Publ. http://books.google.co.in/books?id=73vbTVsPga0C&pg=RA1-PA208&dq=kanhopatra&lr=&as_brr=3&client=firefox-a#PRA1-PA208,M1.) and Abbott and Godbole (Mahīpati; Abbott, Justin Edwards; Godbole, Narhar R. (1988). "39". Stories of Indian Saints: An English Translation of Mahipati's Marathi Bhaktavijaya.) are used. Bhaktivijaya and Bhaktalilaamrita - both by Mahipati - are the only primary written sources of the life-stories of Varkari saints apart from their own abhnaga poetry. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:11, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Vanita (1989) "Three Women Saints of Maharashtra: Muktabai, Janabai, Bahinabai" Kanhopatra is not the central topic of the article. The Sellergren article discusses Janabai as well as Kanhopatra. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:20, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

These objections are not insurmountable (for example, it may be the case that Ranade's book doesn't contain anything that Sellergen's article doesn't, since the latter is based upon and possibly expands the former), but at an FAC review you'll need to be prepared to defend (1) the reliability and quality of the sources used, and (2) comprehensiveness of the sources (i.e., no significant sources have been left out.)

This is just a high level comment about an issue that is of increasing importance at FACs. I'll take a more fine-grained look at the article over the next few days and add my comments here. Abecedare (talk) 06:27, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Anish

• In the first line I would suggest replacing Maharashtrian with Marathi. Marathi makes more sense and the word Maharashtra and Maharashtrian coame in existence only after 1960s.
• The section on Life seems to be too long. I suggest that it be sub-divided into into something like: Early Life, Path to devotion and death. The heading Details of Kanhopatra's life are uncertain should come as a sub-section and merged with death sub-section. These headings are just suggestion as a starting point and something better can be incorporated.

Done. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Redlinks are looking a bit odd. I suggest that try to create atleast a stubs for these redlink.

The redlinks in Vithoba compelled me to start this article. Stubs will be created for links.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:03, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Created stubs. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I will be giving more comments later as and when I find to review it.--Anish (talk) 07:25, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• What is a a tarati tree. Is it same as Tarata tree. Then we can link it. Some detail or link should be given for this tree and its uncommon name arouses some curosity.--Anish (talk) 10:26, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Tarati (तरटी) is a Marathi name of a plant. In Sanskrit, tarati is name of a thorny plant. Could not find its scientific name. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• Translation of phrases like Nako Devaraya Anta Aata and Patita tu pavanahe in brackets would be appreciated by the reader and would add value to the article.--Anish (talk) 10:30, 10 November 2009 (UTC)
• The sentence:"Kanhopatra is formally included in the list of Sants, meaning saints in Marathi" needs some clarification. If it is formally, then by whom—by some organisation or some church etc.--Anish (talk) 10:36, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Clarified. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 11:53, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

• This sentence:"Kanhopatra is considered unique since she is the only prominent Maharashtrian woman without a traditional family" is likely to be challenged and needs some reference. Again, I would word it like-"Kanhopatra is considered unique since she is the only prominent woman in Maharashtra who rose to fame/sainthood without a traditional family backing."--Anish (talk) 10:41, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Reworded. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 12:01, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment from Nemonoman I was very pleased to be the GA reviewer, because it seemed to me that with very little additional effort, this pleasant article could be polished to be at GA status. To get it to FA status will, I think, be a bigger effort.

I'm not very familiar with the subject, but I'm with the editors above in seeing that there the sources are not very varied nor very impressive. I don't know if there are other sources that might be cited, but without a larger variety, I think FA will be hard. The content will probably need to be expanded if the article is to be an FA, answering through additional information some of the questions it suggests:

About the expansion: Ælfheah of Canterbury is much shorter and still a FA. FA demands only comprehensiveness, not length. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Maybe, but I wouldn't pass it at current depth, as it seems less substantial than most FAs. Compare with Vithoba: that's FA substance, IMO.. --Nemonoman (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Variations in the legends -- how the story has changed over time

No evidence that the story has changed over time. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:16, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Ok, then, smartypants, you describe 2 versions of death . How did that happen? --Nemonoman (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Various sources tell various tales. They include Bhaktivijaya (penned about 300 yrs after her death) and oral narratives among the Varkaris. This is often the case in Hinduism, there are multiple versions of a legend, take the example of Ganesha - there are at least 3-4 versions of his birth. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 17:19, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• More (short) examples of her poetry -- and music snippets if possible

I can add more snippets of translations of her poetry. Where should I add it and how many more are needed. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

To be used artfully: particular haunting or popular phrases, or something every Vakari might be expected to know and recite, or something that a scholar has commented on, etc. Her legacy is her poetry: let's show that off a bit...--Nemonoman (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• More pictures -- I'm sure SOMEBODY has a picture of the tree, forbidden as that might be

Photography in major Hindu temples is forbidden for a long, long time. Photography is only allowed in expectational cases such as for books and for creating photo frames of the principal deities.--Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes but for my research I took pictures inside temples and everyone was too polite to complain about the ignorant balding middle-aged American tourist. I'm sure some exist. --Nemonoman (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Also: A small shrine is also dedicated to her in her home town Mangalvedhe. Nobody in Mangalvedhe has a cellphone camera? Surely an exterior shot of that is a possiblity --Nemonoman (talk) 16:37, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• Discussion of her literary or spiritual influence by scholarly sources

Her spiritual influence is covered in "Legacy and remembrance", she does not have her literary influence per the sources. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 16:26, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

• More about her popular influence: Amar Chitra Katha, I'm sure. Etc.

Kanhopatra is not pan-Indian, she is restricted to the Varakari faith in Maharashtra. --Redtigerxyz ^Talk 15:34, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Well then about THAT influence. --Nemonoman (talk) 16:32, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

As is, the article whets one's appetite for information, but leaves me at least wanting more.

If additional content gets added, as I hope it will, then additional copyediting will also be needed to bring this article to the standard of "the best Wikipedia has to offer". I will be very pleased to lend a hand on that effort. RedT., I applaud you for your determination to get this article to GA, which took a lot of work, and I admire your initiative to try to get it to FA. For my own part, I regard the FA process as inherently flawed, and very frustrating. Do not take FA review comments personally -- not even mine! -- because in many respects FA reviewers talk about what they WISH they could see rather than what they is actually in the article. FA criteria are very subjectively judgemental -- what exactly is the best writing? -- and difficult to quantify. So you end up competing with the imaginations and opinions of editors, good or bad, and how is one to compete with that? Anyway--good luck and keep me in the loop. --Nemonoman (talk) 11:47, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 6 November 2009, 05:30 UTC)

---

[edit] Andrew Sledd

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review
Automated suggestions can be generated on demand (more info).

I'm part of the Wikiproject University of Florida, and I've been tasked with rewriting the biographies of the university's presidents, and then to apply that collected knowledge to the expansion and rewriting of the article covering the history of the university. I've listed this article for peer review because I have substantially expanded it beyond the original stub article, and I would like to understand the category "A" article and feature article requirements better as I continue to rewrite, expand and properly source the other dozen or so articles for which I am responsible.

Thank you for your assistance, Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 03:22, 22 September 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is broad in coverage, generally well-written, stable and neutral, and has two nice illustrations. I have a fair number of suggestions related to style guidelines and some other suggestions as well.

Lead

• MOS:INTRO says in part, "The lead section should briefly summarize the most important points covered in an article in such a way that it can stand on its own as a concise version of the article." The existing lead is an introductory paragraph rather than a summary. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of each of the main text sections.

Professor, Emory College and the "Sledd Affair

• "Although Sledd's essay supported the continuation of racial segregation under the "separate but equal" doctrine, a public firestorm ensued in Georgia, stoked by the vitriolic letters and editorial attacks of agrarian populist Rebecca Felton published in the Atlanta Constitution newspaper." - Although most U.S. readers would guess from reading this subsection that Rebecca Felton and others denounced Sledd because they favored lynching (if they actually said this) as a means of suppressing African-Americans, foreigners might think they denounced him because he supported racial segregation. It might be helpful to amend this section slightly with a non-U.S. audience in mind and to make the essence of the controversy unmistakable. (It becomes more clear later in the article, but I think it should be made clear from the outset.) Direct quotations might be one way to do this if you can find representative examples, perhaps from Sledd and Felton. The quote in citation 8 might do for Sledd, or perhaps something longer would be better. Anything of four lines or more can be set off in blockquotes. See WP:MOSQUOTE for details.

General

• The article includes quite a lot of overlinking of the sort described by WP:OVERLINK. For example, the first two links in the lead both go to University of Florida, and the second two go to History of the University of Florida. Readers will assume that the links are meaningful but will discover that the second of each pair is not meaningful. To enhance the value of the wikilinks, redundancies should be avoided. I'd be inclined to link University of Florida only once in the entire article. Ditto for Methodist, Emory University, Board of Control, and many others. In addition, I don't think you need to add the linked places like Emory to the "See also" list.

• Date ranges and page ranges anywhere in the article, including the citations, take en dashes rather than hyphens.

• It's possible to over-reference. It's not necessary to provide a source for every sentence, especially if the sentence in question contains nothing controversial, no statistics, and no direct quotations. For example, the second paragraph of the "First President, University of the State of Florida" section consists of five sentences, all sourced to the same document. One at the very end of the paragraph would be sufficient to cover the whole paragraph. I'd suggest culling refs that aren't truly necessary. (I realize that deciding which are needed and which are not can be subjective and tricky).

• It's a good idea to use short, snappy heads and subheads and not to repeat the same words multiple times in the heads. Thus, perhaps "Scholar and teacher" would be a slightly better head for section 2, and the subheads could be shortened to "Emory College and the Sledd Affair", "University of Florida at Lake City", etc.

• Wikipedia normally doesn't use "Dr." as a title. (See WP:CREDENTIALS). Thus, the Dr. in the infobox should be deleted, and constructions such as "the son of a Methodist Episcopal minister, Dr. Robert Newton Sledd" should also drop the "Dr."

Images

• The Sledd Hall image should be re-sized downward. It's too big and on my computer screen overlaps two sections. I'd suggest tinkering with the size until the image fits within a single section and looks good.

• Featured articles must have alt text as well as captions. Alt text describes image content to readers who can't see the images. Although you might not have to have alt text for GA, it's a good idea to add it as a service to this group of readers. WP:ALT has details, and you can always visit WP:FAC to see how other editors are handling alt text questions.

Bibliography

• If available, book data should include ISBNs. The older books won't have any, but something like Dictionary of Georgia Biography most likely will.

References

• I noticed something odd in this sequence of sentences in the University of the State of Florida section: "Sledd's role was instrumental in the formation and ultimate success of the new university, but his tenure as its president was a relatively short four years.[22] His political support came to an end with the retirement of Governor Broward, and the inauguration of the new governor, Albert Gilchrist, in January of 1909.[22] The Florida Board of Education, which oversaw the Board of Control, made no secret of its desire to replace Sledd,[22]" Although these are sourced to an article about Buckman Hall, the article does not seem to mention Sledd's tenure, Governor Broward, and so on. It would be good to check the citations to make sure that they directly support the claims they are attached to.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 01:44, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for your comments, Finetooth. I am just running out the door to my day job, but I will begin to respond to your comments and make suggested changes this weekend. Dirtlawyer1 (talk) 13:20, 2 October 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 22 September 2009, 03:22 UTC)

---

[edit] Social sciences and society

[edit] Murder of Teresa de Simone

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because… I helped take this article to GA Status and going over it again I believe that it could qualify for FA status and would like input from other wiki editors. Particularly I want to make sure I satisfy criterion 1a and 1b.

However I will point out one major problem with this article and that is that information related to Teresa de Simone simply doesn't exist prior to her murder! I can't find any biographical information in regards to her that isn't related to the murder, I can't even find her year of birth let alone date. It seems bizarre that this (even basic) information doesn't appear to exist anywhere that I can find, whilst I absolutely respect the rights of the family to their privacy, anonymity and grief I'm surprised that none of the refs in the article have mentioned this information.

We also need to be mindful that Sean Hodgson is still alive and so WP:BLP most definitely applies and that the sections relevant to him (particularly since is undoubtedly innocent) should be upheld to the highest standards.

Thanks, Sanguis Sanies (talk) 17:46, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 27 November 2009, 17:46 UTC)

---

[edit] Monarchy of Spain

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because…

My eyes have been on it too long and not enough views that have generated comments! lol. I have watched the page for a year looking to see if there were improvements, but none. So, this past summer I started editing the artical answering questions that I would have for the Spanish monarchy. There are other sections I wish to add, but before I go further I wished to get comments on what is present.

Thanks, ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 07:05, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Two days ago I considerably reorganized the article, but it was returned to a previous version as Drachenfyre and I don't fully agree on all aspects of how the article should be organized and focused. Hopefully this review can bring in different ideas and perspectives. Ltwin (talk) 07:21, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

Lt, list your concerns as a peer review so we may work on them! :) ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 04:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments by an odd name (help honey) Mainly if going for featured article status (and one should try to at least aim for that), but may also apply to good article status, article accessibility, and general policy as well.

• Fix the dab links and loopback link. Would you want to be forced to pick from a list of same-named articles, or click a link to the article you're already on?
• There's at least two dead external links. Use WebCite to retain URLs if they often go dead after you add them.
  • Speaking of links, make sure citations are consistently formatted. Do so quickly, before the article expands to an unmanageable mess.
• The images have no alt text. Try to at least add a brief alt whenever a new image is added. The dynastic line in "History" should, at the very least, have an alt that says roughly how many royals have preceded the current one.
  • On that note, I'm not convinced the dynastic line image in "History" is actually Iacobuslatinus's work—the "1"s in the right-side corners with the crown on top suggests it's a page from another source. If it is from a pamphlet or poster with no copyright, it should be labeled so, and not licensed (there is no right to do so). Such copyright problems can delay or deny promotion.

Gods I would hate to lose that image, but after looking at other posts, I tend to agree now. I'll shoot him a pm for clairification, will remove in mean time :( ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:42, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• "The concept of lèse majesté ("lesa majestad") exists in Spanish jurisprudence, as in other legal systems, which is the crime or offense violating the dignity of the head-of-state, or against The State, which in Article 56 of the Constitution the Spanish monarch and the dignity of the Spanish State are one and the same; "The King is Head of State, the symbol of its unity and permanence" (El Rey es el Jefe del Estado, símbolo de su unidad y permanencia)"—tl;dr. Split the sentence and explain what lèse majesté is right after ("lesa majestad"). Check for such long, rambly sentences throughout—educate, don't confuse.

Broke sentence into two, and looking for others. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:19, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• Is "¿Por qué no te callas?", a relatively modern event, really relevant to the main article about the monarchy throughout history? "King Juan Carlos may have breached lèse majesté himself" does not convince me it's important—it's unsourced and original research.

I removed this section, it is an event in 2007 but does not deserve this much detail now. Also, though I wrote that the king "may have breeched"... it does seem more like OR now that I reread the section. So removed. ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Some things to avoid (added on 05:37, 27 November 2009 (UTC)):

• Short paragraphs. Combine single sentences and two-sentence paragraphs near each other. Do the same for small article sections. This makes the article smoother to read.
• Multiple uses of the same ref for the same statement.
• Linking to YouTube videos unless you are completely sure they are authored and uploaded by a reliable source—don't link to unauthorized copies of someone else's video! If in doubt, just delete them all.

Will do! But what a find in an of themselves!♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:42, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

• "Ibid." for citations—they get moved and deleted often.

--an odd name (help honey) 22:33, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks AnOddName! Much to soak in, which I am working on right now! I see your points! ♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 04:23, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Guidence requested:

I must admit that I am uncertin when to use the origional language, in this case Spanish, when referencing technical terms and names. I am now looking it up in the Wiki style guide, but might anyone comment to the use of foreign terms and languages in the artical?♦Drachenfyre♦·Talk 05:15, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Coming from WP:ITALICS: "Wikipedia prefers italics for phrases in other languages and for isolated foreign words that do not yet have everyday use in non-specialised English." Mm40 (talk) 17:36, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 23 November 2009, 07:05 UTC)

---

[edit] Union College

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because editors UpstateNYer and Eliphaletnott have been busy substantially updating the article over the past few months. They requested an informal peer review on WP:Universities#Peer_review in September and WT:UNI in October, but further comments from a wider audience would be appreciated.

Thanks, Mabeenot (talk) 19:45, 22 November 2009 (UTC)

Quick comments: These aren't thorough suggestions, so I'm not taking it off the unreviewed notice at the top (where it might attract someone else's attention), but I might come back later.

• First off, nice work in just a few months!
• Images need alt text per WP:ALT
• Check the disambig & external links. Several disambig pages are linked, and, when I checked, there was one dead link and (I believe) one ref that needed an access date.
• Can something like what the Family Guy article has done with its voice cast (scroll down a bit) be done with the Minerva system pics?
• The all caps sayings in Seal and motto should be lowercase, per WP:ALLCAPS, and italicized per Foreign terms

Nice work! Liquidluck (talk) 07:45, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 22 November 2009, 19:45 UTC)

---

[edit] Lock-in (decision-making)

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it will improve the quality of the article.

Thanks, Cccantarelli (talk) 11:51, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Note: See banners on article. It is not yet developed to a state that warrants a peer review and should be withdrawn. Brianboulton (talk) 00:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: While I agree this does not meet the criteria for peer review, here are some suggestions for improvement.

• As currently written this article does not meet the Manual of style criteria. It lacks a lead section to start.
• The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article - nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
• WP:HEAD says not to repeat the title of the article in section headers
• Much of the article is so jargon-filled that I can not really follow it / understand what it is about.
• Most of the last two sections have no refs. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
• Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase
• Ref 8 does not criteria for reliable sources as it has not yet been published.
• Given the user name of the editor who wrote this and the first author of ref 8, I think there may be a conflict of interest here.
• See also is generally not for links that are already in the article

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:56, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 10 November 2009, 11:51 UTC)

---

[edit] National Youth Leadership Training

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I have added substantial content to it over the past few weeks. It is comprehensive, well-sourced, relatively well-written, and otherwise appears ready for a GA review. But I'm sure there remains room for improvement.

Thanks, -- btphelps ^{(talk) (contribs)} 00:49, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article and while it is clear that a lot of work has gone into it, I am not sure it is ready yet for WP:GAN. Here are some suggestions for improvement.

• The tools in the box at upper right show two disambiguation links, four dead external links used as references, and no alt text for the one image - see WP:ALT. I would recommend fixing all of these before GAN
• The lead seems a bit short to me - it should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
• Avoid vague time terms like currently in Youth leadership training is currently conducted at three levels, with a possible fourth under development:[1] It is better to say either something like "As of 2009, youth leadership training is conducted at three levels,..." or perhaps "Youth leadership training has been conducted at three levels since 19xx, with a possible fourth under development as of 2009." (put in the year for 19xx obviously)
• The lead (and article) need to give a clearer understanding of the program to someone who is not already familiar with it. It was not until the fifth sentence of the first paragraph of the third overall section (Origins) that I finally was sure this was for boys, and not adult leaders.
• Wikipedia articles need references that are from independent, third-party sources as much as possible - almost all of the sources here are from the Boy Scouts and not independent. What have third-party sources written about this program? See WP:RS
• Article needs more references in at least one spot, the first paragraph of Origins has no refs, nor does the end of the Course contents modifed section. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
• Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. Current REf 34 (description of NYLT) is from the Rip van Winkle Council and this needs to be added as the publisher. See WP:CITE and WP:V
• Ref 36 does not appear to meet WP:RS at all (discussion boards and blogs are not usually reliable sources)
• Avoid excessive detail - does the reader really need the names of all the local attendees in the paragraph starting The local attendees also represented the top council leadership.? See WP:NN
• Article has serious WP:OVERLINKing issues. For example Béla H. Bánáthy is linked four times in the article and White Stag Leadership Development Program is linked 8 times, but each only needs to be linked twice (lead and first appearance in body of the article)
• Also try to avoid needless repetition - do we need to be told Herold Hunt was a professor at Harvard twice? Or that Bela taught Hungarian twice?
• Section headers do not really follow WP:HEAD
• Article needs a copyedit to polish the prose

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 05:28, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Friday 6 November 2009, 00:49 UTC)

---

[edit] Court of Session (Scotland)

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I have extensively rewrote this article, and would welcome feedback on how it could be further improved. Comments that also address the question of whether it could achieve FA status would be especially welcome. Thanks, AGK 22:59, 5 November 2009 (UTC)

A bit of the infobox text appears wrongly written. "Composition method: Appointed by Monarch with name presented Prime Minister—with the advice of the First Minister of Scotland..." What does that mean? Names of possible appointees are presented (i.e. submitted) by the Prime Minister, or the names of the appointed are submitted to the Prime Minister for final approval? There is a big difference in the two. And either way suggests they are all political or royal appointees, which they are not (I hope). Meowy 16:04, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

That should be "presented by the Prime Minister". Vacancies in judicial office are filled by the Monarch, so that parameter of the infobox is otherwise correct (if clumsily worded). Cf this web page. Thanks for contributing, Meowy; most peer reviews take some weeks before they are given attention! AGK 01:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks, happy to help a little. For the infobox, isn't it really only a symbolic Royal appointment, and also only a symbolic presentation? The Queen can't decide to say "no", and the Prime Minister hasn't personally decided "I want so-and-so for the position of judge, but I don't want what's-his-name". Shouldn't the text be changed a bit to reflect that (same for the High Court of Justiciary article)? I'm just thinking that the impression shouldn't be given that senior judges in Scotland are political appointees. Meowy 03:21, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Cptnono

• I don't know much about different court systems so am not the best judge of such an article. As someone who knows so little, this article appears to be a great backbone with factual sources and is well linked to other pages discussing the overall system. However, some of these Wikilinks might be better explained in the text to provide a one stop read for the reader. You obviously don't want to go into too much detail but I found my self navigating away from the page more than I would have liked.
• I noticed that there is information covered in the lead and not the main body of the article.
  • Should a new section be devoted to judges or can that be worked into the existing prose?
    • In particular, 4 women judges is made to look remarkable. Could a line be added explaining the situation (how, when, etc)?
    • Are the other note worthy aspects of the judges?
• History seems too light. The court has been around for sometime and you make it clear that it has mainly stayed the same but the summary of that many centuries in such a concise manner was surprising. You only have so many sources available, of course.
  • Does a source go into detail on why King James V started it? What was the first case? Any response to its founding?
  • Any big cases in its time?
• Location. What other physical buildings has it occupied?
• Does source #3 need "(in English)"
• I didn't see a manual of style for structure of such articles at Wikipedia:WikiProject Law. They do list some current GAs that might help with ideas: Oregon Supreme Court, Supreme Court of Indiana, Gun Court.

Nice work and good idea on the recent rewrite.Cptnono (talk) 01:59, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you for your comments, Cptnono. Your input is appreciated. I've added this review to my list of stuff to work on for this article. Hopefully your points will be addressed soon. :-) Best, AGK 22:01, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

• Update 

  A good article status review of this article is currently open. Any input would probably be more useful if directed there: Talk:Court of Session/GA1. Thanks, AGK 22:02, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
  

(Peer review added on Thursday 5 November 2009, 22:59 UTC)

---

[edit] History

[edit] Hemming's Cartulary

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to FAC at some point, and am wondering if (a) it's too complex for the lay reader who isn't a medievalist, i.e. does it lack context to make the average reader able to understand it and (b) is there anything that is still lacking as far as "expected" information?

Thanks, Ealdgyth - Talk 19:29, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 24 November 2009, 19:29 UTC)

---

[edit] Byzantine Greeks

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it has seen some work lately and could benefit from a critical eye. Looking forward to hearing opinions on how to improve it. Hopefully this will set it on its way to GA status soon enough. I am looking for general hints and tips, as well as people spotting major flaws that are not apparent to me.

Thanks, Anothroskon (talk) 15:41, 24 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Peer review by Monsieurdl

• The first thing that I noticed is the superlative use of referencing through inline citations, as well as a varied amount of sources. That to me shows a lot of care and pride in getting it right. My only criticism in the area of references is that there are too many in certain paragraphs that reference the same page, such as in the Women section. If you can, use the reference for a couple of sentences, and not every single sentence if the page is the same.

• Your reference number 57 in the Greco-Roman heritage section is extremely clunky. The inline citation tags really aren't meant for lists, so I would suggest splitting up your two best references and retaining them under a [57] and a [58] after the sentence.

• The lead is well written and concise, but the information presented doesn't appear in the article at all, and it is unreferenced. If you are going to make statements in the lead, them must either be referenced or the information must appear in the article and referenced there. I have no idea where I could find that historiography defines the meaning of Byzantine/Byzantine Greek, or that Sir George Finlay introduced the terms to the world.

• The Clergy section needs more information- it seems sparse as compared to the other sections.

• The descriptions of almost all of the images are stilted and don't flow right- I would improve upon them, and make them one sentence if possible. Image size may also be an issue as some are a bit small. Also, placing a couple on the left would help the look of it (just my opinion there).

• Overall, your article is outstanding! With a few minor tweaks, it could very well be a highly-rated article. I was very impressed- great work! Monsieurdl ^{mon talk} 19:43, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to read through the article and make recommendations for improvement. It is much appreciated. I will begin implementing your suggestions immediately. Once again thank you.--Anothroskon (talk) 20:00, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Tuesday 24 November 2009, 15:41 UTC)

---

[edit] List of College of William & Mary alumni

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I think there has been a significant improvement to the article since it was rejected for FL status. I started working on this article earlier this month and have made some pretty good changes, I think.

First, I have removed some things that were flatly incorrect. For example, this article used to say that there were sixteen signers of the Declaration of Independence from the College; there were four. It used to say that George Washington was an alum; he only received a surveyors license from the College in its administrative capacity, but he never took courses at the College. Things like that.

Second, I have worked to make the list comprehensive within the existing categories. For example, when it was last submitted for FL status, it left off one of the College's four Supreme Court justices! I have also doubled the list of ambassadors, increased the number of U.S. Congressmen from 8 to 96, doubled the number of U.S. senators, increased the number of Speakers of the House, doubled the number of Major League baseball players, etc.

Third, the list had some real organization problems. Members of the list were included the wrong sections (U.S. Congressmen were listed in the section for state representatives) and U.S. senators were inserted in "Other" sub-lists with no mention of their real notability.

Fourth, I have tried to improve the cites used. The previous list appears to have been pretty much block and copied from the College's own alumni organization page. As a result, the majority of cites were back to that one page. I tried to improve cites, for example, by tying into the U.S. Congressional biographies. Doing so not only documents the W&M connection, but it also documents the entrant's notability.

Fifth, I reorganized the sub-lists and added, adding some categories and merging others. The overall structure of the list is much better now.

Sixth, I have tried to standardize all of the many entries. For example, I have edited the whole list to make notes about spans of years consistent as well as capitalization and ordering of details on entrants.

Now, with that long wind-up in place, here is my pitch. I'd appreciate any sort of feedback on anything. This is my first request for peer review on an article, so any feedback would be great. I envision making some changes based on that feedback and then submitting it once again for a better peer review before submitting it for Featured List status.

So, with that, I'll toughen up my skin and await the feedback!

Thanks, ProfReader (talk) 18:49, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 23 November 2009, 18:49 UTC)

---

[edit] Accurate News and Information Act

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I'm looking to bring this to WP:FAC before too terribly long, and I'd like whatever feedback I can get before that. All comments are welcome, but I'm specifically wondering about the article's scope and the weight it assigns things: it's about the Act, but there's much more material about the context surrounding the Act than there is about the Act itself. There's only so much you can say about an Act that never received royal assent, but I'm still wondering if this could be handled better. Steve Smith (talk) 18:49, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is fascinating and very well-done. I think the background material is essential rather than excessive, and I don't think you should pare it down. I note a few nit-picky things below, but otherwise it seems ready for FAC.

Lead

• "Even the American media... " - Maybe "U.S." instead of "American"? I'm not sure that "American" is understood globally to mean "U.S."

Before the 1935 election

• "The boycott was successful to the extent that it drove at least one newspaper out of business." - Which one?
• Usually blockquotes are of at least four lines on a computer screen. This one is only three on my screen. It might work better embedded in the text inside quotation marks.
• "So frustrated were the Social Crediters with the newspapers' hostility in the run-up to the election, that in 1934 they founded their own, the Alberta Social Credit Chronicle, printed by the Albertan, to spread its side of the story." - "their side" rather than "its side"?

Post-election

• "The other newspapers criticized him for using what was nominally a gospel program... " - Wikilink gospel?
• "with the Accurate News and Information Act figuring prominently on its order paper" - Wikilink order paper or briefly explain it in parentheses since the Order Paper article doesn't mention Canada even though it probably should?

The Act

• To avoid "The" to begin a section head and to avoid repeating "Act", a main word of the article title, maybe "Legislation" would be better.
• "The second round included a drastic new tax on banks and the Accurate News and Information Act." - Since the tax didn't apply to the Act, it might be more clear to flip this sentence, thus: "The second round included the Accurate News and Information Act and a drastic new tax on banks."
• "Non-compliance would result in fines of up to $1,000 per day, and prohibitions on the publishing of the offending newspaper, of stories by offending writers, or of information emanating from offending sources." - Tighten to "Non-compliance would result in fines of up to $1,000 per day and would prohibit offending newspapers from publishing stories by offending writers or information from offending sources"?
• "Lieutenant-Governor John C. Bowen, mindful of the federal government's disallowance of the Social Credit Board's earlier legislation, reserved royal assent of the Act and its companions until their legality could be tested at the Supreme Court of Canada, the first use of the power of reservation in Alberta history." - A bit too complex. Suggestion: "Lieutenant-Governor John C. Bowen, mindful of the federal government's disallowance of the Social Credit Board's earlier legislation, reserved royal assent of the Act and its companions until their legality could be tested at the Supreme Court of Canada. Bowen's ruling was the first use of the power of reservation in Alberta history."
• "along with the others submitted to it for evaluation, was ultra vires the Alberta government" - Perhaps include the translation, "beyond the powers of" in parentheses right after the Latin?
• "the first time it honoured a non-American newspaper" - "non-U.S." or "newspaper outside the U.S."?
• "95 other newspapers... " - Spell out ninety-five to avoid starting a sentence with digits?

I hope these comments and suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 20:04, 20 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 12 November 2009, 18:49 UTC)

---

[edit] Neville Chamberlain

Previous peer review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because… I intend to nom it for FA in due course. I would appreciate others' help in smoothing off the rough edges before I do so.

Thanks, Wehwalt (talk) 14:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Tim riley

I'm working on input into the review - this is a very substantial article, but I expect to have completed my suggestions in the next couple of days. More soonest - Tim riley (talk) 18:49, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Can I just ask, before wading in - is the spelling for the article to be U.S. or UK? At present it is a mixture of both, and it needs to be one or the other. - Tim riley (talk) 19:36, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

It should be UK as as British politician. Timrollpickering (talk) 19:47, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Agreed. I tried to make it UK, but as I am American, well, that is why I asked for a PR.--Wehwalt (talk) 19:56, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

This is a thoroughly-researched and well-proportioned article. I note the commendably wide variety of authorities quoted. Up to the final paragraphs it seemed to me admirably well-balanced, but I did just wonder if there was a hint of special pleading in the Apologia Pro Vita Sua section at the end, though (i) I found the facts as presented pretty convincing and (ii) I am not an historian, and I hope another reviewer, better equipped than I, can comment more authoritatively on the thrust of the section.

The article doesn't shrink from dealing with NC's less appealing characteristics – his jealousy of rivals is not dodged. A quite vivid picture of the man emerges. My comments below are mostly on the prose rather than on the content.

As requested, I have turned U.S. spelling, and occasionally usage, into UK ditto.

• General
  • Capitalisation: Though it is largely a matter of opinion whether job descriptions like Prime Minister or Chancellor ought to be capitalised, I think you should be consistent throughout with each one.
  • Job descriptions used as personal titles: In UK usage job descriptions such as Prime Minister, Lord President of the Council etc are not used as if they were titles. Thus, though it is correct to say "President Wilson" or "King George", it is unidiomatic to write "Prime Minister Baldwin" – that should be "the Prime Minister, Baldwin" (or if you prefer, and I do, "the prime minister, Baldwin")
• Lead
  • Elder/older: the lead has Austen as "older" half brother, but Early life has NC as "eldest" son of Joe's second marriage – either construction is fine, but sticking to "older/oldest" or "elder/eldest" throughout would be neater, perhaps.
• Early years
  • In the early years you repeatedly refer to NC as "Neville Chamberlain". I quite see that you do so to avoid confusion with Joe and Austen, but I think (others may have views on this) that in such cases it is permissible, and is certainly less cumbersome, to call him "Neville" tout court especially in the section on his youth.
  • he was neither an academic or athletic standout – as the article is to be in UK English I'd recommend recasting this as "he was not outstanding academically or athletically."
• Business career
  • Hoskins's & Company – a most unlikely construction. Robert Self's biography of NC gives the company's name as Hoskins & Company, which is much more plausible.
  • but for his disinterest in politics – suggest "lack of interest" (being disinterested is not the same as being uninterested).
  • He became an Official Visitor – this job title conveys nothing to me, and some brief gloss would be helpful
  • While Joseph Chamberlain became the University's first chancellor – does this literally mean "while" in the temporal sense or merely in its antithetical use? Helpful to clarify, e.g "during Joseph's term as first chancellor…"
  • In 1900, he made election speeches in support of Joseph Chamberlain's Liberal Unionists, which were allied with the Conservatives and later merged with them, during the "Khaki election" of 1900. – to avoid ambiguity I'd turn this around to read "During the "Khaki election" of 1900 he made speeches in support of Joseph Chamberlain's Liberal Unionists, which were allied with the Conservatives and later merged with them."
  • corresponded on a weekly basis – "every week"? "weekly"?
  • The two would have a son and a daughter – "… had a son and daughter" would be plainer
  • Chamberlain paid tribute to his wife upon becoming prime minister in 1937 – No real danger of misunderstanding, but even so I'd rejig to read, "When he became prime minister in 1937 Chamberlain paid tribute to his wife"
• Birmingham politician
  • Upon his election, Chamberlain was made chair – I bet he was made chairman! No such gender-neutral language in those days.
  • looking at housing conditions in Birmingham, and which found – some syntactical confusion here: perhaps "which looked at housing conditions in Birmingham, and found"
  • greatly increasing its population. Chamberlain was greatly interested – two "greatlys" in close proximity.
  • The companies which Chamberlain was involved in prospered due to the war, which made Neville Chamberlain well to do. – if you keep "due to" (not b.t.w. good UK English in such a contruction) you ought perhaps to explain how it was due. I'd be tempted to say "during the war". Either way "which made Neville Chamberlain well to do" could be pruned to "making him well-to-do". Note, too, that well-to-do is hyphenated.
  • became the Birmingham Symphony Orchestra – I believe the orchestra has never had that precise title. It has for many years been known as The City of Birmingham Symphony Orchestra, and I suggest you use that. (An unnecessarily cumbersome title when one comes to look at it, but facts are facts.)
• Director of National Service
  • Director of National Service, with responsibility for coordinating conscription and ensuring that essential war industries were able to function with sufficient workforces. This would, I think, be stronger if recast as … essential war industries had enough workers"
  • drafted into the Army at a time that Britain – perhaps "…at a time when…"
  • his sister Beatrice was killed in the influenza pandemic – reads rather oddly: perhaps "died"?
  • The Bank would remain in business until 1976 – clearer to say "The Bank remained in business until 1976"
  • couldn't, wouldn't, couldn't, wouldn't, wouldn't join the dance. If this was my article I'd expand the footnote to explain that this seemingly mad construction was adapted by NC from Alice's Adventures in Wonderland – the Lobster Quadrille, but you may think this over-egging the pudding.
• Minister (1922–1937)
  • whilst he sought a successor – "while" is shorter and stronger than "whilst". Indeed, I agree with the authors of Plain Words that "whilst" is always an unnecessary word.
  • Chamberlain took the opportunity to stage-manage a reconciliation – this makes Chamberlain's action sound a touch cynical. Would it be more neutral to say "to bring about a reconciliation"?
• Minister of Health
  • expressed envy at Chamberlain receiving the credit for the Act – gerund needed here, i.e. " at Chamberlain's receiving the credit"
  • Chamberlain wrote his sisters – UK usage requires "wrote to his sisters…" [A lovely story, by the way; I laughed aloud.]
  • to easily triumph – in UK usage there is a superstition (a very foolish one) that one does not split the infinitive. Some deluded souls will dismiss you as a bad writer if you do so, and it is safer to humour them by writing "to triumph easily" – or, as you have another "triumph" shortly afterwards, you might recast as "to win comfortably"
  • As the writ dropped for the by-election – this is an idiom I have not met before: I should say "As the writ was issued…"
  • The Leader of the Opposition did not stand in the by-election – clearer if you just said "Baldwin" here, I think.
• Chancellor and Conservative heir apparent
  • his sons were cognizant of the appropriateness of Neville Chamberlain advocating his father's policies – this could be crisper: something along the lines of "his sons found it pleasing and appropriate that Chamberlain could now promote his father's policies"
  • Chamberlain had disliked what he deemed to an overly sentimental attitude by both – "deemed to be an…." or perhaps better, "considered" or "regarded as"
• September 1938; Munich
  • The Germans made much propaganda of the incident –"much" looks odd with a plural word like propaganda. Perhaps "considerable"?
  • As the tempest escalated – "grew" would be shorter and stronger.
  • Thousands gathered outside Number 10 – some (not I) might find this too informal – perhaps safer to say "10 Downing Street."
• Path to war (October 1938 – August 1939)
  • created a Ministry of Supply – a brief explanation of the importance of the ministry's role would be helpful here
• Declaration of war
  • Von Ribbentrop – the "von" isn't used when mentioning surname only. He should be called either "Joachim von Ribbentrop" or simply "Ribbentrop."
• Phoney war
  • He restored Churchill to the Cabinet as First Lord of the Admiralty with a seat in the War Cabinet, believing that in time of war, Churchill was a greater danger outside the Government than within it, and gave Eden a Government post as well. I'd be inclined to break this into two, giving Eden a sentence to himself.
• Downfall
  • Chamberlain journeyed to Buckingham Palace – an odd verb – you can walk it in fifteen minutes, and in the prime ministerial car it would take no time at all. I'd stick to the colourless "went".
• Lord President of the Council and death
  • sapped at his efficiency – "sapped his efficiency"

Happy to expand on anything above if wanted. Onwards to FA! Tim riley (talk) 19:02, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Ssilvers

In the last section, "Legacy and reputation", the description of Churchill's book is a little confusing. Can you simplify? -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:24, 10 November 2009 (UTC)

Twice the article says "the King and his wife, Queen Elizabeth". Tim, is there a better way to put this in brit-speak? -- Ssilvers (talk) 05:56, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

This can get frightfully complicated. In normal usage one would just say "The King and Queen", but if you want to give the queen a name, then "the King and his wife, Queen Elizabeth" is as good a way of putting it as any, I'd say. I hadn't noticed it was used twice, though. The second time, perhaps just "the King and Queen" would suffice. - Tim riley (talk) 09:16, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from timrollpickering

A brief one for now but two of the references are to the Oxford Dictionary of National Biography (the articles on Chamberlain and his father). The DNB is one of the most respected sources in the field and is available both in print and on a subscription website, with the latter even providing references in a copy&paste friendly form, but annoyingly some university library subscriptions wind up in the URL. Currently we've got a link that ends up on a University of London library login for off-site access - can someone get the direct links out.

(Anticipating anyone raising the question of using the DNB, the most recent discussion I'm aware of is at Talk:Cosmo Gordon Lang#Oxford Dictionary of National Biography....) Timrollpickering (talk) 10:35, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Comments so far

Thanks for the comments so far, looking forward to more. I will start implementing them later today. A few comments: Macklin gives additional perspective on NC's reputation. I don't really care about the DNB, if people think it would be wise to remove, it is fine. That is left over from before i started work on the article and I don't like to eradicate everyone else's contributions, this is a collaborative project. Since Karanacs has questioned length at my Khrushchev FAC, which article is about 10K smaller, I am going to try to cut it back by a few thousand bytes . The bulkiest part is the Munich area, but I hate to cut back or spin off the very thing that people are reading the article for!--Wehwalt (talk) 17:48, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

DNB is certainly a RS. I thought that what the commenter is just saying that the citation is not correct, and there should be a direct cite to the DNB article: <ref>Crozier, Andrew J. [http://www.oxforddnb.com/view/article/32347 "Chamberlain, (Arthur) Neville (1869–1940), prime minister",] ''Oxford Dictionary of National Biography'', September 2004, accessed 9 November 2009 (subscription req'd)</ref>. The article may be long-ish, but I agree that you should not cut anything that you think is really important for an encyclopedia reader to know. But, often, if you return to a paragraph and re-read it, you can slim it down to the most efficient, important language. As I said before, you are probably in the best position to decide what is cuttable and how to streamline the rest, since you know the sources. Best regards. -- Ssilvers (talk) 20:40, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

The encyclopedia reader normally wants a summarised account of the subject's life; those who want the detail go to a biography. Re possible cutbacks, the Munich Agreement has an article of its own, somewhat shorter than your text on Munich and not, I may say, of the same quality. Most of your stuff could be transferred there, and worked on to make another top quality European history article, leaving a brief (1,000 words?) summary on Munich in NC. The other main area to focus on might be the "Ministerial career" section, approx 3,200 words at present which could, I think, be cut quite substantially without too much loss to the encyclopedia reader. Then, I usually find I can knock 10 percent off my article wordcounts by careful streamlining that doesn't lose any substantive content (but perhaps I am just a natural windbag). Brianboulton (talk) 22:23, 11 November 2009 (UTC)

Given the difficulty I'm having with Khrushchev, I'd expect the delegates to shoot me if I handed them the article as it stands. I don't think that splitting off the Munich material is a good idea, it is probably what the reader is coming to the article for, and it is also Chamberlain-centered, so it would be a lot of work to insert it into the Munich Conference article. (Hm, how about Chamberlain at the Munich Conference, Daladier at the Munich Conference First Day of the Munich Conference the mind boggles, but that wouldn't be cricket). Seriously though, after some thought, what I am thinking of doing is splitting off the pre-1919 material into something like Early life and pre-parliamentary career of Neville Chamberlain. The only thing we would really lose that had serious effects on his later life would be the roots of the quarrel with Lloyd George, and I could keep that material in the main article. Additionally, if necessary the "Legacy and Reputation" section could be split off, say to Historical view of Neville Chamberlain. That would result in a still fairly long article, but probably not as long as Roosevelt or Truman or Reagan. Or Khrushchev.--Wehwalt (talk) 03:08, 12 November 2009 (UTC)

I think I've implemented everything. I'd be grateful for reviewer's views on splitting the article.--Wehwalt (talk) 23:03, 13 November 2009 (UTC)

I appreciate the cricket reference. As to how NC should be split, the most obvious chronological division seems to me to be at the point when he became prime minister. Thus, one article dealing with his early life and his parliamentary and ministerial career, and another, Neville Chamberlain as Prime Minister, dealing with the rest. On the basis of the existing wordcount, the first of these articles would have just over 6,000 words and the second around 9,000. On a proportionate importance basis that seems about right. Of course, with separate leads and an appropriate sign-off for Article 1, a few hundred more words would be needed, but I'm sure that an equal or greater number of words could be saved by some judicious prose pruning. Two articles of respectively 6k and 9k words won't raise anyone's hackles, and there need be no significant loss of material.

I don't think that splitting off the Legacy section is a good solution, and your idea of the "Early life and pre-parliamentary career of Neville Chamberlain" would still leave the main article around 12-13k words. I also wonder whether that early part of his life is interesting or noteworthy enough to deserve its own article. I hope these suggestions help you to decide what to do. Brianboulton (talk) 22:11, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if the prime minister article should be the one called "Neville Chamberlain" and the other one called something like "Rise of Neville Chamberlain" or the like (ideas welcome). After all, people are most likely going to want to hear about the stuff he's famous for in the main article, no? Ideas welcome.--Wehwalt (talk) 22:18, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

Can this be right? I thought that there is one main article on most famous people's lives. What if you leave the main article, "Neville Chamberlian", but greatly summarize it throughout, moving the detailed information into two sub-articles as you suggest - leaving three articles, the main one of which has cross references to the two more detailed ones. -- Ssilvers (talk) 22:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

That sounds reasonable. Brianboulton (talk) 01:36, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

Reasonable, perhaps, but an awful lot of work and also it means for the full information on any topic, you will be forced to a subarticle, which generally have a low number of views. I'd like to at least initially try the single sub article. A second one can always be added later.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I've tentatively split the article at the accession to the PMship and called the part on his earlier life Rise of Neville Chamberlain which is a heck of a lot easier than Pre-premiership career of Neville Chamberlain. I'm going to do the one sub article first and summarize in the main article. We can then see how the articles look and if there's a need for a second subarticle as Ssilvers suggests.--Wehwalt (talk) 15:13, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

I'll keep the peer review open for another 24-48 hours, then will close it. I'll work on both articles, probably bringing back Rise first in a few days, then Neville. Then, if all looks good, I'll nom them for FA one after the other. I'm off again today but have the key references (Smart, Self, Macklin, Dutton) with me.--Wehwalt (talk) 11:43, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 9 November 2009, 14:47 UTC)

---

[edit] History of Hertfordshire

Previous peer review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to know what else I need to do to achieve FA standard.

Thanks, —S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 11:47, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This interesting article was a pleasure to read. I think it's FA-worthy, though I have a few suggestions for improvement.

Lead

• The lead ideally is a summary of the whole article. I generally try to include at least a mention of the each of the main text sections and not to include anything important in the lead that is not developed in the main text. This lead is quite short for such a long article, and mentions three Roman roads that don't seem to appear elsewhere. I think you could reasonably expand to a more complete summary of four paragraphs or so.

Eleventh century

• The image of the River Lea displaces the "Eleventh century" subhead on my computer screen. I'd suggest moving it up to avoid this or, if if won't fit, to the right.

Twelfth century

• "In 1185, a survey of the Knights' holdings showed Baldock had 122 tenants on 150 acres of land." - Imperial units should also be expressed in metric units. I like to use the {{convert}} template for conversions because it gets the abbreviations and spellings right as well as the math. This one would be 150 acres (61 ha).
• Why did King Stephen arrest de Mandeville?
• Why did the Pope place Rome under an interdiction?

Fourteenth century

• "The number of residents probably fell by 30%–50%, and likely took until the sixteenth century to recover." - I'd recommend changing 30%–50% to "30 to 50 percent".
• "These changed economic conditions were contributory factors to the Peasants' Revolt in 1381, in which Hertfordshire's people were deeply involved.[45] After Wat Tyler's execution, King Richard II went to St Albans in person to quell the rebels." - It might be helpful here to include just a little more background. It seems a bit odd that workers who could suddenly demand higher wages and better conditions would revolt. Also, including a brief phrase like "the leader of the revolt" after Wat Tyler would be helpful.

Seventeenth century

• "James I, who was a confirmed dog-lover, also built a huge kennel (about 46 feet long) and dog-yard (over half an acre in size) at Royston." - Metric conversions here too.

Eighteenth century

• The map of Hertfordshire overlaps two sections and displaces an edit button on my computer screen. I'd suggest moving this image down a bit.
• "Their impact on trade and commerce in Hertfordshire is hard to overstate." - Might be challenged unless supported by an inline citation to an RS.
• "an assessment that may not be entirely free from local bias. It nevertheless shows how more advanced farming techniques and soil improvement programmes had enabled farmers to work Hertfordshire's "heavier" soils to better effect over the centuries since the Saxon–Norse wars." - Probably all true, but the interpretations seem tacked onto the verifiable facts as asides, but from whom?

Nineteenth century

• "In March 1886, John Dickinson & Co. Ltd. was incorporated with £500,000 in capital and ten acres of glass houses. By 1900, the company had 264 acres of glass houses in the Cheshunt area." - More metric conversions.
• "It passed to Mrs Bulwer-Lytton in 1809... ". - Rather than "Mrs", it would be better to use her first name.
• "pleaded that the sensational newspaper coverage had prejudiced the Court against him. It only took 20 minutes of deliberations for the jury to sentence him to death by hanging. The crowds that gathered for the trial were so large that the judge had trouble getting to the Courthouse... " - Lowercase "court" and "courthouse"?

Twentieth century

• "Ebenezer Howard bought nearly 1,500 acres in 1919" - Metric conversion.
• "He lived there until his death 1950." - Missing word, "in"?
• "Hertfordshire's last Victoria Cross of the First World War was granted in December 1918, after the war had finished: a posthumous VC for Lieutenant Frank Young of Hitchin." - Add (VC) after "Victoria Cross" on first use?

Post-war

• "A growing trend is research and development, notably for Glaxo and at the University of Hertfordshire which, from relatively humble beginnings as Hatfield Polytechnic, now has over 23,000 students." - Needs a source.

Twenty-first century

• "About sixty million gallons of petrol... ". - Metric conversion.

Footnotes

• Citation 18: "By 1621, the estate included 117 acres of arable land, 99 of meadow, 86 of woodland and 82 of pasture. Over nine miles of brick wall were built around it all." - Metric conversions.
• Citation 24: "one of Moore's statues—weighing 2.1 tonnes... " - Ditto.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 04:44, 18 November 2009 (UTC)

• Thank you for those comments, Finetooth.—S Marshall ^Talk/_Cont 16:31, 18 November 2009 (UTC)
  

(Peer review added on Sunday 8 November 2009, 11:47 UTC)

---

[edit] Geography and places

[edit] Mono-Inyo Craters

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I created this article six years ago and have recently massively expanded it with the intention of nominating at FAC soon. Seems to conform to other mountain-volcano-related FAs such as Mount St. Helens but I need somebody else to take a look to make sure I haven't missed anything (especially those technical MOS nitpicks that torpedo so many FACs early on). Thanks, mav (talk) 02:03, 23 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Monday 23 November 2009, 03:05 UTC)

---

[edit] Lock Haven, Pennsylvania

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to get it ready for FAC. I don't think it should be hard to review because it's already been vetted closely by User:Dincher and has been worked over several times over the past two years by me, mostly, with lots of help in the way of photography and a map by User:Ruhrfisch, who also supplied helpful information and advice. Nevertheless, it will be my first FA try with a city article on which I've done most of the research and writing. I'd like to catch any remaining problems before FAC.

Thanks, Finetooth (talk) 17:06, 19 November 2009 (UTC)

Comment by doncram Reads well, looks good. I noticed the mention of 3 NRHP historic sites in the lede, but then had trouble finding them in the article. The archeological site is mentioned in the history section as being an archeological site (linked to article archeological site located in Memorial Park (which actually links to the article about the site, but which I assumed was an article about the park instead). Then I am pretty sure there is no mention of the other 2 NRHPs in the history section. I couldn't figure out from the TOC where they would be covered. Eventually found all 3 covered in the Arts and Culture section. Perhaps they should be covered in the history section or the Arts and Culture section should be renamed? BTW i noticed the DYK for Water Street District the other day, and read this article, so then was primed to notice "Lock Haven" on the PR requests list. Keep up the good work! doncram (talk) 21:53, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions and kind words. Your observations are keen, and I'll work on making these connections more clear. Finetooth (talk) 22:03, 25 November 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: meticulous work, leaving me only with a series of nitpicks and minor prose suggestions:-

• Lead
  • The first paragraph reads somewhat inelegantly. The problem phrases are "in and the county seat of" and "of and is included in", and there is perhaps a comma too many. These factors interfere with the prose flow. My suggestion: "The city of Lock Haven is the county seat of Clinton County, in the U.S. state of Pennsylvania. Located near the confluence of the West Branch Susquehanna River and Bald Eagle Creek, it is the principal city of the Lock Haven, Pennsylvania micropolitan statistical area, itself part of the..."
    • Yes, these two sentences are boilerplate. I've adopted your phrasing, which is better. Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • There's a slight grammar problem in the last sentence, with an ambiguity around "its". I've tried rewording; the best I can offer is "While industry remains important to the city, about a third of the workforce is employed in education, health care, or social services." For consideration.
    • I changed to "While industry remains important to the city, about a third of Lock Haven's workforce is employed in education, health care, or social services." Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
• Pre European history: The sentence beginning: "Memorial Park Site 36Cn164..." deals with a much later period than the sentences either side of it. Is it in the right sequence?
  • No. Reverse chronological order is better. I revised the second half of the paragraph to maintain a logical order. I also removed the final sentence, which included a fairly dramatic claim supported by only one source. It's credentials as an RS might reasonably be questioned. Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
• Eighteenth century
  • "Four Indian paths ... led to or from the island..." First, is "Indian paths" a recognised description? Secondly, what is the difference between a path leading "to" or "from" somewhere? And thirdly, er... as islands are by definition surrounded by water, I'm curious to know how paths can lead to (or from) them.
    • I have the sources, so I added some below on this. Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • Did the British buy land "through" or "after" the treaty? Should the treaty be described as the "first Treaty of Fort Stanwix" as there was another?
    • The money amount was part of the treaty but less important than the shift in boundaries. I changed this to read, "With the signing of the first Treaty of Fort Stanwix in 1768, the British gained control from the Iroquois of lands south of the West Branch."
• Nineteenth century
  • The paragraph begins: "Lock Haven prospered...", but I can't see, from your narrative, when the place was actually established as a settlement. The previous section only refers to "the future site of Lock Haven"
    • Good catch. I put this in the infobox but not in the main text. I changed the sentence to say, "Laid out as a town in 1833, incorporated as a borough in 1840 and as a city in 1870, Lock Haven prospered in the 19th century largely because of timber and transportation." I added a citation to support the three date claims. Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "the lumber industry was in full swing". It's the quote marks around an unmemorable (cliché?) phrase that are slightly bothersome. Why not just say that the lumber industry was well established?
    • Much better. I have adopted your suggestion. Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "The West Branch Canal opened in 1834 and soon ran 73 miles (117 km)..." I'm not sure what "soon" is doing here. (It's a bit of a stylistic habit - I noticed a few other "soons" going through).
    • Deleted "soon". Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "A rapid increase in Lock Haven's population followed the opening of the canal." Could we have some base figure from which this increase occurred?
    • I was able to find sources for population figures back to 1850, but I haven't found anything exact for between 1833 and then. I will keep looking. Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "On the strength of the railroad's potential value to the city, local residents invested heavily in housing, building large homes between 1854 and 1856." Needs to be "had" invested, to make chronological sense.
    • Changed to "had". Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
  • "...in about 1885, when about 1.9 million logs..." Avoidable close repetition.
    • Changed to "In terms of board feet, the peak of the lumber era in Pennsylvania arrived in about 1885, when 1.9 million logs went through the boom at Williamsport." Finetooth (talk) 04:04, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
• Twentieth century
  • A bit of a comma overload here: "The Lock Haven Electric Railway, managed by the Lock Haven Traction Company and, after 1900, the Susquehanna Traction Company, ran passenger trolleys between Lock Haven and Mill Hall, about 3 miles (5 km) to the west." Couldn't this be: "The Lock Haven Electric Railway, managed by the Lock Haven Traction Company and after 1900 by the Susquehanna Traction Company, ran passenger trolleys between Lock Haven and Mill Hall, about 3 miles (5 km) to the west."
  • Redundant wording here: "...expanded to include several additions, among them an engineering building and an office building." "Expanded" implies additions, therefore: "...expanded to include an engineering building and an office building." (later) ...or better, perhaps, "to include engimeering and office buildings".
• Floods
  • "...the highest floods of record..." Should this be "on" record?
  • Rainfall: "...widespread rains of 6 inches (152 mm) to 12 inches (305 mm) with local amounts up to 19 inches (483 mm)..." Need to clarify the time periods for these levels.
  • "Completed in 1995, it protected..." "It" needs specifying.
• Geography and climate: no particular issues
• Demographics
  • What is the definition of a "household" as distinct from a "family". Is it the presence of children? Point not wholly clarified by paragraph 3
  • "There were 3,565 housing units at an average density of 1,419.9/sq mi (548.4/km2)." I'm not sure I understand what this means.
  • Most readers will not know what a "median" is, therefore link required.
  • "versus" is a rather competitive term; in this case, "compared with" might be better.
• Economy: "...the rate had declined..."
• Arts, culture...: Can you explain the nature of "subscriptions" among the library resources?
• Parks and recreation: The sentence about winning the Little League in 1948 would be better placed in the previous paragraph, where Little League is first mentioned.
• Government: This section should deal with the city's government. It's stretching things, I think, to include the US congressman, and surely US Senators Specter and Casey can't be considered as part of the government of Lock Haven? (except in the same sense that Barack Obama (Dem) is President of the United States)
• Infrastructure
  • William T. Piper Airport: If no commercial, charter, or freight services are available at this airport, what does that leave? Can you summarise in a few words what it is used for?
  • Last paragraph: is this information really part of the city's "infrastructure"? Might it better be placed in te "Twentieth century section as part of the city's history?
• Notable residents: no comment (Sloan is the only one to ring a bell)

I hope you found these comments and suggestions helpful. I shall watch the article's progress with interest. Brianboulton (talk) 17:52, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Yes, this is very helpful indeed. The rest of today and much of tomorrow will be filled with visitors and house guests, so I'll be pretty much off-line until late tomorrow. Then I'll look more closely at each of your suggestions and respond more fully. Thank you for taking the time to do this. Finetooth (talk) 19:10, 26 November 2009 (UTC)

Comments from Niagara

Geography and climate

• I know the Weather Channel provides record temps as well as the averages, so why not add those too.

Economy

• "Two of the city's employers, Lock Haven University of Pennsylvania and Lock Haven Hospital, were among the seven biggest employers in Clinton County." — "are" instead of "were" (both are still among the county's largest employers, are they not?); If both are among the county's largest, wouldn't that make them also the largest employers in the city?

Arts, culture,...

• You mention a student-run television station, but are there any network stations? What channels can be recieved by persons without cable or satellite TV?
• I wouldn't include the frequencies of the radio stations. I found it confusing to read.
  • On a side note, is that 97.7 FM a third station or a secondary frequency of one of the the two mentioned?

Some comments now...won't be around at all tomorrow. ​​​​​​​​Niagara ​​^{Don't give up the ship} 03:07, 27 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you for the helpful comments. I'm working my way through the suggestions from the top of this review to the bottom and shall address them all in due course. Any further comments will be welcome. Finetooth (talk) 03:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments

• I will start by commenting on the Indian Paths and the Great Island, as Brianboulton asked some good questions about them. The usual reference book is "Indian Paths of Pennsylvania" by Wallace, so it is a standard name (I have also seen "Indian trails" used). I checked every mention of "Great Island" in Wallace's book and while it always says things like "from the Great Island (Lock Haven) on the West Branch of the Susquehanna" (Bald Eagle Creek Path) or "it followed the West Branch of the Susquehanna to the Great Island (Lock Haven)" (Great Island Path), it does not explicitly say that they forded or otherwise crossed the river to the island. Wallace's book does not usually mention how or exactly where rivers or creeks are crossed though. Each of the maps for the paths show a symbol for an Indian village on the Great Island itself, as it does for each village along a path. Some of the maps are on the web - see here for The Great Island Path map or here for The Great Shamokin Path. I also looked in Donehoo's "A History of the INdian Villages and Place Names in Pennsylvania" and in the entry for the Great Island (Big Island) it says "This island, which contains about 300 acres, was a favorite gathering place for the Indians from a very early time. Being directly on the line of trails leading into the Seneca domain, as well as on the trail from Shamokin and Wyoming to the Ohio, it was used as a stopping place and a meeting place by Delaware, Shawnee, and Iroquois." (page 12). So yes, it seems as if the paths led to the island itself. More later, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 01:51, 28 November 2009 (UTC)
• I forgot to look at Meginness' "History of Lycoming County" - there is an online link here, where it says of the Great Island Path that it ran "over the mountain into Nippenose valley, through which it passed to the head thereof, then over the bills and through a ravine in Bald Eagle mountain to the river, where there was a fording to Great Island." So yes, at least one of the paths (and I would bet all of them) actually crossed the river to the island. Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:38, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

Thank you. This is most helpful. I had not seen the on-line maps or thought to check Meginness. Since the river divides to go around the island, a ford over the half-river at some point sounds possible. You've done an awful lot to bring this article along, and I don't think I would have considered nominating at FAC without your map and photos. Would you like to co-nom at FAC when the time comes (mid-December or so)? I'd like that a lot. Finetooth (talk) 03:13, 28 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Thursday 19 November 2009, 17:06 UTC)

---

[edit] Republic of Macedonia

Previous peer review

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I don't know where to start! The article is finally stable - the conflicts have died down. Reading through, I think one of the issues is weight in the various sections - some might be too heavy, and others too light. I can see a vague case for restructuring the headings and forming larger sections out of the smaller ones, but without an idea about the weight of some of the subsections, it's a bit tricky. I'd like some outside views of this so that we can proceed. GA is a first target step, with a longer-term view to FA, so any related comments (sources, depth, etc) would also be greatly appreciated.

Thanks, Fritzpoll (talk) 19:38, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: A lot of work has gone into the article, which has good potential. You are right in thinking it has significant problems that would need to be corrected to advance, say, to Good Article. The first one I'd suggest tackling is sourcing, which is quite good in places and entirely absent in others. The lead should be re-written, and I have a few suggestions about subdivisions and image placement. Happily, the prose is good.

• I'd suggest re-writing the lead to make it a stand-alone summary of the entire article. Imagine a reader who for some reason can only read the lead and nothing else, and write the lead for that person. The existing lead says nothing about the economy, science, education, society, and so on. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of the main text sections and not to include anything important in the lead that is not mentioned later in the article.

• Generally, it's a good idea to write in complete paragraphs consisting of two or more sentences and to create sections and subsections that are substantial rather than tiny. Otherwise, the prose begins to look like a list without a smooth and natural flow or much in the way of connection between one thing and the next. I think "Law and courts" is too short a section to stand alone, for example, and I'd be inclined to merge it with "Government". "Tourism" is also too short, and the fix I'd consider would be to expand it to triple its current size by adding a bit more of a summary from the main article it links to. With a one-sentence orphan paragraph like "According to Eurostat data, Macedonian PPS GDP per capita stood at 32 per cent of the EU average in 2008," I'd consider expanding or simply merging with another paragraph.

• Many paragraphs, such as the first two of the "Medieval period" subsection in the article, all of the "Climate" section, and so on are unsourced. To avoid violating WP:V, my rule of thumb is to source every set of statistics, every direct quotation, every claim that has been challenged or is apt to be challenged, and every paragraph.

• I'd recommend rendering the lists in the article as straight prose. For example, in the "Education" section, I'd change the list to say, "The Macedonian education system consists of pre-school, primary, secondary, and higher education". Then I'd merge this sentence with the paragraph that follows.

• The article is overloaded with images in a few places. The Medieval period subsection, for example, has a text sandwich (text squeezed between an image on the left and another on the right). A bit further down in the article, the boundary map and the history list-box form another text sandwich. The boundary map also displaces a section head. It's best to arrange the images so that they don't make text sandwiches or displace the heads or "edit" buttons.

• I'd suggest moving the individdual images in the image gallery to the Republic of Macedonia gallery on the Commons and adding a Commons template to the External links section. Readers who want to see general images of the Republic of Macedonia can then click through to the gallery.

• The link in citation 79 is dead.

• Quite a few of the citations are incomplete. A good rule of thumb for Internet sources is to include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and access date, if all of those can be identified.

• It's disconcerting to the reader to see entire notes rendered as a single blue link as in citation 11. Generally, the title should be blue-linked (clickable to the source url). In some cases, it may be useful to link other elements, but in those cases the links should be separate.

• The images need alt text, which is meant for readers who can't see the images. Alt text is not the same as a caption. You might not need alt text for GA, but you will certainly need it to pass FAC. WP:ALT had details.

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 23:05, 17 November 2009 (UTC)

(Peer review added on Sunday 8 November 2009, 19:38 UTC)

---

[edit] Lincoln Park Conservatory

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because…1) I want to learn about peer review (my first), 2) I think the changes I have made have substantially improved the article, 3) The Conservatory is an important part of Chicago's History, 4) I would like to create a featured article.

Thanks, Buster7 (talk) 23:06, 7 November 2009 (UTC)--

Comments

• The WP:LEAD is quite thin. After you finish writing an article. Consider its structure. Then make sure each section is mentioned in the summary in the LEAD.
  • See thoughts below on location.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
• See WP:CAPTION#Wording regarding ending periods.
  • Please reread.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 01:09, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
    • Still not right. In a nutshell: Periods at the end of complete sentences and omitted otherwise.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:29, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
• Find an infobox will improve
• Make sure your article is structured so that each paragraph has a distinct topic and make sure each paragraph has at least one inline citation.
  • "Surrounding gardens" section is still uncited.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:34, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
• Convert the bullet points to regular prose.
• Go to OpenStreetMap and create a map. (See Loop, Chicago or Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)). Went to OpenSreetMap but not sure how to get it here.--Buster7 (talk) 02:10, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
• Is this in Category:Landmarks in Chicago, Illinois for a reason. Is it a Chicago Landmark, National Historic Landmark, or National Register of Historic Places listing?removed landmark staus for now...not sure
• If Schiller is famous link him. .
• Link Industrial Revolution, Victorian, vestibule--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 23:27, 7 November 2009 (UTC)

• In the future let me strike when I agree an issue has been resolved. --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)
• Here is how I make the maps. It is roundabout but it works.

1. Find a Chicago map on WP from OpenStreetMaps.
2. Click on it to go to its description page
3. Click on its source link
4. Zoom out a bit
5. Move the map so it is centered on where I want
6. Zoom in.
7. Use the export feature to save the map to my hard drive
8. Use microsoft paint to add black borders
9. Note the permalink will give you the source link
10. Upload the map to commons with all the same templates as the original map --TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 06:19, 8 November 2009 (UTC)

• Are you still working on this?--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 13:29, 14 November 2009 (UTC)

• • Honestly, I'm a bit embarassed by my inability to use tools, etc. I'm pretty sure that I exported a map to my hard drive but I can't find it..thanks for the instructions (re:map) but I'm stuck. Also, I think the lead is finished. If, in your opinion, it needs more, maybe I could learn from your edits. Same with the captions. I see that you didn't strike so my changes were probably wrong. But I'm not sure why.--Buster7 (talk) 17:15, 14 November 2009 (UTC)
    • It should be saved on your computer as map.jpg or .gif. Do a search on your computer files.
      • I am creating one for Petrillo Music Shell right now. The file name is map.png.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 21:41, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

• "lakefront park system" is it in the Chicago Park District. You should link this term in the article if it is. Then use the park district page for some citations if it has quality content.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
• You are pretty vague with the location. Look at some of my Chicago building/structure WP:GA and WP:FA articles. They almost say exactly where in the city this is located. You talk about "lakefront park system" as if the reader knows what lake you are talking about and Lincoln Park Zoo as if the international reader knows what part of Chicago it is in. I strongly encourage a map, although it is not required. I am starting to add them to my building articles that I work on. Take a look at Trump International Hotel and Tower (Chicago)#Location and imagine it without a map. Clearly it helps the reader. You don't have to include the location detail like that article though. Even something like Museum of Contemporary Art, Chicago or McDonald's Cycle Center is sufficient.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:28, 15 November 2009 (UTC)

• Link Alfred Caldwell Lily Pool, South Side (Chicago) and other terms that the international reader will not know if they have articles.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:LOTM) 05:33, 15 November 2009 (UTC)
  

(Peer review added on Saturday 7 November 2009, 23:06 UTC)

---

[edit] Manitoba

Article (edit | history) • Article talk (edit | history) • Watch • Watch peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because it passed GA a while ago and I'm looking for some suggestions to (hopefully) get it to FAC sometime in the not-too-distant future.

Thanks, Nikkimaria (talk) 03:18, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Mindmatrix

I think that the list of hospitals is misplaced (link at top of "Economy" section). Perhaps a public services section could be created, highlighting health care, education etc. In my opinion, there is undue weight given to the official languages and armed forces sections. The latter may warrant a CAF presence by province article, splitting that section off as appropriate and leaving only a short section paragraph in its place. I also think the education section is weak - there's no mention of student demographics, number of schools or their sizes, role of private schooling, etc. (Aside: I don't like the phrase "the provincial education system" linking to Minister of Education, Citizenship and Youth (Manitoba).) The intro needs work, especially the second and third paragraphs. Mindmatrix 16:43, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

One more thing: there's a History of Manitoba that could benefit from some of the material at Manitoba#History. The main article's history section is far too long, and portions of it should be merged to the more specific article. Mindmatrix 16:46, 6 November 2009 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments, Mindmatrix. I've shrunk the official languages and armed forces slightly. Language in particular has been a big issue in Manitoba, so I would argue that it merits some weight here. I've also worked on adding some details to education and fixing the lead. Cheers, Nikkimaria (talk) 21:33, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

[edit] Comments by Steve Smith

This is not the sort of article I generally write/review (historical political biography), so I'm slightly outside my comfort zone, but I think I can make some useful comments. Because of my general lack of familiarity with this type of article, I've identified three current featured articles that I think are comparable in subject matter: Minnesota, Oklahoma, and Virginia. I'm letting those articles inform my thoughts on this one.

In general, I think this article needs improvement before it hits FAC, though there's obviously been enormous amounts of good work put into it so far (this is a tough kind of article to write, which is why I generally stick to biography). Many parts of the article emphasize listing facts rather than incorporating them into the kind of prose I'd expect of an FA

I've responded in-line, hope you don't mind. Nikkimaria (talk) 21:45, 16 November 2009 (UTC)

Organization and other high level stuff

• The lead is too short, leaves out many important pieces of information (for example, the only thing said about the history is the date it entered Confederation), and contains other information that probably doesn't belong there (that the BNA Act, 1867 was rechristened the Constitution Act, 1867, could not possibly be one of the things about Manitoba that it's more important for a reader to know).

I've expanded it slightly and taken out the bit about the renaming, but I agree it still needs work.

• The Geography section could stand to be better organized. All of the non-climate physical geography is found under the main heading, and information about human geography is limited to a single table listing the largest cities. I'd suggest emulating the state articles, and dividing it into "Geology and terrain/Topography" (possibly with a subsection for Hydrography, if you think it's warranted), "Climate", "Flora and fauna" (a subject not currently covered in the article)