Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Shotgun house

Shotgun house[edit]

Archived peer review: Wikipedia:Peer review/Shotgun house/archive1

I've been working on this article for a while. This was a bit of a tough topic to research, shotgun houses are kind of seen and not heard, even though the are really common in the American south, not a lot has been written about them that doesn't just repeat urban legends and so on. I think the article now does a good job of summarizing everything encyclopedic about them, and seems to be a good resource for learning about the houses. But I want this article to be really great, so I'm bringing it to FAC. Please fix or let me know any problems you find with the article, and I will try to address them. --W.marsh 17:05, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Good work so far. There are a few stubby "paragraphs", and the last two sections are sort of stubby as well. Perhaps consider a slight section re-layout. Also, consider turning the list into prose (there really isn't a whole lot of prose for the lead length). Just another star in the night ^{T | @ | C} 21:03, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You're right about the stubby-ness, it was the result of a perhaps too hasty integration of some trivia that had piled up. I've moved some things around to try to make it less disconnected.

The list though already is basically prose, a paragraph per item, it's just bulletted because each deals with a specific variation. I think sometimes lists can have a place in an article, and are more clear to the reader than several flowing paragraphs. I just see the section being less accessable if changed it to paragraphs, but if people disagree I would hardly object to changing it. --W.marsh 21:15, 16 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support. Some copyediting remains to be done, but this is already a remarkably good article. Jkelly 00:40, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Comment - I would really like to see the floor plan to a typical shotgun house. I think it would greatly enhance the article, as so far, lengthy prose is used to sketchingly describe this where a picture would illustrate it perfectly. Fieari 17:03, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah, I just haven't found a free one. The ones here would be great but they seem to be under copyright. I've added a request at Wikipedia:Requested pictures/Graphics, I am pretty inempt at drawing anything but I will give it a try if no one else does soon. --W.marsh 17:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I made and inserted a diagram based on some sample dimensions... hopefully a better one will emerge, illustration is not my forte. --W.marsh 18:20, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Support A bit better then when I last commented and the real offenders have been taken care of. Still not sure about that list though, but it is minor. It is as it always was ^{T | @ | C} 21:39, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support DVD+ R/W 23:24, 17 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Nice work. Cvene64 17:47, 18 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Support Wow. Incredible. Lorty 18:14, 19 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]