Wikipedia:Peer review/Canadian rock/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Canadian rock[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I would like a general over view.(Buzzzsherman (talk) 06:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC))[reply]

Thanks, Buzzzsherman (talk) 06:20, 5 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: This is an interesting list, fairly amazing actually, of a lot of wonderful musicians. However, just a quick read reveals quite a few problems related to Manual of Style guidelines, dead links, and proofreading. I have a short list of suggestions for improving these aspects of the article. For expert advice on content, I'm not the one to ask, though the content is certainly broad.

  • 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." A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of each of the main text sections. The existing lead mentions only The Four Lads and Anka and devotes less than a sentence to everybody else.
  • WP:EL says in part, "Wikipedia articles may include links to web pages outside Wikipedia but should not normally be used in the body of an article." The links to external photos of The Four Lads and others all violate this guideline. Ditto for the direct link to Canada's Walk of Fame in the Guess Who section and any other direct external links in the main body.
  • MOS:BOLD says in part, "Use italics, not boldface, for emphasis in article text." The Wikipedia software automatically bolds the section heads and subheads, but names like The Guess Who should not be bolded. I would not put them in italics either but simply use normal type.
  • The link checking tool that lives here finds at least 10 dead links in the citations. You can use this tool to see which ones they are.
  • The dab tool that lives here finds 14 problems with links that go to disambiguation pages rather than their intended target. You can use the tool to find and fix them.
  • Some of the references such as citation 163 are incomplete. A good rule of thumb for Internet sources is to include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and accessdate or as many of these as you can find.
  • The article could use the services of a proofreader who could spot and fix typos, extra spaces, and other small glitches. I see quite a few of these here and there. For example "No Sugar Tonigh" in the "Guess Who" section is missing its final "t"; the "Bobby Curtola" section has too much white space above it; the three-part date in the Ronnie Hawkins section should not be wikilinked; an extra Rush portal is embedded in the "Rush" section, and so on.

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. Finetooth (talk) 18:08, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]