Wikipedia:Peer review/John Johnson (footballer)/archive1

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to make it to the FA.

Thanks, RRD13 (talk) 10:37, 9 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (having stumbled here from my Peer Review)

NOTE: Please respond, below all my comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
Checklinks tool shows a few problems throughout with links and slow links. I strongly suggest archiving as many as possible with added parameters archiveurl= and archivedate= with Internet Archive links.
Per WP:LEAD, consider expanding the lede intro sect, (four paragraphs), so it may function as a standalone summary of the entire article's contents.
2 total images used in article, those will require an image review at either WP:GAN or WP:FAC, suggest you go over all those image pages and make sure all fields are filled in and all licensing checks out okay.
Appears to be well cited throughout with very good use of in-line citations.
5 uses of direct quotations from sources. Consider removing all or some of these and paraphrasing, instead. You'll have an easier time at FAC that way, trust me.
Style of play sect, not the best title for this sect, perhaps just Commentary or Analysis. Because the sect is only about secondary source commentary.
Honours sect, entire sect appears to be uncited.
NOTE: Please respond, below all my comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!

Hope that's helpful, and good luck! — Cirt (talk) 18:22, 25 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (having stumbled here from my Peer Review)

NOTE: Please respond, below all my comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
Generally very good looking - neat structure and well cited.
A WP on referencing (can't find the name immediately) recommended the use of one these formats in citations: YYYY-MM-DD or abbreviation into three letters of the month, so "21 January 2014" would become either "2014-01-21" or "21 Jan 2014".
If applicable, also mention the author in the citation with the parameters "|first=" and "|last=" or "|author=".
Perhaps a line on personal life? This is no must of course, it would be merely illustrative.
In the Style of play section, in the first sentence the word "but" seems needless.
Use of less direct quotations from sources, as already mentioned.
Perhaps in the "External links" section you can also refer to other websites considered reliable regarding soccer statistics, like Soccerway or National Football Teams.
Copy the citations regarding the honours used in the text to the "Honours" section. I just got aware that I will have to do the same in my article undergoing Peer Review.
NOTE: Please respond, below all my comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!

Good luck! Please also take a look at my football-related Peer Review, Kareldorado (talk) 12:05, 26 October 2014 (UTC)[reply]