Wikipedia:Peer review/Brian Halligan/archive1

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Brian Halligan[edit]

Toolbox
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'd like to get into shape for a featured article nomination.

Thanks, Woz2 (talk) 00:26, 15 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Comments (to be honest, I'm mildly troubled that this was passed by a native Polish speaker who believes we use a "Grand Article" name here, not sure this really is GA quality)...
  • Quite short for a featured article at first glance, however if it's completely comprehensive then perhaps that'll still swing at WP:FAC.
  • "a Cambridge, MA-based" expand MA for the non-US readers. After all, some of us actually have an MA from the original Cambridge so I wouldn't want people to be confused...!
  • "in the newer sense of getting found by customers" I don't like this construction at all. What does "in the newer sense" mean? and who (or what) is "getting found by customers"?
  • Consider getting that image cropped so it features only Halligan. The rest of the image is a little distracting right now.
    • I looked for an image of the subject alone before, but couldn't find a free one. I'll look again. I'm not comfortable cropping somebody else's composition. Is this a show stopper? Woz2 (talk) 19:23, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • You have a decent image, and the licence agreement means you can crop etc as long as you attribute it. No problem. As for show stopper, this is just PR, not FAC, I'm just here to provide advice. What happens at FAC may be entirely different (it often is) from here! The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Thanks! (BTW I meant uncomfortable artistically, not legally. Cropping will cut Jerry Garcia's face (in the background) in half). And yes, I was pondering about what would happen at FAC if I left it... Woz2 (talk) 19:38, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Nah, you can cut it so you only get a few pixels of Garcia's face. Do a thin portrait crop, job done. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:40, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I couldn't sleep at night knowing I'd butchered such a lovely composition. :-) Woz2 (talk) 20:19, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Ok, well you could give it a go. It's not for me to go on about this, when you hit WP:FAC, perhaps other opinions will be heard. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:21, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I think you're right. It's just that I'm sure I can find a free head shot image for the info box, and then I'll move the present one down to the para about the second book. Woz2 (talk) 21:12, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • Done! Woz2 (talk) 21:57, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "The first is about getting found by customers at the moment they are searching" badly constructed as well, and what searching are we talking about? Is this about SEO?
  • Two single-sentence paras in the Education and career section makes the section choppy.
  • "House of Possibilities (HOPe)" - is this supposed to mean something to me?
  • What's a BSEE?
  • "Halligan has published two books:" odd that this leads onto two separate (and big) paragraphs. Would suggest you make this a more introductory sentence, like "two books, Book A and Book B. In Book A ...."
  • "is by creating remarkable content such a blog articles and social media " is this a quote (i.e. the "remarkable" bit)? Otherwise it reads hyperbolically.
    • Yes, it's a quote. Added clarification. Woz2 (talk) 19:34, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • "On page xxii of the book Halligan notes that he's seen ..." just "In the book, Halligan notes that he has" (avoiding contractions too)
  • " The authors admire the bands many" grammar fail. (band's).
  • "Ernst & Young Entrepreneur Of The Year 2011 - New England Region" en-dash required, not a spaced hyphen.
  • Any reason why not all of the online refs have access dates?
    • Laziness? :-) Fixed! Woz2 (talk) 00:23, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Author names in ref usually use the first= and last= parameters.
  • "New York Times" should be "The New York Times".
  • Way too many external links, almost as if you're trying to advertise his work?
    • I was trying to be comprehensive, but if you let me know what a reasonable number is, I'd be happy trim it down to the n most important ones. Woz2 (talk) 18:28, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • Just be careful to include links which are purely specific to this bio. If there are other links which you could incorporate as references by expanding the content of the main article, so much the better. The Rambling Man (talk) 19:26, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • OK. Should I roll them into a section beginning 'Being an advocate of publishing on-line, Brian is very active in this medium himself...'? Woz2 (talk) 20:09, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • No, it would appear like you're advertising his publications. I think a note to say he has multiple publications online is sufficient. Don't forget, this is his bio, not a list of links of things he's written. The Rambling Man (talk) 20:11, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • How is it now? Publishing on-line is a big part of his ideology, so I'm thinking it's important to mention he practices what he preaches? Woz2 (talk) 23:02, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
      • But don't forget we're not here to provide him with a free advertising platform. The Rambling Man (talk) 23:06, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
    • I could mention "he blogs, tweets" but not link to the blog, Twitter stream, but that seems odd, given that ISBNs link to a page saying "Buy this book on Amazon." I read WP:ELNO and it seems to says that blogs by "recognized authorities" are OK. It says that notability is necessary for "recognized authority." But it's mute on what is sufficient for "recognized authority." I'm confused. Woz2 (talk) 23:56, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]
  • Red linked category needs to go.
  • Public speakers as a category is redundant (you have two more specific public speaking categories already).

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:58, 19 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

OK, I think I've touched them all. How is it now? Woz2 (talk) 00:30, 20 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Brian_Halligan/archive1&oldid=469483926"