Wikipedia:Peer review/IPad (3rd generation)/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get it to GA status and would like some suggestions on how to improve it.
Thanks, Zach Vega (talk) 14:29, 21 March 2012 (UTC)
- Looks like you're well on your way! A couple of thoughts: you might consider using active rather than passive voice when possible to make reading and translating easier, and consider too being more specific in your language to avoid confusion for those unfamiliar with the subject matter.
- For example, in your second paragraph in the lead, compare the current:
withEighteen different variations were released: either black or white; 16 GB, 32 GB, or 64 GB storage models; and in a Wi-Fi only iPad, AT&T iPad, or Verizon iPad (with the latter two operating on their respective 4G LTE networks).
Apple released eighteen different versions, including black or white external casings; memory storage capacity variants of 16, 32, and 64 GB; and connectivity and mobile network carrier variants with Wi-Fi only, 3G, 4G LTE, and combinations.
- See the difference using active voice, greater specificity and wikilinking concepts critical to understanding the paragraph? Writing to an audience who may know little of the subject, especially with technical matters, can mean the difference between a reader 'getting it' and not. Of course, one can only be reductivist to a point without approaching the pedantic, but generally, the more clarity the better, and as in the above example, specificity often does not require wordiness. You will find Wikipedians who are passive voice apologists, and I grant that sometimes the use of it can make for clearer writing, but generally it does not and it also makes translations more difficult. I often focus on legal subjects (see Apple Inc. litigation, an article I've been working on for awhile and which also needs peer review), and indeed have to watch out for this myself, but just imagine you are explaining the subject to your great-grandmother: make sure to be as clear as possible while showing respect for the readers' intelligence, and patience. With regard to mentioning the various carriers and their connectivity variants, you could move that information out of the lead and into the article body where more detail usually lives. All in all, the article shows your hard work. Good luck! Sctechlaw (talk) 21:30, 26 March 2012 (UTC)