Wikipedia:Peer review/Microsoft Security Essentials/archive2

Add links
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Microsoft Security Essentials[edit]

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'd like to know if this article has the potential for becoming a featured article or if there are outstanding issues.

Thanks, Fleet Command (talk) 15:02, 22 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Note: The author has recently retired and will (presumably) not be checking this page for comments. --Cryptic C62 · Talk 20:20, 29 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Note: Well, the author may be dead but we aren't. I guess it's pretty harmless trying to fix some of these. 91.99.247.120 (talk) 09:44, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Thanks. But "dead" is a little bit too extreme. Fleet Command (talk) 09:54, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Noted, quick comments.

  • Lead's a little brief, see WP:LEAD.
  • Lots of technical abbreviations that a newbie may not understand like VGA, RAM...
  • "(IA-32[23])," etc. check ref placement.
  • You abbreviate it to MSE but then never use it. Would reduce the article length and repetition significantly.
  • Check image captions, complete sentences take a full stop, incomplete ones don't.
  • Magazine titles should be in italics.
  • Why the sub-heading under "Issues" when there are no other sections?
  • Avoid SHOUTING in the refs.
  • Don't mix date formats in the refs.
  • Don't overcapitalise the external links.

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:15, 4 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

  • Lead's a little brief, see WP:LEAD.
  • Lots of technical abbreviations that a newbie may not understand like VGA, RAM...
  • "(IA-32[23])," etc. check ref placement.
  • You abbreviate it to MSE but then never use it. Would reduce the article length and repetition significantly.
  • Check image captions, complete sentences take a full stop, incomplete ones don't.
  • Magazine titles should be in italics.
  • Why the sub-heading under "Issues" when there are no other sections?
  • Avoid SHOUTING in the refs.
  • Don't mix date formats in the refs.
  • Where?
  • Don't overcapitalise the external links.
(: 91.99.247.120 (talk) 09:26, 6 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Ooooookay. Expanded the lead a little a bit and updated some contents. Also created a See also section and brought the portals in there. (More layout compliance.) Fleet Command (talk) 12:38, 13 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Other things

  • Not keen on the unnecessary bold in the infobox for IA-32, x64 etc.
    • I do not care about boldness myself. But in the past, I have seen a lot of people arguing over whether bold is needed or not, with no results; so, I pass it for optional style choice. ArbCom says there should be no edit dispute over such matters and one should leave them be. So, do you still think it is wise to touch it? Fleet Command (talk) 09:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Only two of those five "Size" options have specific references, are the others covered elsewhere?
    • You mean the infobox? Actually, [1] is the source for the first two, and [2] is the source for the next three. I could duplicate the footnote but some think it is unnecessary "Bombardment" and must avoided, per WP:FACR#1a. Fleet Command (talk) 09:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Check for consistency - anti-virus or antivirus?
    •  Done
  • "for short[7])," I think that ref should be placed other side of the comma.
    •  Done
  • For both links to Hertz, you could consider linking to Hertz#SI multiples which is a little more specific.
    •  Done
  • "People's Republic of China" I think most people just refer to it as China these days.
    •  Done
  • "Softpedia" our own article on this doesn't have it in italics.
    • That's because Softpedia is not just a news agency but also a software repository as well. This also the case with CNET. Fleet Command (talk) 09:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
  • Just a feeling, but the article seems to suffer from many very short paragraphs.
  • PC World appears to be PCWorld.
    •  Done
  • Check refs are fully populated, e.g. ref 13 is just a title, no publisher, author, accessdate, publication date etc.
    •  Done

The Rambling Man (talk) 10:00, 16 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks a bunch. You have good eyes. I have left comments accordingly. Fleet Command (talk) 09:41, 18 May 2012 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Microsoft_Security_Essentials/archive2&oldid=493965175"