Jump to content

Wikipedia:Peer review/Music of Chicago/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I have tried to get this article into a FA, but have failed, I want you guys to look through this article and give me some advice to make it better. You can say anything about it, I dont care.

Thanks, Mertozoro (talk) 18:47, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]


WP:FCDW/March 17, 2008 gives some tips on how to locate volunteers to help out at peer review, and you might also contact reviewers who opposed at FAC, to invite them here. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:26, 7 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: Here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

  • I would treat the FAC as a peer review - look at the comments there and see what needs to be done here. The suggestion of model FAs to follow there is especially good. Look at WP:WIAFA
  • Article needs more references, for example the Soul, Rock, Hip Hop /Rap and Music Venues sections are all uncited. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Article needs to be comprehensive - this is a FA criterion - but the History section is one sentence and only covers the 1920s. What happened before and since?
  • The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself but the Chicago Symphony seems to only be in the lead. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
  • The lead sentence (first one) needs to name of the article in bold and I would pick a lead image that shows music and not just the skyline (it is a great photo and can be used elsewhere in the article, just not as the lead image)
  • Article needs a copyedit for language - I read for comprehension but recall seeing "it's" when "its" is meant, starting a sentence with "And", other problems. I would add lots of content and refs before working on the lead, then copyedit the language.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 14:28, 16 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]