Wikipedia:Peer review/Rhino tank/archive1
Rhino tank[edit]
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review to get some feedback and opinions on everything, so that it can be ready for FA.
Thanks, EnigmaMcmxc (talk) 18:53, 4 April 2012 (UTC)
- A few things:
- The automated peer reviewer says (and I agree) that:
- The lead is too short.
- There aren't enough outgoing links, although try to add these without adding duplicate links (duplicates between the lead and the rest of the article are fine, as are duplicates between image captions and the rest of the article).
- It could use an infobox, if there is any applicable one (perhaps there's one about modifications to armored vehicles?).
- I encourage you to use the {{sfn}} template instead of the current manually-done references (which don't include years, I note). Note that ref=harv will need to be added to the cite book/etc templates.
- Reference "Blumenson, pp. 205-206" can be replaced with a combination of "Blumenson, p. 205" and "Blumenson, p. 206".
- Make sure that all books with ISBNs have them filled in; I also suggest, for any books with only a few pages used, checking Google Books to see if those books and pages are available and linking them if so.
- The article is not consistent between British (e.g., "defences") and American (e.g., "armor") spellings.
I've done a touch of copyediting, mostly of an automated sort; I may do more.
- That's about all I can spot at the moment. Interesting article! Allens (talk | contribs) 22:13, 9 April 2012 (UTC)
- Oh. One other thing - the book and web references are not consistent on whether to use a period after an initial (I generally don't, but it's a matter of taste as far as I know - as long as it's consistent). Allens (talk | contribs) 22:17, 9 April 2012 (UTC)