A check for overall neutrality of style, etc. Additions to the outcome sections, areas that need to be footnoted, anything to improve the overall quality of an article I have worked hard on. A mcmurray01:38, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
This really has the potential to be featured, but the references need tightening. They are not organized in a standard way: you have links to NYT articles in Notes that are duplicated in Newspapers, for instance, and some outside links in the midst of text, near footnotes. Not good. You ought to either follow a referencing system like fruit uses (with all sources under "Notes", and Further Reading or External Links for non-sources), or else one like Pericles uses (with Notes separate from Citations, and Citations using an abbreviated form of References). Nearly every meaningful statement should be references implicitly or explicitly, and every contentious statement should be reference explicitly. Also, the list of the names of the dead probably isn't useful here, although you might separate it out into List of victims of the Rock Springs Massacre. – Quadell(talk) (random)17:56, 19 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]
