Wikipedia:Peer review/St. Louis Rams/archive1

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

St. Louis Rams[edit]

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I would like to see what others think of this article. --Pinkkeith (talk) 21:10, 20 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments Just some basic points about what need be done to improve the article.

  • A section about the stadium and owner
  • More refs
  • History section needs espanding
  • Lose the gallery in the Logo and uniforms section.

What's your target for this article? GA status? Because it's still a long way off. Buc (talk) 11:03, 24 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I agree with Buc's comments, here are some suggestions for improvement:

  • 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. The Cleveland Rams players and NFL considers it a second franchise seems to only be in the lead.
  • My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way - for example, Players of note and Coaches of note do not see to be in the lead. Please see WP:LEAD
  • There seems to be too much empahsis in the lead on compared to the amount of text in the article itself, specifically on the Cleveland Rams. See WP:WEIGHT
  • Per WP:CITE the article needs many more references, for example first paragraph in History in Cleveland Rams (1936-1945) or the first, third and fourth paragraphs in Los Angeles Rams (1946-1994), or the first and second paragraphs in St. Louis Rams (1995-present), or the whole Logos and Uniforms or Hall of Famers sections.
  • My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
  • Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
  • Please use my examples as just that - these are not an exhaustive list and if one example is given, please check to make sure there are not other occurrences of the same problem.

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 ><>°° 04:56, 25 June 2008 (UTC)[reply]