Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/2007

Hellyeah

Article on a recently formed supergroup would like to go for GA and eventually FA. Thanks. M3tal H3ad (talk) 04:57, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

LuciferMorgan

• "Blabbermouth.net reviewer Done Kaye commented "with little of the complexity of Mudvayne or angularity of Nothingface and much more of the full-on, pedal-to-the-metal style of Vinnie Paul's previous work", however, he said the songs "Star" and "Thank You" border on musical cliché.[13]" - Split into two sentences. LuciferMorgan (talk) 17:15, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• "A DVD titled Below the Belt was released on November 13, 2007, and featured performance footage from the making of the album, first studio sessions, coverage of the band's world tour, and personal interviews." - Has there been any critical reception for this DVD? IGN maybe? LuciferMorgan (talk) 17:20, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Nothing on IGN and i don't see any professional reviews., yet

• "Paul felt two guitarists...", "passing through 30 cities..." - this should be consistent. It should be either "two" and "thirty", or "2" and "30". LuciferMorgan (talk) 17:22, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

• "However, Ruhlman believes Hellyeah is not a notable variations from members previous bands.[12]" - Variations? A band is classed as one entity, so is therefore a variation (ie. singular). LuciferMorgan (talk) 17:23, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Done, Thanks. M3tal H3ad (talk) 02:10, 20 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:42, 22 November 2007 (UTC)

Suleiman the Magnificent

previous PR

Hermann-Paul

I would like this entry to be evaluated with the hope of becoming a Good Article.

Jdfulmer 03:35, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by DrKiernan

• Please add more links to the article, especially to the lead, e.g. First World War, Druet, move up ripolin link, and to sections lacking wikilinks.
• Who or what is R.E.D.?
• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Can you improve upon the references given? skygaze.com is just a self-published web-site. See WP:RS for an explanation of reliable sources.
• The entire "Post-war" and "Rediscovered" sections need referencing.
• Do you mean "raised by" or "raised against"?
• You use both "1920's" and "1980s", please standardise apostrophe use.
• The article is very pro-Paul. What about the counter-criticism?

Thanks, DrKiernan 09:17, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments by JDFulmer

• Links were added in the lead.
• R.E.D. is the author who covered Paris for the Burlington Magazine for Connoisseurs. He published under his initials. In order to avoid confusion, I've change the cite to the magazine's name.
• Persondata was added at the top of the article.
• I'll improve the references. Unfortuantely, the wikipedia entry on the Dreyfus affair was lacking at the time of the citation. Some of the omitted references were based on the body of Hermann-Paul's work. In those cases, I could cite an online catalog of his work.
• Personally, I would never write "1920's" but wikipedia is a collaborative effort. I've changed the style to 1920s, etc., as a decade holds few possessions.
• Your point on counter-criticism is apt. The man liked to ruffle feathers and as a result, he had more than his share of critics. Several of whom had legitimate reasons to pan him. I will make a point to include it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Jdfulmer (talk • contribs) 17:51, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Edmund the Martyr

Edmund the Martyr has already achieved GA status. It seems to compare favourably to similar articles in outside sources. There is an outstanding 'Request for Comment' regarding Edmund the Martyr and the patron saint of England. Hopefully, peer review editors can add a comment reqarding that issue. Other than that contentious issue, what are the flaws that exist in the article that the contributing editors have missed. Wassupwestcoast 14:28, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• Is St Humbert the same person as Humbertus? How much of the article is from Britannica, can that template be removed? How definite is the birth year of 841, was he said to be 14 on accession in 855? DrKiernan 15:35, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

• My view is that it needs to adopt a more historical approach if it is going to be all that it could be. That doesn't mean we ignore the hagiography, but it needs an awful lot more context. Why are Abbo & Ælfric's versions different? What do later versions tell us? Why did Cnut order the observation of E.'s feast across England? What, if anything, does Edward the Confessor's (probably true on some level) claim of kinship mean? How did E. become the most important saint in Danish East-Anglia within a generation of his death? How and why did E.'s cult spread to Ireland/Scandinavia/etc? And so on. At the moment the article does a good job of explaining the minimal historical detail and the principal early accounts, but that's only a start. Angus McLellan (Talk) 20:21, 13 November 2007 (UTC)

John Kefalas

First in an attempt to systematically create good articles for all Colorado state legislators (a tall order, I know -- but a worthwhile one, I believe). These are tough... they involve synthesizing information from a multitude of sources (as you can see from the refs section) and trying to strive for balance when almost every source may be incomplete or biased. What am I still missing, where have I gone off-track? -- Sethant 21:33, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 19:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Flanders

Ralph Flanders was an American mechanical engineer, industrialist and Republican U.S. Senator from the state of Vermont. Flanders used his experience as a successful industrialist to advise Vermont and national commissions on public economic policy. He was noted for introducing a 1954 motion in the Senate to censure Senator Joseph McCarthy for his sensational, but largely unfounded, accusations that many public figures, especially those in government, were Communists.

I have substantially upgraded this article to include Harvard references to his autobiography. I would like it to be considered as a Good Article within Project WikiProject Biography. It has already been rated as an A-Class article of Mid importance in WikiProject U.S. Congress. HopsonRoad 17:13, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by Lumbercutter

Holy frijoles! This article, formerly very nice, is now awesome! It is said that the "primary objective [of this review process] is to encourage better articles by having contributors who may not have worked on articles to examine them and provide ideas for further improvement." This in fact has already been going on in the case of Ralph Flanders, as HopsonRoad, RedSpruce, and I discussed the referencing system. Well knock my socks off, this article now has some of the better referencing found anywhere on Wikipedia. Countless thanks, HopsonRoad, for donating the time to make this article so great. This is the kind of thing that will make Wikipedia sublime.

Personally, if I woke up next Tuesday, opened the Main Page, and saw Ralph Flanders as the day's featured article, I would find it most fitting. — Lumbercutter 00:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

Thank you for your advice and assistance along the way, LumberCutter.HopsonRoad (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by User:AndyZ

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 04:21, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

• I have implemented seven of nine suggestions. The other two await human review. HopsonRoad 14:27, 12 November 2007 (UTC)
• I have implemented nine of nine suggestions.HopsonRoad (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by CApitol3

Well written, organized and solid referencing. Not to mention the great picture research and usage. I am also happy to see an article where wikilinking is done judiciously, with the purpose to add context. Thank you HopsonRoad for a really well written and polished article. CApitol3 13:45, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

Thank you, Geared Bull, for taking the time to review this article. Based on other input, I’ve done a bit more style editing.HopsonRoad (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by Billy Hathorn

This is a well-written article for the most part. It assumes that Senator Flanders was right on communism and that Senator McCarthy was wrong -- the traditional view.

See this from Wikipedia.org under Joseph McCarthy

[New scholarship] cites new evidence, in the form of Venona decrypted Soviet messages, Soviet espionage data now opened to the West, and newly released transcripts of closed hearings before McCarthy's subcommittee, asserting that these have vindicated McCarthy, showing that many of his identifications of Communists were correct. It has also been said that Venona and the Soviet archives have revealed that the scale of Soviet espionage activity in the United States during the 1940s and 1950s was larger than many scholars suspected,[81][82] and that this too stands as a vindication of McCarthy.

Some responses to these viewpoints have been written by Kevin Drum[83] and Johann Hari.[84] Historian John Earl Haynes has also argued against this 'rehabilitation' of McCarthy, saying that McCarthy's attempts to "make anticommunism a partisan weapon" actually "threatened [the post-War] anti-Communist consensus," thereby ultimately harming anti-Communist efforts more than helping.[85]

Of the many individuals that figured in McCarthy's investigations or speeches, most were already suspected of being Communists or at least of having leftist politics. There are several cases where Venona or other recent data has confirmed or increased the weight of evidence that a person named by McCarthy was a Soviet agent. However, there are few, if any, cases where McCarthy was responsible for identifying a person, or removing a person from a sensitive government position, where later evidence has increased the likelihood that that person was a Communist or a Soviet agent.[86]

Below are listed the names that various authors have alleged were "correctly identified by McCarthy." As the footnotes show, in almost all cases this assessment is questionable or demonstrably incorrect.

Solomon Adler[87] Cedric Belfrage[88] T.A. Bisson[89] Lauchlin Currie[90] Gustavo Duran[91] Theodore Geiger[92] Haldore Hanson[93] Mary Jane Keeney[94] Owen Lattimore[95] Leonard Mins[96] Annie Lee Moss[97] --Senator Symington's defense of Moss has been refuted. Franz Leopold Neumann[98] Edward Posniak[99] William Remington[100] John Carter Vincent[101]

The article might should have a paragraph or two saying that Flanders underestimated the communist conspiracy even on the assumption that McCarthy overstated it.

There is another book which exonerates McCarthy written by a conventional American liberal about 2000. I unfortunately cannot remember his name but will try to find it.

Billy Hathorn 23:32, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

This scholarly book rejects the conventional view on McCarthy, written by a liberal: Joseph McCarthy: Reexamining the Life and Legacy of America's Most Hated Senator by Arthur Herman. Ann Coulter's book is more opinion and informal; this is fully documented. If true, Herman has found a whole generation of faulty scholarship on McCarthy.

Billy Hathorn 23:40, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

Thank you for taking the time to review this article.

You suggest that the article "assumes that Senator Flanders was right on communism and that Senator McCarthy was wrong." I feel that either assumption would be a POV. In augmenting the article, I drew on published sources available to me. If you have published sources that you can recommend to further describe how others reacted to Flanders's assessment of McCarthy's approach to fighting communism, I feel that they should be included for completeness. You could leave such suggestions at Talk:Ralph Flanders.

You suggest that "The article might should have a paragraph or two saying that Flanders underestimated the communist conspiracy even on the assumption that McCarthy overstated it," especially in light of Venona. I’m unaware of any literature where is there a statement about how large Flanders estimated the internal Communist threat to be, so it would be impossible to state that he underestimated it. The record is clear that Flanders felt that the external Communist threat was extremely serious—so tremendous that it would leave the US and Canada isolated as free nations—and that he felt McCarthy’s actions distracted the nation from it.

I feel that estimation of the internal threat of communism is a more appropriate discussion for the Joseph McCarthy or McCarthyism articles. The scope of this article should be limited to what Flanders thought and whether others agreed with him.

I have rephrased the lead paragraph that you edited to state: "He was noted for introducing a 1954 motion in the Senate to censure Senator Joseph McCarthy. McCarthy had made unsubstantiated claims that there were large numbers of Communists and Soviet spies and sympathizers inside the federal government. Ultimately, his tactics led to his being discredited and censured by the United States Senate." The first sentence is undisputed, the second and third ones have stood the test of time in Joseph McCarthy. HopsonRoad (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by Miranda

The citations need to have page numbers. Miranda 06:13, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

Thank you for looking at this article, Miranda. You will find at Harvard referencing that page numbers are optional, not required. In this case, I’ve used them where a passage is buried in a book, not when casual perusal of a reference would quickly find the discussion.HopsonRoad (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by N-J Seigel, non-Wikipedia reviewer

• I still am hoping someone will look at this article with the depth of a college professor—still giving the high grades, but also making further, specific remarks/suggestions about length, organization, and style.
• Although the content, as a comprehensive article, is undeniably excellent, and a major contribution to Wikipedia, there remain punctuation errors, repetitions and long sentences, which need work.
• As to length, it is easy to justify including everything. However, a little bit less might be better. I think some deletions would improve the article as a whole, and make it a better "read"—for example, leaving out all of REF's Senate committee assignments.

Posted for N-J Seigel by HopsonRoad (talk) 14:32, 19 November 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

Thank you for looking at this article, N-J Seigel. I have received your independent style edit and have implemented most of your suggestions in the next revision. I have received no comments from other reviewers suggesting issues with length, beyond the need to expand the lead paragraph.

HopsonRoad (talk) 14:54, 24 November 2007 (UTC)

Review by BDell555

An impressively comprehensive article. Flanders' views on liberalism and conservatism, as further described at http://www.vpr.net/episode/31630/ may be of particular interest to many readers. My concern is just that it is a rather fluffy. For example, most short biographies of politicians wouldn't note that "He wanted to signal to the world at large that all nations “should work together toward human betterment...". Not because it isn't true, but simply because politicians say those sort of things all the time. The "Doing “what no one else was willing to do"" section might be another example. A more critical, skeptical tone would give the article more gravitas. I note that according to the Vermont Encyclopedia, "His voting record, more popular with conservative constituents than that of his colleague George Akin, reflected his business orientation." That's the sort of observation that is very useful, and inclusion of something like that would help diversify your sources, which at present are rather overconcentrated to Flanders' own book. You could also cite Time's August 2, 1954 article ("The Dispensable Man") which says that Flanders won the support of a group of 23 top businessmen, labor leaders and educators for the censure motion, but the article should not be lengthened further, in my opinion.Bdell555 (talk) 06:00, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

Reply to review

Thank you for taking the time to review this article. Your observations have been helpful to make the article more suitable for Wikipedia. Here is what I have done in response to your suggestions:

• Because the views on liberalism and conservatism, as further described at http://www.vpr.net/episode/31630/, were quotations from Flanders's autobiography already referenced in the article, I simply added the link.
• To address the "fluff" factor, I have deleted the "Doing 'what no one else was willing to do'" section and added the Vermont Encyclopedia citation in a revised section, Senate record and committee assignments.
• I have added the Time reference to the section, On Joseph McCarthy.

I understand the concern for an over-concentration of sources in Flanders's autobiography. Fortune wrote a puff piece on his pre-senate career. There are diverse news articles that pertain to his McCarthy role. I'll look into adding an American Society of Engineers biography on Hartness as a source pertaining to his engineering career. I'm afraid that, for a minor historical figure, that's probably the best we can do. In addressing your concerns, I have shortened the article slightly. Sincerely, --User:HopsonRoad 17:16, 1 January 2008 (UTC)

Bullet for My Valentine

This article was in really bad shape so i decided to completely re-write it. Hope to make it a Featured Article. M3tal H3ad 11:42, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

LuciferMorgan

Comments;

• "...below Guns N' Roses and Funeral for a Friend.[13] Other tours the band embarked on include opening for Metallica and Guns n Roses for six weeks of the summer in 2006,[14]" - The band name Guns N' Roses needs consistent spelling. LuciferMorgan 12:09, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• The following provide info on Metallica covers by BFMV; link one and two. LuciferMorgan 12:15, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• The article refers to their first two EPs. Can the article mention that the second EP only contained one extra track than the first EP? LuciferMorgan 12:20, 8 November 2007 (UTC)
• Can you add any critical feedback for the EPs (which I personally count as the same EP)? LuciferMorgan 12:21, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. M3tal H3ad 04:55, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:50, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

J Milburn

• Sorry to mention the same trivial thing twice, but does the logo have to be that big?
• Considering how important so many people consider it, perhaps a reference for the metalcore claim?

People aren't concerned about the metalcore thing mainly when someone adds thrash metal/other genre. M3tal H3ad 04:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

• Kerrang! is a periodical, it should be in italics.
• "A record deal"- the definite/indefinite article should be avoided in page and section titles unless part of a proper noun. 'First record deal' would be a better section title.
• "A second EP (often referred to as a mini album) entitled, Hand of Blood, was released" The comma use isn't quite right here. I think the comma after "entitled" should be moved to after "EP".
• "The Poison" should be in italics, even in the section title.
• "Since its release, the album has sold 330,000 copies." Perhaps this should add "as of [date]".
• "Promoting Poison"- Since the album is named The Poison, this section should probably be entitled 'Promoting The Poison'.
• "the larger Snickers stage,"- I'm unfamiliar with the stage; do we have an article? If not, could you perhaps explain in the article?
• Barfly links to a DAB page.
• "tours the band embarked on include opening for Metallica and Guns n Roses" Probably best to change that to "Guns N' Roses".
• "The Poison: Live at Brixton"- That should be in italics, I think.
• "Vocalist of fellow support act Lacuna Coil, Andrea Ferro, attributed the behaviour due to inexperience; "Probably they got some different kind of success in the U.K. in the beginning and they think that they paid their dues, but I believe that they still have to pay their dues, like everybody.[18]"- You forgot to close the speech marks.
• Some tours have been put in italics, some haven't. I am actually not sure if there is any consensus on this, but it would be best if the article was consistent.
• "Machine Head replaced the band as supporting act." Perhaps link to Machine Head?
• "Scream, Aim, Fire", the section title, should be in italics if the section is about the album (as I suspect) or perhaps speech marks if you think it is about the single.
• "from the band's upcoming album of the same name" 'Same name' doesn't need to be in italics.
• The blockquote appears to be unreferenced.
• "what our fucking hair looks like"[2]." The reference should be after the punctuation.
• "The Sun, the band were 'booed' when receiving the 2006 Metal Hammer" The Sun and Metal Hammer are both periodicals.
• "Metal Hammer and Kerrang, and stories in Revolver, Outburn, Penthouse, Rock Sound, NME, Hit Parader, Guitar One, and Alternative Press" Many more periodicals, not to mention Kerrang! should have the !.
• The bottom of the table isn't showing in the discography section, it probably just needs an additional |}.

Very well written article, as usual. Well done. J Milburn 19:37, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for the comments. M3tal H3ad 04:15, 9 November 2007 (UTC)

Gwen Shamblin

The article on Gwen Shamblin goes through a lot - from vandalism to well-meaning edits that can take away large chunks of information. I've been adding cites to this for a couple of months, but would really like some feedback on how to make this article the best bio of a living person it can possibly be. Also, extra feedback would help me get sections and ideas tacked down with unbiased input from others. Please let me know what I can do to even out the tone and keep information on Gwen Shamblin as comprehensive and NPOV as possible.Efkeathley 13:45, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate comments. 11:05, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Paul Ferreira

I hope that a Peer review will give some feedback on what needs improvement. I hope that the article can attain a GA for now.Abebenjoe 21:15, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate comments. 10:46, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Rodriguez

Good Article. Has had editing problems in the past, but is stable now. Jeffpw 10:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate comments. 10:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Cerball mac Dúnlainge

The 9th century version of six degree of Kevin Bacon: a fairly obscure Irish king of the 9th century who was incorporated into many Icelandic genealogies long after he died. With improvements to the Icelandic section and a map, I think this could reach FA class some day, so I'd appreciate any and all comments, especially as regards the narrative flow of the main section. Angus McLellan (Talk) 11:24, 23 September 2006 (UTC)

Relisted. 10:21, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

H. S. S. Lawrence

No request beyond the listing was made - I moved the semi-automated PR run by DrKiernan to the proper page.

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 17:58, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

David Petraeus

The general has recently been mentioned very often in the news and elsewhere. The article itself has gone through some major edits for content, tone, and references-- I don't know where to go from here. Revolutionaryluddite 02:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• My main concern is with the citations. I'd like to see them all replaced with citation templates for consistent formatting and information. The in-line external links should likewise be converted to citation templates with the text unlinked or a red link. (E.g. "Airborne.", "Iron Rakkasans" and "Ahmed S. Hashim") Also the citations should follow punctuation without a trailing space. ("1983[4]," - "facial hair[7]," - "2007[11]," - "general. [13]", and so forth.) Finally the "External links" section seems a little too long. Can some of those be worked in as citations? Otherwise the article seems in pretty decent shape. Thanks. — RJH (talk) 20:49, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• I left a series of sample edits; there are quite a few issues of WP:MOS cleanup that are needed.[1] Please see my edit summaries. In particular, review footnote placement per WP:FN (I fixed), WP:MSH capitalization on section headings, WP:MOSDATE on date formatting needed throughout, WP:GTL on excess article links in See also that should be removed, and WP:MOS#Captions regarding punctuation or not of sentence fragments or complete sentences in image captions. Also, pls remove the author links to him, as this is his article and those are causing incorrect bolding. External links need to be urgently reduced to only the most essential and should be minimized: see WP:EL, WP:RS and WP:NOT. Also note that you don't *have* to use citation templates, but you should consistently, fully and correctly format the citations by whatever method you choose (see WP:CITE/ES). Also, you have external jumps in the body of the article; external jumps (with very few exceptions) belong in external links. If a topic is notable, it should have it's own article, with the website given there, or the website should be converted to a citation, but external jumps to outside websites shouldn't be in the body of the article. Most of the cases I saw in this article are terms that should probably have their own articles. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 23:27, 29 October 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for minor issues of grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 02:51, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

(Response) Thanks, I see that many technical edits need to be done. Still, though, what do you think about the content of the article? Does it look like anything needs to be added or tweaked? Besides fixing the grammar, etc., is there anything keeping this article from good article status? Revolutionaryluddite 02:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

Harold Innis

I have added considerable information to this article, along with photos, captions, many citations, and an extensive bibliography. I am wondering what rating this article should receive now that it has been extensively expanded.

Bwark 21:04, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 00:53, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Awadewit

Hellow Bwark! Thank you for this wonderful article on a very important academic! Many of the comments I have may seem picky, but that is because there are no large-scale comments that need to be made. Well-done! Also, many of the changes that need to be made to the article are only to make it conform to the manual of style. You asked what the article should be rated now. It is currently a "B" - it clearly merits a higher rating than that, but without submission to Good Article Candidacy, WikiProject Biography A-class review, or Featured Article Candidacy, it cannot be ranked any higher. It must go through a vetting process at this point. You might spend some time looking at these processes in order to decide if you want to submit the article to them. I can offer advice on that front, as I am fairly familiar with them.

• Innis is considered by many to have been one of the finest and most original scholars Canada has ever produced. - Wikipedia tries to be as specific as possible in statements of this kind - "considered by many scholars" perhaps?
• This article has a lot of quotations, especially a lot of long quotations. I would try and summarize as many of those as possible. Retain only the ones necessary for the flavor of Innis's writing or for some particularly relevant anecdote or astonishing fact, etc. (see summary style). It is also not always clear in the article itself who is speaking/writing the quoted words. So, for example, in the large block quote about his railroad thesis, we get what seems to be an independent assessment of it - but who is writing this? The reader needs to know.
• A wider world beckoned. - While poetic, this kind of sentence is not necessarily encyclopedic. I would suggest deleting these kinds of sentences and phrases. The kind of writing style we are trying to achieve on wikipedia is very neutral, which often results in boring prose, I'm afraid.
• In spite of its religious affiliation, McMaster was far from a dogmatic or doctrinaire institution. - This kind of sentence might be viewed as point of view - could it be more neutrally worded?
• I would delete the "Notable quote" unless you can find a place to integrate it into the article. It might be viewed as trivia.
• Some of your images look like they need fair use rationales (see WP:FAIR). Also, some editors might question the images you have chosen to use. For example, why a postage stamp of a cod rather than the book cover of Innis's book?
• If you decide to go for good article (GA) and most especially if you decide to go for featured article (FA), you will need to spend a few days perusing the manual of style (MOS) and making sure that the article adheres to it (ex: links could be added in places (Baptist); links should be taken out of quotations per WP:MOSQUOTE). I've altered some things (such as image sizes - only maps and images with details that must be seen should have sizes - something about browser differences and user preferences) along MOS guidelines already.
• This page is quite long (it is around 10,000 words and that is the max - you might hear complaints about that). Here are some sections that might be summarized more succinctly:

• Early education in general
• PhD thesis section
• U of C section - list of professors would be difficult for someone unfamiliar with them
• Fur trade - remember, Innis's theories don't all have to be described here - they can have their own pages! that is the glory of wikipedia
• Communications theories in general - create subpages for the books and link there
• McLuhan section

Please feel free to ask questions about this review either here or on my talk page. Again, thank you for this carefully constructed and well-written article! Awadewit | talk 10:58, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

Lance Bass

Hi! I've been trying to get this article up to GA status for a little bit now. Am I almost there, or not even close? I think I've covered a wide range of subjects within Mr. Bass's life, but I'd love to hear some feedback about the wording and tone of the article, as well as any suggestions on how to improve it. It would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks, MgCupcake 21:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 02:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Harriet Tubman

I've spent some time taking this to a polished state, and I believe it's in FA-shape. I'd like comments and suggestions on how I can make it even better. (Two sources are heavily referenced, since there's a sad lack of books available – more info in the article.) Thanks in advance! – Scartol · Talk 02:13, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments by DrKiernan

Certainly a very strong article. My few comments are:

Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]

 Done – Scartol · Talk 15:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Why does the photograph say 1868 but 1880 on the image page?

Hmm. The LOC page indicates no date is included on the caption card. PBS gives a date of c. 1880, so I'll use that on the page itself. – Scartol · Talk 15:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

"in the midst of slavery's tumult" is a strange phrase, can you reword?

 Done I meant to fix that earlier and it must have slipped my mind. Fixed. – Scartol · Talk 15:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The map and picture of Susan B. Anthony have no source specified.

 Done The user who created the map is AWOL, so there's no way for us to ever discover its source. I really prefer the color map used earlier, but if a sourced file is needed, I suppose we can use the b/w red-county one I've switched it to. Insofar as they're licensed as free content, is the source really urgent? This is not a rhetorical question; I'm not well-versed on image legality issues. – Scartol · Talk 15:42, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Images should have sources, if it is obvious that this image is created by the uploader, you could modify the image page to reflect that. There seems to be another image you could use: Image:Map of USA highlighting Maryland.png. What would be really great, also given qp's comment below, would be a map showing the area where she actually lived, i.e. the North-Eastern United States. But I'm afraid I can't find one of those on commons. DrKiernan 09:28, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• That's it – I'm going to make one this evening. I'm going to try my hand at cartography. Watch out, world! Here I come with my pastel paint buckets and standardized fonts. – Scartol · Talk 18:06, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Can you cite "Because the specifics of her route were used by other fugitive slaves"?

 Done – Scartol · Talk 15:44, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Presumably she and John Tubman lived separately after their marriage? Perhaps you could mention this? Could you be more specific about the marriages? They all seem to have committed bigamy quite happily, presumably marriages were common law and not official ones.

Will address this soon. – Scartol · Talk 15:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Actually, it's not really possible to address it. I've more or less given all the information that's available – which is not much. Both Clinton and Larson explain that there's very little data available, and (probably in light of their breakup years later), Tubman didn't say much about the marriage to Bradford. Alas. – Scartol · Talk 19:35, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

The tag on the picture of David Hunter should be updated. DrKiernan 09:38, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done Thanks for your kind feedback and attention to detail. – Scartol · Talk 15:45, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Jayron32

Just gave it a readthrough. Looks great. Just some general comments:

• Watch out for overlinking, specifically linking the same statement twice in a short space. The lead, for example, links the Underground Railroad twice. It may be OK to link a topic twice, for example if the topic appears in two very separate parts of the narrative, however in general linking it the first time is sufficient.

• Yeah, I think I did okay with this in general, and forgot I had added it earlier in the lead. Thanks for the reminder. – Scartol · Talk 19:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Also watch out for over citing. For example, where the information is UNCONTROVERSIAL, and easily referenced to, for example, several different pages in the same book, it is OK to condense these to a single reference, for example "Larson, pp 213, 264" or something like that, and simply cite at the end of the paragraph. If it comes from two different sources, then it is probably OK to cite both references at the end of the paragraph. The only time you should really cite after each sentance is: 1) Direct quotes 2) controversial, surpising, or jarring facts, and 3) statistics and data. Most of this article contains what I would call uncontroversial information, and so footnoting at the end of the paragraph is sufficient. You can improve readability and not reduce verifiability by moving some of these references to the end of the paragraphs.

• In the past I've been chided for not having enough citations (see example above), so I tend to overdo it rather than take a risk in underciting. – Scartol · Talk 19:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Well, you should understand there is a difference between people commenting "Statements X, Y , and Z need citation" and "This article seems undercited". The former is actionable, the latter is not. Articles don't need citing, facts do. Citing at the end of a paragraph is still fairly unambiguous as a properly crafted paragraph should contain a single thesis, and what you are citing is that thesis and its supporting details. I have always been under the opinion that unless a specific statement is challengable (as defined as quotes, cited opinion, statistics/data, or controversial/jarring/surprising statements) then it is still unambiguous to cite at the end of a paragraph. If someone asks for more cites, you are well within your rights to request that they tell you which statements they think needs citing. I would agree that an overcited article is preferable to an undercited article, however BOTH are inferior, in my opinion, to a properly cited article.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 04:11, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, I see what you mean. I hope you won't be offended if – rather than go through and redo all the citations in HT – I put it into practice in future work. – Scartol · Talk 18:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• HT? What's that? --Jayron32|talk|contribs 05:42, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• H as in Harriet. – Scartol · Talk 11:48, 17 November 2007 (UTC)

• The image "scars on a whipped slave" does not seem to directly relate to the article. It is an excellent picture, but I question its purpose here. Since this is not a picture of Ms. Tubman herself, I wonder why it is in the article.

• I agree that it's not directly related, but given the barbarity of slavery and its effects on young people, I think the image is useful in depicting the conditions from which she escaped, and to illustrate the dangers she returned to – voluntarily – again and again. – Scartol · Talk 19:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

• Fair enough. --Jayron32|talk|contribs 04:13, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• The infobox "african american topics" Could probably find a better place. Could it be moved to the top of the page, or perhaps is there a horizontal version to be placed at the bottom?

• Yeah, I used the footer instead. Good call, thanks. – Scartol · Talk 19:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

These are all small issues. This seems VERY close to FA standard now, and just needs a little spit-polish to make it there. Good job, and I look forward to seeing this at FAC in the near future! --Jayron32|talk|contribs 17:49, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thank you kindly. I do hope to move it along quickly. Cheers! – Scartol · Talk 19:29, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

One more thing, I noticed that several people have commented on the status of certain maps in this article. I would agree that maps could help, and that the current maps need work. Please consider contacting User:Kmusser, who is unequivocally the best cartographer (at least, in my humble opinion) here at Wikipedia. He has done several maps for articles I have worked on (see infobox at Plymouth Colony for one example). You may want to consider contacting him at his talk page. He is very good, and usually very fast. I can give no better recommendation than him.--Jayron32|talk|contribs 04:18, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I think it may even be easy enough for me to make one of my own, using the USA maps available. – Scartol · Talk 18:02, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

User:Qp10qp

• I'd suggest that the lead be shortened to concentrate on what she is noted for: perhaps dropping things like the abortive marriage to Tubman, and Nelson Davis and Gertie, and four different jobs in the army, and the circumstantial matter from "Aided by the Underground Railroad, traveling by night and in extreme secrecy, Tubman (or "Moses", as she was called) followed the North Star and – in her own words – "never lost a passenger". Rewards were posted for her capture, but historians disagree on their actual amount; estimates range from US$12,000 to US$40,000" (a brief mention of rescues and rewards would do here, I think). I would drop "70" and postpone the discussion of historical evidence until later in the article.

•  Done – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

That's a very effective lead now, I think. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• On the other hand, I'd add a phrase of explanation for Underground Railroad and a line of context to indicate why she would be free in one state and not another.

•  Done – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

OK. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Not all non-Americans will take the social and historical context for granted. Could something be said to explain the nature of slavery at this time? In particular, about the difference between a slave and a freed slave. Presumably, Tubman's work did not come out of the blue. On the one hand there were calls for the emancipation of slaves (and the more southern states were being pressured by the northern ones); also she would have seen freed slaves in her own community, a phenomenon that must have put pressure on the status quo. The article addresses this as the article progresses, but perhaps something needs to be said earlier on.

• It's possible that I'm taking historical context for granted, being a US resident. But I'm not quite clear on what needs to be clarified. Tubman's work didn't come out of the blue in the sense that there were abolitionists, but insofar as their work revolved mostly around supporting and maintaining the Underground Railroad, I figured that explanation was sufficient.

• I don't know how severely the southern states were being pressured by the northern ones – the Fugitive Slave Law, at least, is an example of the reverse. When the Civil War started, Lincoln had no intention of abolishing slavery, and many Union officials wanted to work out a compromise.

Maybe not by governments, which are always the last to act. But the movement to abolish slavery was powerful, so I imagine that the slaves in Maryland would have been fully aware of it. Lincoln may not have intended to free the slaves, but the tipping point had been reached, and like a smart politician he surfed the big wave. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yes, but we don't really have much evidence of how they came into contact with it, and I'd hate to speculate. Larson does a bit of this (some parts of the book are pretty long tangents), but I don't know how helpful such a thing would be here. – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• Surely Tubman saw free black people in Maryland, but they were born free, manumitted or purchased by family members. Escapees always fled, and her biographies are very clear that she was breaking new ground by going back.

However, I imagine that the tendency, noted in the article, for slaves to be freed at a certain age was a response to the influence of the emancipation campaigns and a foreshadowing of the emancipation. I imagine that Maryland's closeness to Pennsylvania might have been significant too.qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe I should add a sentence or two on the general lay of the land, in terms of which states did and did not allow slavery? Or something like that? – Scartol · Talk 18:50, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I expect that seems so basic to an American. But this subject is surprisingly little studied in Britain, and it's probably the same elsewhere. I admit that I'm way out of my comfort zone in trying to make useful comments. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep working at it. I actually heard a very interesting talk several years back by a fellow who had written a book about British abolitionists entitled Bury the Chains. – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• Constantly wading waist-high into cold water, she fell ill with measles and was sent back home. This sentence makes it seem to me as if the two clauses are somehow connected.

• They are. She got ill from her constant slogging through the water, especially in the autumn and winter. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

But they aren't. You catch measles from a virus. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Hmm. I was misled by my failure to read more closely into the sources and the measles article. Curse me! Apparently I summarized it wrong, and have now reworded it correctly. – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• The map of Maryland with Dorchester marked is not particularly clear, in my opinion. By not showing neighbouring states it seems to hang in space, as if Maryland has a much longer southern coastline. It is surely crucial to mark the Mason-Dixon line, at least. And Delaware and Pennsylvania.

• Yes. I'm going to make such a map this evening. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

You versatile chap. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Her owner said she was "not worth a sixpence" and returned her to Brodess, who tried unsuccessfully to sell her. I thought Brodess owned her anyway.

• Yes, but she had been hired out. I've tried to make this more clear. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I assumed this is what was meant. Clear now. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Why were the slaveowners willing to free Tubman's father but not her mother? What was the difference? Was it, as you say in the next paragraph, that the children's status depended on the mother's status and not the father's?

• There's some speculation on this. I thought about including the differing opinions from Clinton and Larson, but I worry about including too much of that sort of thing (I already feel like the article's heavy with it), and didn't think it would add too much here. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

OK. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Also, her father had been owned by a different family – one, presumably, more willing to carry out its patriarch's last requests. – Scartol · Talk 18:44, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

That might be it. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Although Tubman's husband is mentioned later, there is no mention of him when she escapes from Maryland. From a storytelling point of view, the omission struck me.

• Actually, there is: At the end of the first paragraph the sentence appears: "Tubman refused to wait for the Brodess family to decide her fate, despite her husband's efforts to dissuade her." – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I missed that! My fault and apologies. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Because the specifics of her route were used by other fugitive slaves, Tubman did not speak about them; particulars of her journey remain shrouded in secret. Did not speak of them at the time; that makes sense. But later, when her story was taken down, surely it would have been safe to speak of the route?

• Perhaps, but all of the biographies leave it as a mystery. My guess is that Bradford wasn't interested in (and/or didn't have the training in oral history to ask about) these routes, and later investigations haven't yielded much. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough. Perhaps changing the semicolon to a full stop would remove the implied connection. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• The article says that it was unusual for a slave to marry a free man, but later it says that her sister Kessiah did the same. How unusual?

• A good point, and one I hadn't picked up on. I still think it was an anomaly. Maybe Harriet inspired her? – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

What I'm sensing, with this and the freeing of the father (and later of the mother), and the ability of Harriet's parents to resist a sale of their child, and the self-hiring-out of slaves, and the buying of freedoms, and the existence of the underground railroad, is that the situation was becoming complex as the old certainties of the slave system were undermined in this death-throe period of slavery. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Undoubtedly – but I think they were becoming more complex even before she was born. The contradictions of a "land of the free" which was founded by slave owners began to unravel as soon as the Declaration was signed, methinks. – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps a phrase of explanation is needed about the Fugitive Slave Law.

•  Done Agreed. Added. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Fine.qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Where did Douglass live?

• It's not clear. Larson speaks of Tubman taking a route "out of Philadelphia to New York City, then on to Albany and Rochester, New York". Douglass' book is not much clearer (he moved around a bit; even Frederick Douglass isn't very specific about where he lived when. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Fair enough.qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• Her journeys into the heart of slaveholding states put her at tremendous risk. Did she do this in other states than Maryland? (I know Delaware was a slave-owning state, but not such a dangerous one at this time, I would say.)

•  Done True. I suppose the plural is superfluous. Fixed. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• She also carried a handgun, and her willingness to use it was legendary. What does legendary mean in this context? At the time, or later? Does it mean merely "famous" or "semi-mythical"?

• I meant to indicate that everyone knew she was willing to use it. I've reworded this. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

OK. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• During one voyage with twenty-five fugitive slaves. If she rescued, as stated earlier, some seventy slaves in thirteen expeditions, then this expedition included over a third of all she rescued. I noticed here that you did not come back to the scholarly issue of numbers referred to in the lead. Given that Conrad, reffed for this incident, is an early source, perhaps he has been challenged by later biographers? Kate's note on the talk page is worth taking seriously on this, I suspect (presumably this is Kate Larsen, author of one of the biographies).

• Yes, she is the same Larson, and I agree that Conrad may have used flexible math. Since the point of the story isn't about how many were in the group, I've taken out the specific number. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

That solves it.qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

• I find it a little hard to believe that Tubman would threaten to kill anyone once they were over the border into the free states, even if they intended to continue to Canada; but that's the impression this anecdote gave me, as worded.

• That's also the impression Conrad and Clinton give; the fear was that they might give out information vital to keeping other people hidden and free. (Her exact words, according to Conrad, were: "Dead n[egroes] don't tell no tales.") – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I suspect that Tubman might have been exaggerating here. I would at least add a "Tubman remembered", or something here, to frame the assertion. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, okay. Done. – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• I find the discussion of rewards slightly superfluous: does the reader require this? Perhaps the reader could simply be told that rewards were offered, including one for US$12,000.

• Given the wild numbers which circulate in the children's books, and the amount of time Larson spends debunking it, I do think it's relevant. (The numbers for this and the record of how many slaves she helped liberate were changed even as I worked on the article.) – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

It's up to you. But if Larsen has debunked the earlier stories, then they have been superseded.qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Well, even she admits that it's hard to know for sure. I like it as is. – Scartol · Talk 02:14, 16 November 2007 (UTC)

• tending to her family, Does this mean her parents etc., or children of her own?

• Parents, etc. I changed it to "relatives", which is hopefully more clear. – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

Cheers. qp10qp 23:24, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

I found this an excellent article by diligent colleague Scartol. It avoids most of the pitfalls of biography based on oral retellings and, once it gets going, is fluently and clearly written in accessible encyclopedic prose. Once some work is done on the lead, this will make a worthy candidate for featured status, in my opinion.qp10qp 20:32, 14 November 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much, Qp. I appreciate your support. (As for the lead: Once again I messed up by caring too much about what other people had written before me. I always feel weird coming through with the sledgehammer, so I try to leave intact some of the original wording. But every time it seems it gets changed eventually anyway!) – Scartol · Talk 18:41, 15 November 2007 (UTC)

James J. Strang

I would like to request a peer review of the article on James J. Strang. I am hoping to get the article to "FA" status someday, so that other Wikipedians can read more about this very interesting man from Mormon and Michigan history. I would be interested in any suggestions on any part of this article that could improve its quality, and make it a better candidate for a "FA" nomination. Thanks!! Ecjmartin 21:12, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 19:48, 12 November 2007 (UTC)

Klaas-Jan Huntelaar

Article is currently a good article candidate. Any feedback regarding further improvements that can be made would be much appreciated. JACOPLANE • 2007-10-15 21:30

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Takeshi Kawamura

I'm new to Wikipedia contribution, and this is my first article. It was originally rated while it was still a work-in-progress; I'm fairly certain it's above stub-class now and would like to see it reassessed. I'd also like any pointers on style, content, ridiculous grammar/writing errors that I've somehow missed -- anything of the sort. Also, I'd like to add some pictures to it, but I'm a bit at sea on where to find them. I know of webpages and books that have images of Kawamura's productions, but I doubt use of them would be legal and am not sure where else I might look. An article about theatre without pictures is a sad article, says I.

Thanks ahead of time, and I hope to be adding more theatre content to Wikipedia in the future.

Koetachi 18:17, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Awadewit

Welcome to wikipedia! What a wonderful contribution! Thank you! I think that you have hit the encyclopedic tone exactly right in the article. What is missing is the biographical data. You have quite a bit on Kawamura's writings (which was fascinating and I now want to go out and read these plays), but the page also needs to detail a bit about his life. See, for example, Balzac and Sarah Trimmer. You can either integrate the discussion of the works into the life or separate them out, but with a writer you need both the works and the life. With regard to images, I think you can use bookcovers, as long as you are talking about that particular book at some length (so, perhaps, Japan Wars). You would have to find a free or fair use image of the author himself. That is much trickier - I assume you looked on the wikimedia commons already? Pictures of theater productions I don't know about - have you read Wikipedia:Non-free content? That has a lot of helpful advice. Awadewit | talk 11:20, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! It's always intimidating to try something for the first time -- so your kind words are much appreciated. Kawamura's life prior to and around his works may be difficult to find information on (in English, at least), as he's most widely known in Japan; but I'll keep an eye out for anything more personal I can dig up as I look through other Japanese theatre texts. Nothing like a language barrier for keeping information scarce! I'll look around both the Commons (which I just learned about) and read about non-free content and see what more I can track down in the image field -- that actually seems to be the trickiest part of an article to navigate, images. If bookcovers are fair game, I think I'll look at the Japanese editions, see if they have anything usable. Thanks again! Koetachi 00:48, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• You're welcome! I suppose the Japanese wikipedia has a more substantial biography on him? I wonder if it is possible to request a translation? You might look into that. Awadewit | talk 01:11, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

They don't seem to have a page on him (according to google), the first article i found with his name has it red-linked. CaNNoNFoDDa^Talk 14:14, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah, I've noticed that -- and find it odd, as he's won major national awards, stits on judging panels, is still active, etc. My only thought is either a) Wiki's as behind in some areas in Japan as it is in the U.S. or b) he's listed under his troupe, Daisan Erotica or T-Factory. I'm going to check in to both. What article did you find his name in? Koetachi 15:17, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

The one i linked is about a magazine that he is apparently on the editorial board of (the title is coming out as "Lines of Age", but this could be scrambled by the autotranslator, so i wouldn't trust it too much). He also has redlinks on an article about Kanagawa Prefectural Kibougaoka High School (under notable alumni) and China plays Becker Engineers Award under "21 times from Chapter 30" (don't look at me, that's what it says). I *think* this is the "what link here" page for his article. The google search i linked above seems sort of reliable (it's probably better than the MediaWiki search engine anyway). CaNNoNFoDDa^Talk 21:07, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

William Stacy

My objective in requesting a Peer review is to obtain constructive criticism, and to generally improve the article via independent critique from “another set of eyes”. This was my first article. I’ve worked on it for several months, and received useful critique during a recent GA review. I’m hoping to receive more good criticism from a Peer review, and would greatly appreciate your time, effort, and comments.

William Stacy was an officer of the Continental Army during the American Revolutionary War, and was subsequently a pioneer to the Ohio County and the Northwest Territory. I have attempted to reference most or all books containing descriptions of Stacy. In that respect, I’ve tried to be as complete as the historical record allows. (Unfortunately, there is no available portrait, drawing, or likeness of Stacy.)

I’m hoping that a reviewer would bring a new perspective to any issues related to the article, including suggested edits, grammar, balance or point of view, and completeness. Thank you for your help. ColWilliam 21:19, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you to APR for this review. Working on comments. ColWilliam 23:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Awadewit

Welcome to wikipedia! I'm glad that the GA process was helpful for you. This article looks quite good. I have only a few minor suggestions.

• The lead should be a standalone summary of the article. For hints on how to write one, see WP:LEAD and WP:BETTER#Lead section. The second sentence of the current lead is much too long for the average reader.

 Done ColWilliam 22:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• You might think about rearranging the page more chronologically, so that the plaque details and other remembrances are in a section titled "Legacy" or some such thing.

 Not done - However, the suggestion is appreciated. I've generally written the article chronologically. However, I wanted to include the plaque and inscription in the section "Opening days of the Revolutionary War". The inscription helps describe the events of that time. Thanks again for the suggestion. Regards, ColWilliam 18:45, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• This page is well-written, but some of the language is a little decorative for an encyclopedia. Watch out for phrases such as "colorful events" - they can be interpreted as violating wikipedia's neutral point of view policy. We try to have a pretty objective writing style - what that really means sometimes is boring.

 Done ColWilliam 22:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Your bibliography is impressive, but a bit overwhelming for the average reader, I think. Why don't you list only the best sources on Stacy? Your notes will take care of the rest.

 Not done - However, the suggestion is appreciated. I have not implemented, but instead, am considering the idea of an additional section (perhaps a "Bibliography short list") to address your idea about listing only the best sources for an average reader. Also, I wanted to retain the detailed references and bibliography for those readers who are interested in historical details and/or fact-checking. Although many references are provided to the article, most references contain only a sentence, paragraph, or page regarding William Stacy. Thank you again for the suggestion. Regards, ColWilliam 21:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Infoboxes are optional - decide whether you think this box aides the reader or not.

 Done - Retained infobox, as it was added based on a request from the initial article assessement. Regards, ColWilliam 17:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• I would suggest that you stagger your images on the right- and left-hand sides of the page. It is more aesthetically pleasing (see WP:MOS#IMAGES and WP:IMAGE for suggestions on page layout).

 Done ColWilliam 18:39, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• Any quotations need to have the inline citation placed directly after them to make absolutely clear what source they are being drawn from.

 Done ColWilliam 22:45, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• You might think about combining references rather than having multiple citations. That is generally the preferred method. Having five little numbers in a row can be distracting to the reader.

 Not done - However, the suggestion is appreciated. Similar to above…I have not implemented, but instead, am considering the idea of an additional section (perhaps a "Bibliography short list") to address your idea about listing only the best sources for an average reader. Also, I wanted to retain the detailed references and bibliography for those readers who are interested in historical details and/or fact-checking. Thank you again. Regards, ColWilliam 21:48, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Most of my comments are nit-picky because you have written a very fine article. Awadewit | talk 11:46, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you very much Awadewit for your efforts and comments. Will work on your suggestions. ColWilliam 23:27, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• You're welcome. Awadewit | talk 00:18, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you again. Incorporated some suggestions above and am considering others. Done for now. Regards, ColWilliam 18:50, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Kevin Myers

I know you've just finished for now, but I just noticed the peer review for this very nicely researched and written article. I have one suggestion regarding the References & Bibliography section. Above it was mentioned that these seem a little overwhelming. This is because you've combined two different approaches to citation, which produces a ton of repeated information. That is, in every single footnote you repeat the entire publication information of the source, and then you repeat that same information again in the "bibliography" section. This is not a standard approach in the publishing world or on Wikipedia.

One approach you can use, which keeps all of the infomation but makes the notes easier to read, is to use the Chicago Manual of Style "short form" for your citations. That is, in the footnote, just use the author's name, the name of the publication, and the page number, and then in the bibliography section give the complete publication details so that readers can check your sources if they need to. See Pontiac's Rebellion for a featured article that uses this style, which is standard in published academic history and the style I recommend for history articles. Your article will look more professional this way. Good work and good luck! —Kevin Myers 19:30, 10 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you very much, Kevin Myers, for your comments, and for the suggested "short form" approach to citations. This is a great idea, and I will change the format to short form. Thank you. Regards, ColWilliam 21:49, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

 Done - I've made a first pass at converting citations to short form. I'll be cycling through the article and references several more times to improve, catch mistakes, and perhaps combine references. The short form looks much better. Thanks again for the suggestion. Regards, ColWilliam 23:16, 11 November 2007 (UTC)

William Gibson

Recently reached GA, editors are somewhat at a loss as to how to proceed from here. What would it take for the article to reach WP:FA standards, do you think? Skomorokh ^incite 16:04, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Replies to comments are on the article discussion page. CaNNoNFoDDa^Talk 22:17, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Susanlesch

Hello. A great candidate for FA. A few ideas, please ignore them if they don't help. Good luck. -Susanlesch 15:30, 12 October 2007 (UTC)

• The biography might be more encyclopedic if his family was explained, for example the names of his parents, any siblings, information about marriage and any offspring.
• Could "Influences" and "Influenced" in the infobox be expanded into prose?
• Could Mary Shelley and more female authors be mentioned?
• Can Gibson's critics have a voice here?

Automated Suggestions from AZPR

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

SandyGeorgia

External jump here should be removed: "Gibson returned the favour, writing "U2's City of Blinding Lights" ... ", could be converted to a citation. There is some confusion on the use of WP:DASHes (there are spaced emdashes and unspaced endashes on page ranges, etc.). See MOS:CAPS#All caps (there are some all caps in the citations). Make sure all dates in citations are consistently formatted, some are linked and other aren't. e-mail exchange as a citation - how do you plan to justify that as a reliable source at FAC? There is some incorrect bolding in citations. Is this a date? Bolhafner, J. Stephen (3 1994). If so, it should be March 1994. This is a purely aesthetic comment, but the bottom half of the page just looks disorganized and cluttered. HTH, SandyGeorgia (Talk) 04:37, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Lotsa ideas from Jay

Here are some suggestions on where to take this article. The people working on this article are the experts; don't feel as if any point I make must absolutely be followed. (Sorry for the length, hopefully the ideas are more good than bad!) Feel free to ask for clarification on any point.

• Biography If the answers are known they'd help create a more complete picture of his life.  :
  • Is it known what the Appalachian mining town was that they moved to?
  • Is it known how his mother died?
  • Was she still in West Virginia when he went to Tuscon?
  • Do we know why Tuscon?
  • Does he have any siblings?
  • If Gibson was 18 when his mother died does this mean he left high school just months before graduating?
  • The timeline here is a bit vague. Do we know how long he traveled in Europe and California after her death? Do we know what money he used for these travels? Did he have any money? Did he grow up with money after his father died?
  • Do we have any idea what he did from 1967-1972?
  • Did he meet his wife in Yorkville as part of this hippy community?
  • Do we know how long his second trip to Europe was? Big difference between a week-long trip to Paris and 9 months backpacking through 40 countries.
  • Do we know why he picked English?
  • Do we know what authors influenced him? Who he read and loved in college?
  • Do we know what year he got his bachelors?
  • Do we know what year he became a full-time writer?
  • Does he have kids?
• Literary career The reason we have an encyclopedia article on William Gibson is because of his literary career. Therefore this section needs to be where we hit our home run. So, with that in mind:
  • Were his early short stories successful at all? Where were they published? When did people start paying attention to Gibson?
  • Neuromancer is still his best-known work. So let's say a bit more about it. Do we know anything about his writing process? About how he got the publisher? Did it start selling well right away? Or was it once it won the awards?
  • Why have 6.5 million people read Neuromancer? Or in other words, tell the reader more about what distinguishes this book. We don't need a plot summary. But how about a basic plot outline and the details such as the timeframe in which Neuromancer is set, some details about the futuristic world he paints, the sprawl from Boston to Atlanta! How is it different from other science fiction (less aliens and intergalactic travel)? We read Gibson for his dystopian vision of -- not the powers -- but the perils of technology. There was no ghetto on the Star Ship Enterprise.
  • Let's say just a bit more about the rest of the sprawl trilogy, a one- or two-sentence outline, and some sort of indication of to what extent the books were critical and/or commercial successes.
  • Same thing with the Bridge trilogy. Tell the reader a bit more about Gibson's vision of this future. What's significant and interesting about this world? Again, to what extent were the books critically and commercially successful?
  • And so take his recent novels and do much of the same. "Gibson viewed the Sept. 11, 2001 attacks as a nodal point in recent history..." -- indeed! Pattern Recognition begins with Cayce's father disappearing in the attacks. What a bold literary maneuver for 2003! (As an aside: I haven't read Spook Country yet. I loved Pattern Recogintoin. Think I'd like Spook?) Also, it'd be good to know more about the critical and commercial success of these books.
  • Also, there are two critical communities for Gibson. The science fiction critics and the mainstream critics. I think we could say more about Gibson's cross-over (the quote about not being in NY Times for ten years is the right direction), what sort of reception has he received outside of science fiction critics?
• The Collaborations section is already quite good in my opinion. I didn't realize he actually wrote the Screenplay to Johnny Mnemonic. Again, as a major work of the author, we can say a bit more about this film. Has he ever commented on the screenwriting process? Is it something he'd like to do again? Again, what sort of critical and commercial reaction did the film receive? Was Gibson happy with the film?
• Influence and recognition is quite good as well. I wonder, could we start the section with a better quote than that from Literary Encyclopedia? "One of North America's most highly acclaimed science fiction writers" is almost an understatement.
• Visionary influence could use just a bit more about the things he foresaw. He predicted an internet in neuromancer, but how was it similar and how different to what happened? What subcultural aspects did he predict? What were his predictions regarding reality TV?
• (And because I don't want this left unsaid, the picture in the infobox is just stunning.)

So I realize that's a huge amount of ideas. But like I said, I'm just sort of throwing out most of what occurred to me. If the information's not out there that's fine, but at least this way we asked the questions. The key goal should be expanding and improving Literary Career. Once that's been hit I think you'll be ready for FAC. Like I said, let me know if any of my suggestions are unclear. And again, don't take any of this as negative. This is a really great article. And I only have so many suggestions because the subject of the article is so interesting to me. --JayHenry 21:26, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Berkley Bedell

Over the past few days, I have worked on expanding this article from a stub to a real article. At this point, I think it is well-referenced and somewhat thorough. I must admit that I am proud of it, but I must also admit that there is room for a lot of improvement. That is why I am posting here - I want input from more experienced editors on how to improve this article. My goal is to bring this article to GA status (and maybe eventually FA.) Thank you to anyone willing to help. Minute Lake 03:24, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 15:27, 11 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Ok, the third suggestion is, I think, the result of an error. I think it is considering the dates in references. The first two I really wish I could fix, but there are no free-use images of him available (the only chance is if one of his images falls under fair use.) Thanks. Minute Lake 15:43, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Lisa del Giocondo

Hello. I'd like your help to find out if this article about the likely subject of the Mona Lisa could reach GA or A or FA in the long run. The article walks some lines of controversy but thanks to several sources a biography of her life seems to be straightforward if lean after 500 years. Also some of you might know if the Italian persons in the article are referred to correctly in English. One art history scholar for example calls her Lisa del Giocondo. -Susanlesch 16:59, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Could we have a color picture?

Yes (I missed the link to the Gutenberg color image before and have made this change). Thank you for asking. -Susanlesch 14:04, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?] DrKiernan 10:07, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you, added Persondata. Also moved the article to Lisa del Giocondo, her married name, for now and the name used by above mentioned expert. -Susanlesch 13:18, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Review by Jeff

I can see the primary contributor(s) have done a fair amount of research on the topic, for which they should be commended. Here are some points that may help improve the article.

• Any particular reason to use the Gutenburg image rather than the one on the Mona Lisa page?

• Only because of the two sources it is most likely to be a free image.

• Yorck Project had a detail in the commons. I switched to their version. Maybe someone else will know what set is best to use (I have been told the Louvre has some copyright interest and thought the images with Louvre as a source have a photographer's copyright and would like to be safe as possible). -Susanlesch 16:37, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

• Because Mona Lisa is in the public domain (in most countries if not all), Faithful reproductions do not attract copyright here in the US (in France may be a different story). Because the servers for the English Wikipedia are based in the US (I think is the same with Commons), the Louvre photographers can't claim copyright for the image hosted here. In other words, we are allowed to use any faithful reproduction here. See When to use the PD-Art tag under Country specific rules. Jeff Dahl 17:06, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

• About the dates, right now you have this format: (1479-06-15) with the year first. Usually you would put the year last, no matter what order the day and month are in. I know that users can set their own preferences, but many users will not. Having the year listed first is highly likely to confuse a great many readers, whereas having either of the more usual formats (month-day or day-month) would be much less confusing to everyone regardless of preference. In other words, I suggest changing to (6-15-1479 or 15-6-1479, or spell out the names, see Wikipedia Manual of style, dates) for the sake of unregistered users, the vast majority.

• Fixed I think.

• "...whose identity became a source of scholarly arguments and fascination." Probably should say when it became a source of arguments and fascination, because right now it seems too vague.

• Cut.

• "For certain, the Mona Lisa is identified by France's Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs and in the national collection of the Louvre as a portrait of Lisa." This probably ought to be reworded to say:

• "Both France's Ministry of Foreign and European Affairs and the Louvre maintain (or assert, contend, officially declare) that Lisa del Giocondo is the sitter in Mona Lisa." The reason is that if I read the start of the sentence, I might come to the conclusion that "For certain, the Mona lisa is identified." Which is not what is intended. What you mean to say, I think, is that For certain, the Louvre and the Ministry of Foreign affairs have claimed Lisa del Giocondo is the sitter.

• Reworded. Thanks for noticing.

• "...and one reason to think she and her husband cared for each other." This is ambiguous. Did husband and wife care for each other like a nurse cares for a patient (taking care of each other), or do they care for each other like lovers? I think you might reword to say "...and one reason to think she and her husband genuinely loved each other." Which removes all doubt.

• Thanks, fixed.

• "By luck and the ups and downs of fortune, an artist called a genius who had an extraordinary talent for painting had time in 1503 to begin it" Again ambiguous. If I start to read the sentence it looks like it is going to say "An artist called a genius" in the sense that the Artist was calling a genius (subject-verb-object). This is not what you intended. Sentences that look like they are going to have one structure and then suddenly switch to a different structure are very confusing. Try to reword it so it is simpler, or perhaps delete it, because it really does not add any new information.

• Cut.

• "As Lisa, the painting..." As Lisa? What does this mean?

• Cut.

• "As Lisa, the painting is a tender expression of real and quite ordinary people..." The painting is a "tender expression" of just one woman, not "people," which makes this sentence confusing

• Cut.

• "...how an artist could possibly describe feminine virtue in visual art..." again confusing

• Cut.

• You will want to make sure you maintain a formal tone in some of the passages describing the painting. "Viewers may see Francesco's affection for his wife ..." is an example of a sentence that is really not in a formal tone, instead this sentence is too sentimental and hyperdramatic.

• For now I removed all of this section.

• You are really going to have to be scrupulous in your sources. Some of them (Zollner and Muntz) are pretty strong, but some of them are really weak (Lorenzi and Johnston, for example). The prose must reflect how confident you are in the source, if just one scholar is asserting this information his name should be in the prose and use the text "so and so has asserted based on evidence from such and such that ..."

• I can try to find the book Lorenzi and Johnston talk about or some replacement but maybe not until after Thanksgiving (a guess). For now, yes there are some weaker sources. The best sources there at the moment are the most used if that helps.

Good work with the research. Jeff Dahl 03:09, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

• Jeff, I cannot thank you enough for the review. Thank you. -Susanlesch 07:49, 11 October 2007 (UTC)

Automated Suggestions from AZPR

• Also changes were made based on Automated peer review suggestions here from APR (Sorry I moved the article and may have messed up the link at first.) Thank you. -Susanlesch 01:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Charles Philippe Leblond

I've been working on this article for a while since my grandfather's -CP Leblond- death and would welcome any input and thoughts. How should this article be rated? Thanks. Aeternalis 18:31, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, which some editors find useful and others do not. Be aware that not all comments may apply.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honor (A) (British: honour), honour (B) (American: honor), behavior (A) (British: behaviour), fiber (A) (British: fibre), ization (A) (British: isation), isation (B) (American: ization), modeling (A) (British: modelling), cosy (B) (American: cozy).
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 07:04, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Kunichika

I have greatly expanded this article and would like further assessment of its quality and value. --Clhowson 22:47, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Review by Doug.

This is a great start class article. It really needs some references though. I only found a couple of inline references and neither of them showed up in the references section at the bottom. Lots of external links, maybe some would be appropriate for inline references. I have concerns when there is a long article with only one reference listed in the references section. If it were well referenced this could easily be a B-class article.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 22:29, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments from DrKiernan

• You say "is considered" in the lead. Considered by whom? Please specify.
• You may wish to convert your form of references to the cite.php footnote system or <ref> notes system detailed at Help:Footnotes. DrKiernan 13:02, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 12:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Reply by Clhowson

• Thank you all for your suggestions. I have followed them to the best of my ability.

--Clhowson 17:55, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

Britney Spears

• First peer review
• Second peer review

This article has recently passed GA. As Britney Spears gets so much attention from the media, being one of the most searched names on the internet, and as pop phenomenon, her article should be in top shape, aka FA status. Oidia (talk) 14:39, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

J Milburn

Ok, looks like a high-quality article. A few small things that could do with fixing-

• A number of times, you use the word Spears's. Is this correct? I would spell it Spears', but the article's usage is probably correct.

 Not done I've asked about it in the Reference Desk, dicussed it in the talk page. And majority of people agreed that Spears's is the correct term. Oidia (talk) 04:57, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

You might want to add a footnote about that spelling from Bartleby's. — RJH (talk) 23:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• The sentence "The album of the same title was released in January 1999, reaching number one on the Billboard 200,[25] and certified Diamond with more than 25 million copies sold worldwide,[26][27] although it received mixed reviews." is horribly clunky. Perhaps it could be broken down a little?

 Done Although that's the disadvantage of using the lead single's name for the album's name. Oidia (talk) 02:59, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• "The success of Spears's music coupled with her controversial image made her one of the year's biggest stars." could do with a reference. Who has said that it was those things that made her a star?

 Done The source phrased it slightly different, but it's obvious that they are saying the same thing. Oidia (talk) 03:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• I am not sure that the tours should be in italics; I think they are just meant to be phrased in normal text. I can't see anything that could include tours on the list of titles to put in italics.

 Done Oidia (talk) 05:23, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Spears released her third studio album Britney in November 2001. This was the first album where Spears assumed some creative control by co-writing five of the album's tracks." Can we have a reference for this?

 Done I rephrased the sentence, and used the Rolling Stone's review as an appropriate reference. Oidia (talk) 05:10, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• The line "In contrast Rolling Stone said of the album, "Britney" belabors the obvious: "Spears is one month away from entering her twenties and clearly needs to grow up if she's going to bring her fans along."" is a little confusing. Too many quote marks, made slightly worse by the fact I am quoting it here.

 Done Is it better now? Oidia (talk) 04:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "hit a sour note" isn't a very encyclopedic phrase. If I didn't know better, I'd say it was a pun ;-)

 Done Oidia (talk) 04:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "was highlighted by Forbes in 2002" Forbes is the name of the publishing company, and the link leads to that. We have no article for the magazine, but at least call it Forbes Magazine, and remember that, as a periodical, it should be italicised.

 Done Oidia (talk) 04:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that's all for now- got to dash for a while. I will review it further either later tonight or tomorrow at some point. J Milburn 15:54, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Right, time to finish my review. Sorry for knocking your comment down Jeff, I just prefer to keep all my reccomendations together.

• "newest single "Someday (I Will Understand)," originally"- I think the comma should be outside the quote marks, as the comma is not part of the title.

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "2007: Return to Music: Blackout"- Is there any reason 'music' is spelt with a capital M? Is it a proper noun?

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Brunette Spears covering herself with the vest in the music video for Gimme More."- Quote marks!

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "successful single in the United States since her debut, ...Baby One More Time."- And again.

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:38, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "attention and was lauded as her "comeback""- By who? Names, publications, quotes, refs.

 Done I didn't exactly mentioned "who" in the article, but I think 3 sources from 3 different countries all saying it is a "comeback" is good enough. Oidia (talk) 03:40, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• "a media critic noted that Spears seemed confused and disoriented on stage and appeared to have forgotten the lyrics and dance moves to her performance."- Again, who, and who were they writing for?

 Done Oidia (talk) 03:50, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• "On September 18, it was announced that Spears had been dropped by her management company, The Firm."- Is The Firm the name of the company? Why is there no wikilink? Why is it in italics?

 Done Althought not wikilinked due to the absence of an article. Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• Single line paragraphs are generally frowned upon; there's a few in 'Film and television'.

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Honestly, I think we should just trust our president in every decision he makes and should just support that" Rather than linking 'our president' to George Bush, I think it would be better to add [George Bush] after it.

 Done I think it's probably better to just remove the wikilink all together. Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "On May 28, 2007, Spears made a cameo appearance on the premire of the E! reality show Sunset Tan. There were rumours that she had only appeared because her then-manager Larry Rudolph is one of the co-owners of the shop; a few weeks later, these rumours were confirmed to be true." Urgently need refs for that, otherwise we have a potential BLP problem. Also, a wikilink to Larry Rudolph would be nice, if we have an article.

 Done I removed all the information about the "rumor" because no source can be found. I did add a ref to it though. Oidia (talk) 11:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• "NBC has a show in development reportedly titled Occasional Wife, with Matthew Perry as the lead. This supposed remake of a sitcom of the same name in the 1960's would also star Spears as the opposite since she has tested the role and received positive response."- Refs? Also, I am not sure I like the phrasing of that line, not to mention the misused apostrophe on 1960s.

 Done cited and removal of excess information. Oidia (talk) 11:17, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• Going back to the tours thing- italics are probably not correct, but I doubt speech marks are either. Even worse, some have speech marks, some don't.

 Done Removed italics, but inserted speech marks as they are "names" of tours. Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• Some perfumes have speech marks, others don't. Not sure which is more accurate.

 Done Speech marked. Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• Again, single sentece paragraphs in the first personal life section.

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

• And in the second section.

 Done Oidia (talk) 10:55, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, that's everything I saw on first reading. J Milburn 09:41, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Dahl

• You might try to cut back on the wikilinks, per MoS, which should be used only when relevant or for dates etc. Such gratuitous examples include: actress, dancer, author, film, divorce, advertising, grade school, manager, contractor, gymnastics, solo, actress (2nd time), Catholic, schoolgirl, Grammy (once is enough, we don't need it every instance), George W. Bush|our president, engagement, nude, school uniform, etc. If every single noun is wikilinked, the article becomes nothing but a sea of blue. Jeff Dahl 17:57, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Automated

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:30, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

A thought

Isn't there some requirement that featured articles actually be about something significant, rather than about drugged-out, worthless, washed up, former pop tarts? Just a thought...

Ha! The answer is, "No." These reviews are based on the quality of the content of the article, not the subject of the article. Sorry. :) --Midnightdreary 00:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Jagadish Chandra Bose

I've listed this article for peer review under multiple wikiprojects because I'd like to get some creative feedback to take this article to GA status. Thanks,

Arman ^(Talk) 05:01, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, which some editors find useful and others do not. Be aware that not all automatically generated comments may be applicable.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?] Done
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?] Done
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 12 Meter, use 12 Meter, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 12&nbsp;Meter.^[?] Done
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?] Done
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • apparently
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]  Done
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: meter (A) (British: metre), metre (B) (American: meter), realise (B) (American: realize), isation (B) (American: ization), signalling (B) (American: signaling), program (A) (British: programme), skeptic (A) (British: sceptic). Done
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.” Done
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 08:44, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

The suggestions from the automated review have been incorporated in the article now. Arman ^(Talk) 10:32, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Paul Collier

Hi, I am hoping to make this article into something more than a Stub and hopefully go beyond Start to a B. Your suggestions and help are much appreciated.

Ramnarasimhan 16:43, 2 October 2007 (UTC)

Semi-auto review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program.

• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as it could be. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 06:54, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Review by Doug.

Expand, expand, expand.--Doug.^{(talk • contribs)} 22:28, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Priestley

Joseph Priestley was an eighteenth-century polymath. He was a theologian, scientist, educator, political theorist, and minister. He published around 150 works. Writing a succinct biography of him is therefore quite difficult. This article, despite having two spin-off pages Joseph Priestley and Dissent and Joseph Priestley and education, is still quite long. It is just around the 10,000 word mark the last time I checked. Obviously, any suggestions regarding deletion would be helpful; however, it has been edited quite rigorously and we are still left with this much material. The article is currently GA and we would eventually like to take it to FA. Please help us clarify, copy edit, and whatnot. Thanks! Awadewit | talk 05:43, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

Infobox? DrKiernan 13:04, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

As infoboxes are optional, the consensus was reached on the page to delete it and arrange the lead as you see it. The layout of the lead is a consensus that was reached after a bit of a kerfuffle over something. (BTW, when you think about it, this page certainly does not need anything added to it.) Awadewit | talk 19:16, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Dahl (see sandbox page for further discussion)

• After thinking about this for about 4 days, I think I finally found an example of what I'm talking about. Take a look at FA Isaac Newton. This is pretty much a perfect example of what an article about an influential figure in science/religion/etc should look like, and is only 55kb. Jeff Dahl 18:39, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• You might want to try: {{TOClimit|limit=2}} for your table of contents, that will limit the depth to only the ==level 2 headings== and make it much shorter which, as I'm sure you know, is FA requirement. Just place the template right after the intro paragraphs. More comments to come... Jeff Dahl 17:38, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks - have done that. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, I see a really good article with lots of information. Lots and lots and lots of information. Too much information. The actual prose is well written in terms of sentence structure, grammar, spelling, references etc. But from the overall standpoint, it is just too much. One reason the article is so long is because it is overly detailed. It is painful to have to cut out information, but when the reader's eyes start to glaze over such passages it is time to adopt more of a summary style. One element that continually contributes to the problem is the little bits and pieces of information, almost trivia, sprinkled throughout. There's a saying I've heard that applies here: "Perfection is reached not when there is nothing left to add, but when there is nothing left to take away."

An example: "...when he began a lecture series based on his Institutes of Natural and Revealed Religion, a text he started writing at Daventry but did not publish until 1772." The part about when he started writing the book and when it was finished, I think is too much detail.

• I had removed this but added it back in at another reviewer's request. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)
• I need examples of where there is too much detail; this article has already been severely reduced in size as it is. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Because of the complexity involved, I created a sandbox page for this work. Check out this sandbox. I highlighted passages in gray that seem too detailed and need to be deleted or reworded. I did a few sections to highlight what I mean, but I can't do the whole article this way because the wiki-markup takes about ten times longer than doing in on paper. I don't suggest simply deleting the gray passages, and please take these as flexible suggestions; some material in gray should be kept but will need simplification or rewording to make it fit. The prose should not stray off-topic trying to cram in every little detail. Jeff Dahl 20:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• What I would recommend is copying the text to a sandbox or whatever, to be used as a base for spinoff articles, of which many could be created. Then, examine each sentence and ask, "is this really necessary?" If the answer is no, then zap it. If it is necessary, then start summarizing the information. Tell us only the most important parts.

• That is precisely what I have already tried to do. In fact, I have already created two spin-off pages. What you are asking for is much harder than you realize. In fact, I have asked many people to list the things that should be deleted and they have not been able to list anything (in fact, one editor who insisted on spin-off pages said there wasn't too much detail in this article, confusing me enormously). If you could please list what needs to go, I would be happy to rework it, but I have done my best to present what the biographies say is the most important material and I have continually asked for help regarding deletion. If you would be willing to work with me, point by point, I would greatly appreciate it. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• Another problem is the "-isms" I know it is just impossible to define each in the article due to size, but as it is, many sentences are unreadable by a layman. For example:

"...researching and writing the work eventually convinced him to adopt Socinianism, a form of Unitarianism." What does this even mean?

• This is another problem. Explaining all of this only balloons the size of the article. I can explain and make the article twice as long (explaining theology is long and tedious) or I can rely on wikilinks. I chose the latter in most cases. If you feel that there are isolated instances, such as this, where more detail is needed, please list them. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

another example "...This work marked an important change in Priestley's theological thinking that is critical to understanding his later writings—it paved the way for his materialism and necessatarianism." Again, I am baffled. Might want to double check the spelling of "necessatarianism." Although the article documents Priestly's religious associations in microscopic detail, I still don't get a feeling of what those beliefs actually were, because of all the jargon. Try summing up the themes of his beliefs using normal words and sentences rather than tossing up an -ism, and leave those details to their own article.

• Help would be appreciated on this because none of the sources use any other language than this, and, frankly, these are the best words to use because they are the most precise and the most concise. In most instances, I have tried to introduce Priestley's beliefs using these precise words and then explain them using lay vocaboulary. In the case you point out, I did not because I go on to explain those things later in the article. Repeating the explanation would only make the article longer. Again, a detailed list would be helpful at this point. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• The picture captions might be a little more interesting, telling us something about the item rather than just its title.

• What kind of information are you looking for? We have given more when more was necessary or available, I think, but perhaps you could list which images you think need more explanation? Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Take a look at Wikipedia:Captions for some great tips. I think the idea is to add some more information besides just a title. Sometimes, you can actually use the caption to describe the work and take that part out of the main text. Jeff Dahl 04:40, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I have done of this. See whether you think more could be accomplished. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 07:04, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, some of these (PriestlyFirstPrinciples, Stephen Hale - pneumatic trough, PriestlyCartoon, PriestlyMedal) do a fine job, though some images have only a title. Jeff Dahl 19:12, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

I've done some more, but I can't really see anything to do with the rest that wouldn't take too much out of the text. Awadewit | talk 21:50, 14 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, that's enough for now, I'll do more later. Jeff Dahl 18:33, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks - I really appreciate it. Reading this article is difficult and time-consuming, I know. Your efforts are greatly appreciated. Awadewit | talk 19:14, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Qp10qp

One point, before I read the article. I have never believed that a page about someone on Wikipedia is a form of boiled-down biography. I remember you raised an eyebrow at the Anton Chekhov FAC when I said I had deliberately missed out stuff about his love life and much else. But if you had seen the door-stop size of some of his biographies, you might have sympathised. As a history graduate, I suppose I have very little admiration for biographies. I wouldn't necessarily regard it as a virtue that you have tried to do justice to the information in Priestley's biographies. Biographies give one the kitchen sink and all, whereas I think a Wikipedia article should concentrate on notablity. In other words, I believe the criterion should be: what are the notable things about this figure? For a major figure about whom the information is copious, the biographical details should be restricted to what is notable or essential, I feel. The rest may justifiably be excluded. qp10qp 23:54, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

• Benjamin Franklin: not British, surely.qp10qp 00:52, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

• You must know I sympathize with this view to a large extent. That is why I read the long list of "other secondary sources". The other thing is that Priestley biographies are not the kind of personal biographies one usually encounters and that I think you rather despise. The most recent and most thorough, Schofield's, is more of an intellectual history. This article reflects that. I don't think that you will be upset by the level of "what Priestley had for breakfast" detail. :) The problem with Priestley is that he was notable in so many fields and in so many areas that are now rather difficult to explain - natural philosophy and theology, to name two. I think when you read the article, you will begin to see the difficulties that I have been struggling with. I don't anticipate any serious methodological differences. There is no room for "breakfast" details because there is so much other stuff to cram into this bio. I have only included a few to placate the masses. :)

• Franklin was considered a British expert in electricity for some reason. I think it is because he spent a lot of time there, discussing his experiments. See, he was part of this club... Awadewit | talk 01:28, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Well, one can't be American on the one hand but British according to what one studies, surely. By that reasoning you yourself would be part British. With a Yorkshire accent probably.

I'm simply repeating what I read: these were the foremost British experts on electricity. How about we just say "in Britain" then? Awadewit | talk 16:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• I've now read the whole article, and it took me a while. I enjoyed the parts about air, the contrast with with Lavoisier, and about the Birmingham riot, and this may be because at those points I felt the material was quickened by its obvious notability. I would not suggest substantive changes to those parts.

However, I don't think this article works overall. Before I go on to give my reasons, I'd like to commend you (main editor Awadewit) for the depth and detail of this work and for its usefulnesss. On balance, I would support it at FAC on those grounds; but I'd caution against submitting too early to that forum since I fear that objections to length and digestibility might be lodged.

My suggestion is going to seem quite extreme. (I doubt it will be accepted; if it isn't, I will try to come up with a plan B.) I think there must be an attempt of some sort to reduce the length and emphasise according to significance of information. By the time I reached the "Legacy" section, I had decided that the article would be better divided into clear parts, by topic rather than chronology. Then I read this: "His scientific discoveries have usually been divorced from his theological and metaphysical publications in order to make an analysis of his life and writings easier". So I am not the only one; but you quote opposition to that approach, and you will doubtless say that his interests were thoroughly intermixed. I take that point, but it is ambitious to organise the article on that basis, I think. Anyway, I will forge ahead with my suggestion.

I believe the chronological approach and headings would be better ditched. In my opinion this structure imposes a dutiful and oppressive comprehensiveness on the article, a grinding determination to provide information of some sort about everything he did and wrote. In my opinion, however, the article would more lucidly address Priestley through a hierarchy of what he is known for.

I would start with a short biography, lightly covering the main external details of his life, where he lived, marriage, jobs, awards, etc,, but cutting down on the less notable information, for example some aspects of his life in America.

I would then address his science: however, I'd cut to a minimum mentions of his less significant scientific work, for example on optics; some light treatment of electricity would be in order, followed by a major treatment of his work, theories and controversies on air. Why? Because this is what he is mainly known for. And even though his significance in this field is clearly vulnerable to counter-arguments, I think his notability stands, because his discoveries, even if he didn't understand them, cannot be taken away from him. This is often the way with scientific discoveries, that the discoverers and the best theorists aren't always the same people: this was the case with Alexander Fleming, for example, who also didn't quite understand what he had discovered.

Next I would look at religion, using the transition from science to address the way the two overlapped in Priestley's view. Gradually I would move into a treatment of his dissent. I would however cut a great deal of the information on that, in particular the reporting of each of his writings and the scrupulous but slightly indigestible mapping of all his different beliefs and shifts in emphasis in that regard. I would not say too much about his odder beliefs: after all, many famous scientists had odd beliefs, astrology, for example (and Newton was obsessed with alchemy), but these are largely overlooked when we assess them.

Finally, I would address philosophy and politics, using the transition from dissent to lead into his political views and his clashes with authority and the masses in the context of the effect of the French Revolution. Detail of the Birmingham riot might be interesting here, having perhaps been touched on in the biographical part.

I would cut down the legacy section, reducing the number of eulogistic quotes, which, in my opinion, have the effect of repetition.

Along the way I would cut much of the minor detail. There is often, in my view, so much undifferentiated material that it is at first difficult to tell what is most significant. I would provide detail according to the following criteria of significance, the first requring more space and emphasis than the second: 1. What is significant about Priestley for the present day? 2. What, though it might not be significant now, was most sigificant about Priestley for his own day? Anything else I would consider cutting.

I advise aiming to reduce the article to 80kb or under, which would still leave a mighty read.

In making these suggestions, please don't think I don't appreciate all your awe-inspiring and time-consuming scholarly work here. Cutting things that took hours and hours to research and write is a heart-breaking prospect, I know. But I honestly think it would make a better encyclopedia article.qp10qp 04:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Don't forget that anything you cut out can be put into a spinoff article, nothing has to be wasted! Jeff Dahl 04:36, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

But no one really reads those. The main biography page of a person is the core information. How many readers are willing to read three or four pages on a figure? Not many. That is why I am not really a fan of the spin-off page. I resisted spinning-off JP pages for a long time for precisely that reason. Awadewit | talk 06:11, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right that I don't want to do that. One reason is that I simply don't want to invest the time at the present moment. If that means the article has to stay un-FA'd until I or someone else feels like it, that's fine with me. But anyone else, in my opinion, is going to have enormous trouble doing what you have asked. The scholarship, except for the early twentieth-century biographies, do not say "this is more important than that". In fact, that is biggest flaw of Schofield's work - he details everything. It would be quite difficult for any editor to justify why they have elevated one set of things over another, in my opinion, without going back to the early biographies. Occasionally I used these biographies to do this out of sheer desperation, but it is one of the things that I feel is actually the least supportable about the article.

One of the reasons I chose the chronological approach is because that is the approach followed by most of the biographies. It also allows the reader to see Priestley's intellectual development over time, which is quite significant.

Of course, the biographies are chronological, but that is not the only way to arrange information in an article. One can show Priestley's intellectual development within other sorts of sections and structures.qp10qp 15:23, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

It is interesting that you recommend cutting down on the America section. This section is already severely reduced. Priestley's time in America is one of the most well-researched aspects of his career, but it receives little attention here. Cutting it still further would create a further imbalance in that already subjective choice.

The reason I suggested it was that he doesn't appear to have done anything very significant over there.qp10qp 15:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

That is true - that is the initial reason I cut it down in the beginning. Awadewit | talk 16:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

You emphasize in your description "what Priestley is known for" but that is different than "what Priestley had an influence on". I think that what he influenced is actually more important than what he is known for - reputations can be deceiving.

I'm not sure what "odd" beliefs you are referring to. Most of Priestley's religious beliefs were fairly common among Dissenters. Priestley was first and foremost a theologian, not a scientist. In fact, he was not a scientist at all.

I mean his beliefs about the relationship between science, nature and religion.qp10qp 15:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

But according to everything I read, those beliefs are at the core of his philosophy. They may be odd by our standards, but if they are his core beliefs, we have to explain them. Awadewit | talk 16:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Question #1 (Priestley's significance for the modern day) is the last thing I think we should consider. I really am actually very tired of hearing this question about every eighteenth-century topic. Most have only a distant significance to the modern day and any influence they might have had on our world is indirect and near impossible to prove. These questions are so speculative that I feel that they are best relegated to the fluffy "legacy" sections.

Perhaps I didn't explain this well enough; "influence" would do just as well. What I mean is that in my opinion the article would be clearer if it gave aspects of Priestley's life and work that connect to the present day priority over those that don't. By "connect", "influence", "significance to the present day", or whatever, I mean that historical and scientific figures are most important to us for their position in the development of knowledge (or society, religious thought, or whatever). Those who made no contribution are usually forgotten. It seems to me that there is too much in the article that is either insignificant to us today or was insignificant (or markedly less significant than other aspects of Priestley) in its day. If the article tells us, as I feel it does by implication, that everything Priestley did was equally significant (in fact, I get the impression that you would like to say that he was less significant as a scientist than as a dissenter), then commonsense tells us that this can't be so. Even someone who knows nothing about science would surely feel the article come to life at the moment it describes the discoveries Priestley made about air.qp10qp 15:19, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I think it is highly debatable whether Priestley was more influential as a natural philosopher than as a Dissenter. Oxygen was discovered earlier by someone else who communicated this fact to Lavoisier, so that is no big deal, really. It just happens to have received a lot of press. Priestley's philosophical and theological writings influenced people like J. S. Mill and Kant - how is that not important? Perhaps even more important than his half-discovery of oxygen? Awadewit | talk 16:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Question #2 (Priestley's significance for his own day) is far more important. Priestley's notability rests on that. No one now cares about much that Priestley cared about, but during his own time, he was one famous guy. I think that this article should try to explain why it was that Priestley was such a controversial figure in his own time and why what he said was so inflammatory. It is difficult, because the debates are foreign, but it is essential, in my opinion.

If you come up with a Plan B, let me know. I understand your desire for a "Priestley's theology" paragraph or two, but the reductiveness of such a thing frightens me. The DNB doesn't even do that. :)

I do realize that this page is a tad long for many readers and dense in places, but I am just not sure how to discuss theology and philosophy without being a little technical. These concepts were very important at the time and deserve to be mentioned. I do not think that the article should be dumbed down too much. Then it will look like Joe Jackson's biography on Priestley, which radically misrepresents Priestley at times, the French Revolution, the British reform movement, etc. all in the name of sensationalism and readability. We need a better balance. Awadewit | talk 06:09, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

But it's not just a tad long; it's horrendously long. I mean by that that it's so long that it doesn't really work as an encyclopedia article, accessible for the average reader interested in the overview of the subject. The principles for a large subject like this are different from those for a smaller subject, where one can afford to be fully comprehensive. Plan B would be for me to list sections of the article that I think should be thinned or removed and then for me to do a copyedit on top of and as a result of that, to take 4 or 5 more kb off the article without much changing the content in itself (the copyedit would be too little on its own, though).qp10qp 14:58, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

I am suitably chastened. Could you try it in the sandbox that Jeff has set up? Perhaps we could work out a new version there together. If that doesn't work out, I will rewrite the whole thing from scratch. I view that as a last resort, though. Awadewit | talk 16:08, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 12:50, 9 October 2007 (UTC)

Fvasconcellos

I'd like to note that I am not a member of this project, and the sheer extent of the discussion above leads me to believe I won't have much to add to this review. I do have a few comments, however, before we get to trimming the body text (which is currently a 20-page printout, with tight leading and no images):

Lead

• I've added convenience links to theism, materialism, and determinism.
• "Because many of his texts were written during the French Revolution [...]" this seems to "downplay" the nature of the controversy surrounding him; from what I gather reading the text, his work was surely always controversial, due to its very content and not only the "atmosphere" (sorry, no pun intended) of that particular time? Perhaps I'm misreading things here.

• This is supposed to explain why a mob burned down his house, but you are right that it isolates his controversial nature? How do you suggest fixing this problem? Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Hmm. Perhaps In his metaphysical works [...] a project that has been called "audacious and original"; not surprisingly, much of his work was controversial [at the time]. Stop me if I'm editorializing here; I'm not much of a writer, and synthesizing what appears to have been a lifetime of controversy in a single compelling sentence is a little beyond me :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
    • I'm not sure the new sentence is compelling, but perhaps it is an improvement. Awadewit | talk 23:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)
      • It is. Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:28, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] Priestley's determination to reject Lavoisier's 'new chemistry'"—perhaps a link to Chemical Revolution would be appropriate here, if not ideal.

• Added; also added a "see also" under "Chemical Revolution". Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Early life and education

• "Priestley was born to an established Dissenting (i.e., they did not conform to the Church of England) family"—I think Priestley was born to an established Dissenting family (that is, they did not conform to the Church of England) would be clearer. I agree with Jeff's slight trim of the first paragraph, although I feel the remainder of the section is significant enough to stay as is.

• Moved. Which trim? In the sandbox? Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thanks; yes, in the sandbox. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Needham Market and Daventry

• "His series of scientific lectures, titled "Use of the Globes", however, was more successful"—this seems somewhat lacking in context. Since we don't want to add to the article, perhaps rewording it to something like He also presented a series of [scientific] lectures titled "Use of the Globes", which was more successful.

• Changed. Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] his time there was happier. The congregation cared less about Priestley's heterodoxy and he busied himself learning to play the flute [...]" I realize this is a nice indication of a (likely important) change in his state of mind, and in keeping with the article's overall tone, but it seems too trivial.

• Deleted flute reference. I think the contrast between his misery and Needham Market and his happiness at Nantwich is important. Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you, I understand. Unfortunately, some things will have to go, and I was trying to spot statements which added the least to the article. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Warrington Academy and subsections

• "Priestley moved to Warrington and assumed the post of tutor of modern languages and rhetoric at Warrington's Dissenting academy"—the town's Dissenting academy?

• Changed. Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• "He fit in well at Warrington and quickly made friends with another tutor, John Seddon." Is this really significant? I read this as early evidence of how Priestley's views usually isolated him. Is this accurate? As you mention Seddon again later on, it might be best to leave this in.

• Priestley got on well at Warrington, unlike other places he lived. It is the contrast that is important. Moved Seddon explanation to where he is introduced. Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • OK, thanks. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• "The couple played several games of chess or backgammon every day [...]"—again, a nice touch of humanity, but at the risk of being harsh this doesn't add much to the article, if anything at all.

• I wanted to add something about JP's domestic life. Much is made of these games in his autobiography and other commentary of the time. But some things must go...and it is always the women. :) Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Oh dear. Well, I'm no expert on eighteenth-century relationships, but I guess the fact that he spent any quality time at all with his wife must have been significant then :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
    • We still have the long quote of him praising his wife and his bereftness at her death. Awadewit | talk 23:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• "His millennial perspective was bound up with his optimism [...]"—that's an awkward construction, a little too idiomatic; it doesn't really match the overall style.

• My own style doesn't my own style? Do you have another suggestion? Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • Sorry :) Perhaps closely tied to? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Yes, that sounds better. Changed. Awadewit | talk 23:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Despite his busy teaching schedule, Priestley decided to write a history of electricity." Why? :)

• I don't know. I haven't seen any explanation of his motivation than I can recall. Awadewit | talk 23:43, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• Benjamin Franklin described as British—I can't get my head around that. My impression is that Franklin visited the Society's meetings on occasion. Is British necessary at all? I see you've tried to tackle this above.

• How about "in Britain"? (We do all realize that the colonists were British until some particular date or other and that they thought of themselves as British for a while after whatever arbitrary date you want to choose, right?) Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • In Britain is fine. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

• The description of The History and Present State of Electricity could, in my humble opinion, be shortened considerably; after all, there's a main article.

• I'll let ragesoss tackle this. He's been helping me out with the science parts of this article. Awadewit | talk 16:30, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
  • OK. Thank you, and sorry for the edit conflict :) I'll go over some more of the article later. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:48, 13 October 2007 (UTC)

Leeds and subsections

• The summary of the Institutes is a bit long-winded. I realize this is important, but perhaps it could be shortened further?

• Attempt has been made. Awadewit | talk 00:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Priestley also founded the Theological Repository [...]"—when exactly?

• That must have been lost in the editing - restored. Awadewit | talk 00:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] he believed that science could increase human happiness"—increase sounds a bit weak here.

• Nothing is coming to me at the moment. It is all about more happiness - ideas? Awadewit | talk 00:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• I'm drawing a blank at the moment. Will think about it. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• magnify? further? expand? Awadewit | talk 19:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• further sounds excellent, although somewhat different in meaning. I'd go for it. Sorry for not getting back to this, but I've been busy with work! Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)
• Further now inserted. Awadewit | talk 03:15, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] it was the only English history of optics for 150 years. Priestley paid careful attention to the history of optics [...]"; redundant-sounding, although clearly different in meaning; could you reword either?

• Changed first one to "book on the topic". Less precise, but avoids redundancy. Awadewit | talk 00:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] Lord Shelburne delicately wrote to Priestley [...]"—why delicately?

• Shelburne was afraid Priestley might be insulted. Should I put that in? Awadewit | talk 00:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps. I personally think more context would help here. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• What isn't clear exactly? Perhaps you could list the questions you had? That would help me. Awadewit | talk 09:59, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Right, sorry :) Well, "wrote delicately"—as I said before, why delicately? In my opinion, a mention that "Shelburne was afraid Priestley might be insulted" is warranted. Then, we have, "insulted why?" I presume the reader would be interested in knowing—I would. By the way, in a completely unrelated matter, I see you moved mention of Priestley's birthplace to an image caption. I really think it should be in the main text :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 13:49, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• I have just removed "delicately". Going into the rest of it would just add unnecessary detail in an already too-long article. What does it read like without the "delicately"? I can't tell anymore. Everything looks horribly truncated to me. I have moved West Yorkshire back into the main text but left the other details in the caption. Is this acceptable? Awadewit | talk 19:08, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• It reads fine. As for everything looking horribly truncated, trust me—it's just a matter of strategic distance :) The article is excellent. Regarding his birthplace: that's also enough, no problem. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:15, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Priestley debated whether to sacrifice his ministry and accept the position; after intense soul-searching, he resigned from Mill Hill Chapel [...]"—intense soul-searching may be accurate, but it doesn't sound it in the article's context; just overly emotional.

• But it was a difficult decision for Priestley to make. How can I describe it better? "agonizing"? Awadewit | talk 00:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Leave it in. I've thought this over, and it is really not detrimental to the article, just something that jumped out at me. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll take a break here—more to come later. Sorry for my trivial suggestions; I hope they're somehow helpful. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 19:24, 9 October 2007 (UTC), revised 16:13, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for all of these helpful suggestions. I have to take a break from editing for the moment because I have some sort of horrendous flu. I hope to be recovered in a few days and back at it, though, so please don't think that I don't appreciate your help. Awadewit | talk 22:33, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

• • Ok, I have no voice anymore, but that doesn't matter for us! Let's see what we can do with JP. I would kinda like to nominate him for the main page in February. He's such a fascinating guy. Awadewit | talk 16:00, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
    • Ah, I can relate to that :) Welcome back. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 16:24, 13 October 2007 (UTC)
      • Thank you again. Feel free to strike out as needed, I also think it's helpful. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:27, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Part 2

OK, here we go. I'm sorry for taking so long to get back to this.

• Not a problem. I have been quite busy myself. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Calne and subsections

• "Priestley also became a political adviser to Shelburne, gathering information on parliamentary issues [...]"—I'm interested in this "Priestley as spy" (I know, I know) aspect. I know you're trying to trim, but could you add a little more detail on this? How did he gather such information? Where and who from? If this is too much trouble, never mind; just a curiosity.

• Very little is known about this. Any other details I added would be pure speculation by scholars, so I left them out. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK, no problem. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "He criticizes those whose faith is shaped by books and fashion [...]"—"shaped by books and fashion" sounds like a direct quote, and perhaps should be formatted as such? If it isn't you're really a great writer :)

• It isn't a quote as far as I know. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] the world and the men in it will eventually be perfected."—the world and the people in it? ;)

• Ah! Fixed. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Priestley believed that mankind could be perfected through a study of nature." From what I read directly above, Priestley's philosophy involves the concept that mankind is invariably, if slowly, headed towards perfection; if so, this sentence is a little confusing. I realize perfected is meant in the sense of improved, but perhaps the word could be changed? I'm taking this article as my sole source on Priestley right now, so if I misunderstand, please let me know.

• Priestley is confusing. It is not entirely clear to me whether Priestley was a postmillennialist or premillennialist. Nothing of what I read made that distinction. However, the books and articles often use the word "perfected". Are humans perfecting themselves? Is God perfecting them? Again, this is not totally clear. I have a feeling that it is because Priestley is not clear or consistent. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for clarifying; best stick to the sources' wording, then. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Also, the volumes [...]"—Furthermore? Please don't hate me for this.

• Changed. (No hate.) Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "[...] the discovery of several airs:"—several substances? Some slightly more modern terminology may be welcome here.

• This change I will resist. One reason for using Priestley's terminology is that he thought of the "airs" this way - he did not think of them as "substances". I think it is good to remind readers that Priestley and others at the time conceptualized these "things" quite differently. The words do that - and readers can still understand what is being said. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Fair enough, and a good point. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Priestley ignored the burgeoning chemistry [...]"—burgeoning chemistry would look better.

• You could change that, too! Changed. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• I'd rather check first :) Thank you. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

Birmingham and subsections

• "[...] until they were forced to flee in 1791 by mob violence." Could you add a tad (really, just a tad) more context on the motivation behind the riots? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• There is a little subsection on the "Birmingham Riots of 1791". That paragraph you read is a little overarching narrative of Priestley's time in Birmingham. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• I know; I thought some of it could be moved up in the way of introduction, but that could just mess up the structure. It's fine. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 12:15, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

More tomorrow. Again, I apologize for getting sidetracked... Fvasconcellos (t·c) 00:55, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks so very much. Awadewit | talk 01:36, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

OK, I'm back :)

• "Because New Meeting paid Priestley only 100 guineas [...]"—how often? ;)

• Now reads: Because Priestley's New Meeting salary was only 100 guineas. Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• "superior [in] dignity and importance."—if the original quote is of superior dignity of importance, that could actually sound better. If not, just ignore this.

• Original quote does not have "of". Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• "The text addresses issues from the divinity of Christ to the proper form for the Lord's Supper."—issues ranging from?

• Fixed. Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Pennsylvania

• "They were immediately feted […]"—I presume very appropriate language, but maybe a little over the average reader’s level? It took me a few seconds to parse (I usually expect a circumflex on fete. Bad habit.)

• Added circumflex and linked to wiktionary. Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• "[…] the couple began building a home in rural Pennsylvania."—a home in the countryside? I think ‘’Pennsylvania’’ is pretty clear from the preceding sentences.

• Changed to countryside. Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Legacy

• "[…] the second portrays him as innocent as well as "warped" for not better understanding the implications of his discoveries."—not better understanding their implications? Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Changed. Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

That's all from me. I've reread the (now copyedited) article, and in my humble opinion nothing has really been lost. The last few sections, from "Birmingham" onwards, seemed particularly excellent; I maintain my opinion that this article is one of the finest I've read on WP, and I eagerly await that gold star at the top right corner of the page :) Congratulations, by the way. Fvasconcellos (t·c) 14:12, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks! Awadewit | talk 04:13, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

Update

• I have started removing quotations (sigh). More will probably have to go.
• Following Jeff's suggestion, I have moved information to the captions.
• I have rewritten the "Materialist philosopher" section. Please let me know if it is more comprehensible. It is also more concise.
• The article is now at 9000 words (81kb). I am aiming to shave off another 1000 words or so. Those will be even tougher. :) Awadewit | talk 20:51, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Scartol

First of all, I'd like to say: Pass the Lavoisier!

Okay, now about the JP article: It's clear from the above discussions that I can only really insert my own perspective on the large-scale questions, and offer copyedit services.

• I can actually see both sides of the structure discussion. Qp10qp's suggestions are very convincing to me, but on the other hand I agree with Awadewit in general that chronology is the way to go. I think if concision is really what is needed (and if there's no other way to do it), restructuring – painful as it would be – is a good choice. However, as Awad said, maybe it's better just to leave it un-FA and whittle away at it. I don't really feel very strongly one way or the other.

• Since it is already down to 9000 words, I feel like whittling is the way to go at this point. If, after whittling and revising, people still feel it is too long and boring, then I will put it away for awhile until I feel like undertaking a major rewrite. Awadewit | talk 00:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• What, then, can be done about the length? I don't feel sufficiently wise to offer suggestions on what to trim. All I can really offer is to do more of the ruthless red-pen-ism I've demonstrated with this sample. It's not pretty, but it will cut down on words. If you like, I'm willing to do more of the article in a similar fashion, to show how I'd revise sentences and paragraphs.

• I think most of these suggestions are good. Do you want to go section by section? It would help me a lot. One English teacher copy editing another. It is the best of both worlds. :) Awadewit | talk 00:20, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• Sure, no sweat. I've actually got one other article ahead of this one in the queue (Battle of Dyrrhachium (1081)), but as soon as I've finished that, I'll get to work on the other sections. I assume I should do them in my sandbox?– Scartol · Talk 15:31, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

• I think a sandbox would work well for this article. No rush. Awadewit | talk 20:41, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Just lemme know. Good luck on this, and sorry I can't be of more assistance. – Scartol · Talk 23:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I've made more suggestions on what might be trimmed, to the end of Educator and historian. – Scartol · Talk 17:51, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the wonderful copy edit! I owe you one! Awadewit | talk 02:47, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

Markus Poessel

Just some notes following a brief read-through (and I apologize for not collating with earlier comments).

• "to cling to phlogiston theory" - as a courtesy to less knowledgeable readers, might one something like "to cling to the phlogiston theory of heat" to at least give an impression of what this is about?

• The last remaining thing on my "to do" list is "explaining phlogiston theory better". I find it very difficult to do, however. I will add this phrase. If you have any insight on how to explain the theory itself, please let me know. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• This has been done. Awadewit | talk 05:55, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Even given your efforts to keep the article short, I think that to "In the eighteenth century, it was believed that flammable substances could burn because they contained an essence called phlogiston." should be added something like ", which was released during combustion." - something to give at least a hint of the role played by that substance. On the other hand, I am puzzled by "dephlogisticated" and more concretely by the sentence "Priestley believed that the reason the gas burned so well was because it lacked phlogiston—what he believed was the essence of flammability" - if phlogiston is the essence of flammability, why does a lack of it mean that something burns especially well? --Markus Poessel 19:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• It is not clear to me that all of the phlogiston theories in the eighteenth century actually accepted the idea that phlogiston was released during the burning process. (There was more than one phlogiston theory, apparently.)
• I am going to remove that second sentence - explaining it means explaining Priestley's experiments, which I don't have space to do. A better place for that will be the subpages, I think. Awadewit | talk 04:22, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• "at the age of four he could perfectly recite the Westminster Shorter Catechism" - again, if I have to click on the WSC in order to find out what's so great about this, the sentence loses much of its direct impact. "...could perfectly recite all 107 question-answer pairs of the Westminster Shorter Catechism" would be more informative.

• Done - that information was removed long ago in an effort to shorten everything. Apparently too much was removed. :) Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• And "perfectly" should probably be replaced by "word-perfect" (in a grammatically admissible way). --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Replaced with "flawlessly". Awadewit | talk 21:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• "In order to earn extra money, Priestley tried to open a school, but local families refused to send their children." - doesn't sound quite right. Did he open a school, but nobody sent any children, so it folded? Did he float the idea, but no local family said they would send their children?

• Now reads: In order to earn extra money, Priestley proposed opening a school, but local families informed him that they would refuse to send their children. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "had a daughter, who they" - especially in an article about a historical subject, a "whom" might not be inappropriate? In particular in a sentence like this, where the "who" is misleading until you read the next word?

• Fixed grammatical error. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "which he believed would "impress" upon students "a just image of the rise, progress, extent, duration, and contemporary state of all the considerable empires that have ever existed in the world" - surely that quote refers to a different chart? One that, say, shows empires? And perhaps covers a more extended period of time than just Ancient Greece and Rome?

• I can't find a picture of the other chart and I was encouraged to move text to the captions to reduce the word count. New caption reads: A redacted version of Chart of Biography (1765); Priestley believed his Charts would "impress" upon students "a just image of the rise, progress, extent, duration, and contemporary state of all the considerable empires that have ever existed in the world". Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Athens of the North" - capitalization, and isn't that epithet more commonly applied to Edinburgh?

• I've only ever seen it applied it to Warrington during the Priestley-Price years. (Capitalized "North"). I have sources... Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not disputing that it was applied to Warrington, as well, but current usage (you have sources, I have Google...) appears to be Edinburgh; as such, a nod towards current usage might be appropriate. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Ah, yes, I see. Now reads: The intellectually stimulating atmosphere of Warrington, referred to during the eighteenth century as the "Athens of the North", increased Priestley's interest in natural philosophy. Awadewit | talk 21:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Some scholars of education have described Priestley as the "most considerable English writer on educational philosophy"" - as it stands, this might be taken as a statement that more than scholar of education used this exact wording. The reference is to two works, from which one is the quote? It might be clearer if you were to quote the whole sentence, i.e. include the appropriate versions of "some scholars of education have..." inside the quotation marks.

• I just reworded to avoid the confusing quotation - there is no longer a quotation. Schofield doesn't provide much documentation for this claim. That he is the source is supposed to be clear from the "see also" in the note. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps the Benjamin Franklin issue raised by others might be addressed even more completely by changing "John Canton, William Watson, and Benjamin Franklin" to "John Canton, William Watson, and the visiting Benjamin Franklin" or similar?

• I think we agreed that "in Britain" works. I hesitate to keep adding words - we are really trying to cut, cut, cut. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• It does sound a bit artificial, and, I would think, is going to make some readers wonder (and become distracted). An added "visiting" would be a good investment, I think. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Added "visiting". (Although I really feel this is all superfluous; since this is 1766-67, everyone was British.) Awadewit | talk 21:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• "..and was prompted to undertake his own" - "and began to design experiment of his own"? In a very real sense, the earlier experiments were "his own", too, if he was the one doing the experimenting; the important thing appears to be that he then began to design his own experiments.

• The attempt to cut words lost accuracy. Do you think it should say "designed and undertook" or just "designed"? Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "undertake experiments of his own design"? --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Added. Awadewit | talk 21:54, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• As for "The History and Present State of Electricity": since this was published after Priestley was accepted by the Royal Society, presumably those who were impressed enough with it to nominate him had access to a draft version, or the manuscript? If yes, this should be mentioned; otherwise, readers might wonder about the order of events.

• Added in "impressed with the manuscript of his history of electricity". Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Based on experiments with charged cylinders, Priestley was also the first to propose that electrical force followed an inverse-square law, although he did not generalize or elaborate on this." - sounds a bit mysterious. Surely long cylinders would follow a one-over-r law? It would help if the summary would give a slightly better idea of what the experiments were.

• ragesoss? Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Whoops! Don't know how I messed that up. Yes, it should read spheres, not cylinders.--ragesoss 21:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Priestley believed that by educating the youth of the congregation, he would unite it again" - not my favourite sentence. The "it" presumably refers to congregation, but could refer to "youth"; "unite again": did he mean to lure back those that were lured away, or simply strengthen the congregation's unity to prevent future lurings-away?

• "Priestley believed that by educating the youth of the congregation, he could strengthen its bonds". Adding on something about seducing straying members back will start to sound repetitive, I think. I'm just paranoid at this point about adding words, I'm afraid. The general point is about his educational program. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Now that sounds more like chemistry. Still sounds weird to my ears, though - strengthening he bonds of youth. "..he could strengthen the bonds of the congregation by educating its youth"? --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Now reads: Priestley believed that by educating the young, he could strengthen the bonds of the congregation. Awadewit | talk 21:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• For necessitarianism, a brief half-sentence of explanation would be great. Especially as the information that can be found in the wikilink at the moment amounts to "Necessitarianism is a metaphysical principle".

• Working on it. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Now reads: This work marked an important change in Priestley's theological thinking that is critical to understanding his later writings—it paved the way for his materialism and necessitarianism (i.e., the belief that a divine being acts in accordance with necessary metaphysical laws). Awadewit | talk 23:10, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• May I please remove i.e.? :) Fvasconcellos (t·c) 23:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Sure. I was just trying to make it clear that the definition was for "necessitarianism" and not "materialism and necessitarianism". Awadewit | talk 23:25, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• "scientific readers did not appreciate seeing science used in the defense of religion" - to me, that is a very surprising statement. We're still in the 18th century - was it, at that time, really the prevailing attitude among scientists that science not be used in the defense of religion?

• It is not that surprising when you think about how many "scientific readers" there must have been. Those that were sufficiently interested in "science" (if one can call it that) to know anything about that were most often also the ones that were questioning religion. Enlightenment and all of that. Also, this is the end of the eighteenth century - we are moving away from Newton's worldview. Priestley obviously wanted science to explain God's creation, but many French scientists were not so (ahem) dogmatic. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK, in that case it's just my unfamiliarity with the late eighteenth century. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Well, really, I'm just shocked. Are you telling me that you have had no time while you were cramming your head full of knowledge about relativity to look up eighteenth-century religious or scientific history? :) Awadewit | talk 21:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yep, there goes my application for the Association of Modern Renaissance Persons- --Markus Poessel 13:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Mine as well. I'm still waiting to learn about vectors as we have only made it through the opening paragraphs of introduction to general relativity. :) The book you recommended is on my holiday wish list, though. Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Natural philosopher of air" sounds a bit weird.

• It was supposed to specify what kind of "natural philosopher" he was. Ideas? Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Only dreadful puns come to mind. But how about simply taking the description given by the man himself: Experiments and Observations on Different Kinds of Air? --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Changed. Awadewit | talk 21:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• With no mice mentioned in the section on "The Discovery of Oxygen", the connection with "See also: Wikisource:The Mouse's Petition" might be a tad too subtle.

• The quote about the mice is gone now? The mice that proved the air is good? That has to go back in. Or at least an explanation of how he used mice. That was a big deal. Working on it. (Isn't that poem great?) Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• There's passing mention of mice in another section, but no mention of their unwilling employment in the sections dealing with Priestley's science, as far as I can see. Looks like something has gone agley, there. The poem is sad, and I find the reference to metempsychosis intriguing. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• The poem is supposed to be a rousing call for liberty - for women, Britons, and mice. Barbauld put the poem in one mouse's cage, supposedly, and Priestley was so affected by it that he let the mouse go free. A nice anecdote that is now gone. :( I'm trying to put the mouse sacrificed on the altar of science back in. Awadewit | talk 21:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Added mice back in. Awadewit | talk 23:15, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Good to see the mice are back. However, now the sentence "Priestley also connected oxygen to respiration." which occurs later is a bit redundant. --Markus Poessel 13:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Fixed. Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• "In 1777, Antoine Lavoisier had published Réflexions sur le Phlogistique pour servir de Développement à la Théorie de la Combustion et de la Respiration, his first sustained attack on phlogiston theory;" - "his first sustained attack" sounds a bit strange. In what way is one book a "sustained attack"? Or was it the first thrust of sustained attack? The first of what prove to be a series of attacks?

• Changed to "the first of what proved to be a series of attacks". Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Furious, Priestley lashed out with his Remarks on Dr. Blackstone's Commentaries (1769), correcting Blackstone's grammar, his history, and his interpretation of the law." - unless the question of grammar was very dear to Priestley in this context, this should probably be something like "correcting Blackstone's interpretation of the law and, incidentally, his history and grammar as well"?

• Grammar was very important to Priestley - I thought I made that clear in describing his grammar book? Ah! It is all such a mess! Neither was history "incidental" to Priestley, as I tried to make clear earlier in the article - Priestley thought people could practically bring on the Christian Millennium by studying history. This is the hardest article I have ever written. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• I did realize from the article that grammar was very important to Priestley. But when it comes to defending the rights of Dissenters, one might think that grammar is not considered to be of the foremost importance, however fond of it the person in question might be. At least, this would appear to be so from a modern perspective. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• That is where we moderns differ (at times). In the eighteenth century, grammar was part of the culture wars (sometimes it is part of ours, too). The first "real" dictionary was published by Samuel Johnson and the first steps towards a standardized set of grammar rules and spelling rules was being laid down (imperialism does that to a nation). You can imagine how easy that was - it was kind of like wikipedia. No, Latin doesn't have a split infinitive and the Romans were great, so we shouldn't have a split infinitive either! But we are greater than the Romans and we should distinguish ourselves from them by having the split infinitive. And on and on it went. Grammar and language were at the heart of Thomas Paine's trial over the Rights of Man when he was tried for treason and sedition. There are many books on this topic which are all fascinating. I could actually go on and on about it - but I have said enough. Grammar was highly politicized at the time. Awadewit | talk 21:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• This is one of the interesting tidbits that, on its own, are enough to make reviewing on WP worthwhile. Please, point me to a book! Apart from that, I still think this is alien enough to most modern mindsets to merit special mention in the text. Otherwise, it's a bit of a stumbling block. --Markus Poessel 13:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• You might start with something like John Barrell's English Literature in History 1730-1780: An Equal Wide Survey. There is a chapter in it on Samuel Johnson's dictionary that would be particularly interesting for you, I think. Also, Olivia Smith's The Politics of Language. Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)
• Now reads:Furious, Priestley lashed out with his Remarks on Dr. Blackstone's Commentaries (1769), correcting Blackstone's grammar (a highly politicized subject at the time), his history, and his interpretation of the law. - Much more and I'll have to launch into the speech above! Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• If it does not altogether distort Priestley's view, I would still think that a re-ordered "Furious, Priestley lashed out with his Remarks on Dr. Blackstone's Commentaries (1769), correcting Blackstone's interpretation of his law, his grammar (a highly politicized subject at the time), and history." would read more fluently with modern eyes. --Markus Poessel 19:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• Replaced. Awadewit | talk 20:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Such experiments demonstrated Priestley's early and ongoing interest in the relationship between chemistry and electricity" - that sentence sounds a bit off. With the charcoal, Priestley had investigated a physical property of one particular material. In what sense does this reflect an interest in the interplay of chemistry and electricity? Or did his investigations of charcoal go further?

• We should check with ragesoss on this. I don't want to say something idiotic. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• The discovery that charcoal is a conductor was the novel part, but he also reported experiments on the conductivity of a range of other substances. I've expanded that passage; hopefully it's clearer now.--ragesoss 21:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• I still don't get the chemistry connection. Testing different substances for certain physical properties sounds like physics to me. The connection between chemistry and electricity makes me think of, well, electrolysis and things like that - where there are actual chemical reactions taking place. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Chemistry was (and physical chemistry still is, partly) the domain of the study of physical properties of substances; matter theory was a chief concern of 18th century chemistry.--ragesoss 21:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Might I just mention something here? I don't think physics was conceived of as a discipline in the eighteenth century the way we think of it now. I haven't read of anyone doing "physics" - studying fundamental interactions and forces, for example - at this time (Newton comes the closest, obviously, but I don't think he conceived of himself as a "physicist" - we just say that in retrospect). Also, this was the actual moment that the idea of "chemical reactions" was developed (chemical revolution). That is one reason it is so difficult to describe this time. Using our vocabulary really distorts what these (mostly) men were doing and thinking. It is really important to me not to be anachronistic in this article with respect to the "science" (another emerging concept!). I hate even using that word in the article. Awadewit | talk 21:55, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I agree with what Awadewit just said, but to reinforce that passage from a modern perspective: conductivity wasn't the only things he was testing; electrical explosions (coronal discharge) were also one of the main things he was studying here, and these phenomena do involve chemical reactions.--ragesoss 22:32, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK - could the chemical aspects (chemical in the modern sense) then perhaps be mentioned in the text? In my eye, that would make the text more readable for an only-modern reader. --Markus Poessel 13:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Could you suggest a rewording? I'll check with my live-in physics expert here who has read a bit about Priestley as well; he'll know if what you have written jives with Priestley's experiments, I think. I'm just so nervous about saying something really silly. After the whole "discovering oxygen" instead of "oxygen gas" gaffe... Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• I wouldn't worry so much about the oxygen gas if I were you. Frankly, I don't think I know enough about what Priestley did to offer a re-write. What I meant was basically to replace the sentence by "Priestley also showed an early interest in the relationship between chemical reaction and electricity, as exemplified in his experiments on [insert some experiment that without a doubt shows that P was interested in the relationship between c.r.'s and e]." --Markus Poessel 19:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) Perhaps ragesoss can help us out here. Awadewit | talk 20:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• A sentence has been added. Awadewit | talk 02:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Almost there, in my opinion - in that sentence, I would replace "This and other experiments" by simply "other experiments", since I don't see how the experiments stated involve chemical reactions/chemistry (admittedly in the modern sense). --Markus Poessel 19:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe it would make more sense to replace every instance of "chemistry" with "chymistry" (though I don't think that's necessary). For Priestley and others working in the traditions of 18th century chymistry, studying the properties of materials is part of chymistry. It's a misleading use of the source to imply that the experiments on the conductivity of materials are not part of Priestley's interest in the relationship between chemistry and electricity.--ragesoss 16:14, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• My argument is, of course, from a modern point of view (which is probably the p.o.v. of most Wikipedia readers). So if that is the confusion, then certainly some qualification of "chemistry" - either an explanatory sentence, or, as you suggest, use of "chymistry", which word should also be explained on the occasion of its initial occurrence, would be very helpful. --Markus Poessel 17:32, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• I think I've found a solution: I replaced "chemistry" here with "chemical substances", avoiding the ambiguities of modern/historical scientific/natural philosophical disciplines/traditions altogether.--ragesoss 19:48, 5 November 2007 (UTC)

• This certainly does not have the potential to cause confusion I was complaining about in my comment. Sounds good. --Markus Poessel 16:24, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

• "The fourth part of the Institutes, An History of the Corruptions of Christianity, became so long that he was forced to issue it separately." - aren't we talking about a time when even much shorter books were published in separate installments?

• I think you are thinking of the nineteenth century - perhaps the triple-decker novels? Priestley's books were huge. That is why I described the one as 700 pages. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• I'm not sure, but I thought the practice was much older - publishing books in installments, which could be bound together after the book was complete. The book where I seem to remember last seeing this was from the 17th century. But I've never seriously looked into this, and might be mistaken. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I thought you meant deliberately publishing works in three volumes to make money off of them or deliberately writing longer works so that they could be split into three parts (common nineteenth-century practices associated with fiction). Many books were published in installments, but not necessarily so that they could be bound together later. Almost all books until the nineteenth century were published unbound - buyers paid for their own binding. I'm confused, really, about what you think this section should say. Sorry. Awadewit | talk 21:57, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I was talking about installments, whether for binding-together or not, and my point was merely the following: if you're publishing your book in installments anyway, why is it a big deal if one part is "issued separately"? In a modern, bound-book world it might be, but not when all the installments are issued separately in the first place, methinks. --Markus Poessel 13:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes - I see. I am being dense. I don't know - perhaps they could only bind so many pages together at one time? I am just repeating what the sources said on that. I can't really explain any more than I have, I'm afraid. Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• When in doubt, leave it out? E.g. "Priestley believed that the voluminous fourth part of the Institutes, An History of the Corruptions of Christianity, was "the most valuable" work he had ever published." - where the only remnant of the other sentence is now the "voluminous"? --Markus Poessel 19:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)
• I like leaving it in because it suggests how long Priestley's works were. If it comes up again, though, I'll take it out. Awadewit | talk 20:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• OK, your call. --Markus Poessel 10:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• "the latter aided by a steady supply of carbon dioxide from a neighboring brewery" - minor point, but: did he really transport carbon dioxide from the brewery to his own house, or did he simply perform some of his experiments at the brewery?

• I'm not totally sure - the whole brewery story is a bit shrouded in mystery, anyway. Priestley seems to have misremembered some of these details. I once had a big, long footnote explaining all of that, but it is gone now. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• ...gone, but not forgotten, given WP's history function? --Markus Poessel 19:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• I should have been clearer - the note would not have answered your question, anyway. I tried to find it, to show you what it was, but it is lost in a sea of changes. The note was about the reliability of the brewery story itself. There is no firm answer to your question, I'm afraid. Awadewit | talk 20:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• In that case, might it be a good idea to make the limited reliability of the brewery story clear? --Markus Poessel 10:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• Unfortunately, it is only Schofield who explains the limited reliability of the brewery story. The other biographers just accept it. So I only have one source for that (although it is the most recent and reliable of the biographies). This point is rather small. Ragesoss and I discussed it - I wanted to include the caveats you are discussing and even more, but he thought them unnecessary. Considering that even more caveats have been dropped from the article since then, I don't think that adding this one back in would clarify anything for the reader. Awadewit | talk 20:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• "His colleagues therefore believed that they could easily reproduce his experiments in order to verify them or to answer the questions that had puzzled him." - this sentence sounds as if it should continue with "But they were sadly mistaken; in fact...". So: did his colleagues manage to replicate his experiments easily? Did they find it straightforward to continue his work?

• I'm not really sure if they managed to. I just kept reading that they believed they could. ragesoss? Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• As I read Schofield, that belief that the experiments could be reproduced was part of why others believed what Priestley wrote (and by implication, why they didn't have to actually reproduce them.) It's not clear whether or not people actually did replicate them. Historically speaking, replication of experiments doesn't actually happen that often; it's more the principle of potential replication that matters.--ragesoss 21:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• In that case, I would think that the important point is that his descriptions did contain sufficient information to allow anyone interested in doing so to replicate his experiments. If yes, might it not be put in this way, leaving out the question of "belief"? --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• How would you reword it? Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

• If factually true, then my choice would be "Priestley also invented cheap and easy-to-assemble experimental apparatus, described in sufficient detail as to enable any interested colleague to reproduce Priestley's experiments, verify his findings, or even go beyond his findings to answer questions that has puzzled Priestley." --Markus Poessel 19:41, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• Except your sentence doesn't emphasize the "belief" bit which is the most important part - his contemporaries believed they could replicate his work. It is not clear whether they actually did or not. What is clear is that they used his apparatuses (sp?) to engage in their own experiments - something more along the second half of your sentence. But I would hesitate to suggest to that Priestley set the research agenda or anything like that. Awadewit | talk 20:55, 27 October 2007 (UTC)

• On the other hand, that brings us back to my original complaint – emphasis on the belief part is commonly taken to imply that the belief is unjustified. If they did use his apparatuses, they are likely to have reproduced at least some of his experiments – if only to check that what they had built was working properly (my impression is that this is how most reproductions of experimental results take place nowadays – replicate some experimental set-up; do some measurement with known outcome to ensure that your set-up is working). As for the last sentence, the "puzzled him" was in the original – was that meant to be a "puzzled them"? Given your last remark, how about "Priestley also invented cheap and easy-to-assemble experimental apparatus, described in sufficient detail as to enable his colleagues to use them in their own experimental work (and presumably check on a number of Priestley results in the process)."? --Markus Poessel 10:27, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

(unindent) I don't think "belief" is unnecessarily unjustified - perhaps just another word there? Also, I don't think we can assume that his contemporaries replicated his experiments just because they used his apparatuses - these were basic experimental set-ups, as I understand them (according to Jayron32, we still use them today). Furthermore, the kind of checking of apparatus that you are describing that goes on now did not go on in the eighteenth century - they had no values to check their experiments against. Remember, there isn't even a periodical table at this moment in history. Finally, nowhere have I read that Priestley's contemporaries definitely checked his results; we can only speculate and given what I have read, I would say that it is wild speculation to say that they did check his results. When Lavoisier "replicated" Priestley's oxygen-discovering experiment, it was done quite differently, in a way that we would not consider replication at all: his sample was not the same purity, it was a slightly different compound, etc. (That is why initially he got different results.) Everything was just so much messier and so much more ad hoc. I cannot express this enough. I'm concerned that you are foisting a modern interpretation of science back onto the eighteenth century. People like Priestley and Lavoisier may have been forerunners of today's scientists, but they did not practice "science" the way you and your colleagues do now. They were much more cavalier about the whole enterprise, in my opinion. One good example of this is that Priestley did not practice the scientific method as we think of it today: he did hypothesize, test, analyze, and conclude. He left out the hypothesizing step. :) Awadewit | talk 20:17, 28 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Priestley and other Lunar Society members argued that the new French system was too expensive, too difficult to test, and unnecessarily complex." - "too expensive" sounds so unusual by modern standards that some explanation would not come amiss.

• I'm not really sure. Perhaps it was too expensive to test. ragesoss? Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• I haven't read the sources used for this bit, but it's not surprising to see "too expensive" raised as an objection to certain research methods in the 18th century, referring to the cost of the special apparatuses used by French chemists. The French system consisted not only of new nomenclature and the replacement of phlogiston theory, but also the introduction of the experimental methods of physics into the study of chemistry; much of Lavoisier's Elementary Treatise on Chemistry is devoted to detailed descriptions of the kinds of apparatus that he and other advocates of the new chemistry argued were necessary to practice modern chemistry. The English scientists had a system that they thought was quite sufficient for pushing forward the science of chemistry, and would not want to have to spend the resources necessary to battle the French system on its own terms. Lavoisier, who was an important government official and managed French mining and processing of saltpeter and other minerals, had an unprecedented level of state patronage. But "too expensive" doesn't seem unusual by modern standards to me, either; after all, this was a frequent complaint against the Human Genome Project, and a continuing complaint against high-energy physics collider research—of course, the ones complaining are the scientists doing related work that doesn't require the same level of capital.--ragesoss 21:44, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• I later thought of the SSC, as well; still, expense is not usually an argument agains the science in question, just about ways of pursuing it. Here, we are talking about competing scientific models, so, by modern standards, "too expensive" should not be an argument. --Markus Poessel 20:05, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Don't think of the "new chemistry" as simply a theory or scientific model, in the modern sense. It's called the French system for a reason, because it not only entailed new theoretical and linguistic tools for making sense of chemistry, but also specified the kinds of experiment that were and were not appropriate for the study of chemistry. I think if you looked hard enough, you could find analogous situations in 20th century science, but I digress... "too expensive" may sound weird today, but it makes sense in context.--ragesoss 21:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• "Modern standards" don't really apply to eighteenth-century natural philosophy, either. That is one thing that was reinforced as I read about Priestley. Awadewit | talk 21:59, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• By the way, did you mean the Superconducting Super Collider? Apparently there are other things abbreviated SSC. Awadewit | talk 22:52, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yep, that was the SSC I was talking about. And I think that, for the modern reader, you should at least make it clear in a sentence or so that the "new chemistry" is much more than a theory or scientific model, and why "expensive" is not a surprising argument in this context. --Markus Poessel 13:56, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

• Ragesoss, if you could add these sentences, I would be very grateful. Thanks. Awadewit | talk 01:19, 26 October 2007 (UTC)

These have now been added. Awadewit | talk 02:49, 31 October 2007 (UTC)

• Unless I'm missing something, the "expensive" bit is still not clear to me. --Markus Poessel 19:30, 1 November 2007 (UTC)

• There is not going to be that much detail on these issues on the JP page itself. Other pages like Chemical revolution or even some of the JP subpages will go into more detail. I really do think it is acceptable as it is. It is supposed to be a summary - not a comprehensive explanation. If readers want to know more about the debates over the acceptance of Lavoisier's system, they can read about elsewhere. This is not the page to detail that in full. This page is supposed to explain JP's life. Awadewit | talk 19:41, 2 November 2007 (UTC)

• Fair enough, and your call, of course. But please keep in mind that the text should also be self-contained. Something like the unexpected "expensive" makes it just that little bit less accessible. And there's always the motto "When in doubt, leave it out", of course. --Markus Poessel 13:17, 3 November 2007 (UTC)

That's all, really. Overall, quite an interesting read. --Markus Poessel 14:16, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Awadewit | talk 20:10, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

John Knox

I originally found this as a B-class article and I completely rewrote it. It is now in the GA nomination queue, but as they have a long backlog, I assume I won't get feedback very soon. So I ask for your advice now. I intend to take this to FA. --RelHistBuff 12:42, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 03:22, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

I reduced the lead section to 4 paragraphs and I believe it is a summary of the article. There was only one date wikilink in the text which I removed. --RelHistBuff 09:36, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the GA queue, I can see that it will probably take another month(!) before this article gets examined. So I am thinking of skipping GA altogether. I would like your advice on whether instead to go ahead with an Biography A-class assessment or maybe even directly to FA candidacy. --RelHistBuff 21:45, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

A-class review is very slow. DrKiernan 12:50, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Looking at the archives, the review speeds seem to vary. But at least someone responds and I am happy just getting feedback from "humans". The worst thing is if it sits there and no one comments except for an automated script. That happened to me twice on the general peer review page. --RelHistBuff 13:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

I am responding to the comments on the talk page. However, I still have this page on my watch list. So if anyone in addition to Awadewit have comments, please put them here below. Thanks! --RelHistBuff 11:48, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments by Awadewit

• Hello, fellow researcher and writer. I have only briefly glanced at John Knox so far, but the first thing I noticed was that many of your sources are a tad on the old side (the notes rely on those from the 1850s, 1950s, and 1960s). Is this because there are few to no modern biographies of Knox that are as reliable as these older ones? I checked the DNB and it seems that they use older sources as well (that entry might be useful to you, by the way). Awadewit | talk 23:54, 6 October 2007 (UTC)

I used those biographies only because those are what I had easily available. All of them use Knox's History as the starting basis. McCrie's biography is the oldest, but MacGregor says that it is the standard. The style of writing is old, but it is very comprehensive. I also have access to one more major biography, although I have not used it yet, Peter Hume Brown (1895), which is equal to McCrie as a comprehensive standard reference. I noticed McCrie's impact by looking at all the biographies together. There are biases in all the biographies I used, which is why I tried to use as many as possible. To avoid any biases, I would like to try to place multiple footnotes for each potentially contentious point. There are two more recent biographies that I am aware of which are Douglas Wilson (2000) and W. Stanford Reid (1974). The first one also looks like it has biases; I don't know much about the second. --RelHistBuff 07:06, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

• I think your idea of using multiple citations is excellent. That is what I tried to do at Joseph Priestley. I tried to include only the information that all the biographies agreed upon. Other information I identified as being the opinion of a single scholar. (Of course, all books have their points of view and limitations - that is why it is such a good idea to use multiple sources, as you have.) I will read the article over more carefully today and post my comments later. Awadewit | talk 19:24, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

Ok, you might have noticed that the first two sections did have multiple citations. I got a little bit lazy as the article evolved, but I did consult all the books I have. I will start adding additional citations now. --RelHistBuff 19:48, 7 October 2007 (UTC)

This is a very good article. You have done an excellent job of identifying sources in the prose when necessary and explaining when particular theories are only theories and not facts, a rare skill on wikipedia. I have carefully combed over the article, as you indicated that you would like to take it to FA eventually.

• The Wishart incident needs to be more fully explained. Why was Wishart arrested? Why was Knox prepared to die with him?

• He was still in charge of three boys, the sons of Douglas and Cockburn who wearied of moving from place to place while being pursued. - This is the first readers hear of the three boys, so the "still" is awkward. More explanation is needed, I think, if this is an important part of Knox's life. If it is not important, a rewording is in order.

• The section entitled "Conversion to Protestantism" is not focused on Knox's conversion. Do we know more about the conversion itself? If not, I would suggest a new heading, one that reflects the material in that section.

• The paragraph divisions in "Conversion to Protestantism" could be better - think of each paragraph as being about a single topic.

• The beginning of the "Confinement to French galleys" section does not focus much on Knox. Is there a way to make it seem less like a general history and more like a biography at this point? (More like the "From Geneva to Frankfurt and Scotland" section)

• On his release Knox found that he could be of little use in Scotland in its existing state. - Perhaps explain a bit why?

• However, Knox found that England to be a very congenial place and felt sympathy for the English in their troubles. - Perhaps hint at what the troubles were?

• He found much work that needed to be done and the English were receptive to his ideas. - A few details, perhaps?

• In the pulpit he preached Protestant doctrines with great effect. - Explain the effect perhaps?

• When Mary Tudor ascended the throne, England was no longer a safe place for Protestants. - This needs to be explained to readers who don't know the history.

Prose: While the article is, in general, well-written, I think that it could be improved even more by a good copy editor. Having someone else look at the sentences, someone who hasn't stared at them for hours, is generally a good idea. I did a quick copy edit of the lead; here are some additional prose issues from that section:

• he was caught up in the ecclesiastical and political maelstrom of that period - Could you be more specific here? (I love "maelstrom", by the way.)
• He was licenced to work in the Church of England where he quickly rose in the ranks until he became a royal chaplain serving the King of England, Edward VI. - You have put the most important thing at the end of the sentence where readers are less likely to pay attention to it.
• After gaining the trust of English Protestants, he was able to influence the text of the Book of Common Prayer. - This sounds slightly sinister.
• He also made an attempt to return to Scotland where he was able to meet and to support the Scottish Protestants. - It is not clear from this sentence whether he succeeded in the attempt, which makes the second half of the sentence confusing.
• On his definitive return to Scotland - "final" perhaps?
• He continued to serve as a religious leader during the reign of Mary Stuart, Queen of Scots. - Unclear - "religious leader" of what and for whom?

Recommendations to consider:

• Many biographies have "Legacy" sections. If, after reading your sources, you think Knox has a legacy worth a section, you might include one.

• Infoboxes are optional; you might think about removing this one. I don't think it aids the reader in any particular way and it is a bit unaesthetic.

• It is always difficult to know how much information to assume readers have or how much they should be expected to gather from wikilinks. My overall impression from the article, however, was that perhaps a few phrases or sentences could be added in various places early on to explain the Reformation. I say this as someone who has a familiarity with the Reformation because I fear most readers will not know its history in any detail. Doing so will add some historical context to the biography. Later in the article, however, I felt that the historical context overwhelemed the details of Knox's own life. I wondered if this was because we know little about his life.

• You may want to cite some more claims before FAC. This is up to you. Technically, the WP:V policy states that only "controversial" claims or claims "likely to be challenged" need to be cited, but I have found that at FAC, nearly everything needs to be cited. Perusing some recently promoted FA biographies would give you a good sense of this. I once heard that a rule of thumb was a minimum of one citation per paragraph but most FA articles have more. Also, all direct quotations need inline citations directly after them (I noticed some in this article were missing citations).

• You have used many images of buildings - what about also including images of Knox's works? I noticed that the title page from "Monstrous Regiment" is available.

• Before nominating for FAC, I would suggest that you spend a day or two perusing the manual of style and making sure that the article conforms to it as closely as possible. That way the nomination can be a discussion of content rather than dashes or quotation marks. I noticed, for example, that the article had a lot of unlinked dates.

The nit-picky nature of these comments demonstrates the already high quality that this article has reached. I look forward to seeing it refined. I don't know how familiar you are with the FAC process, but I have run the gauntlet quite a few times now and can offer advice on that front, if you would like. Awadewit | talk 01:07, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your comments! This will certainly keep me busy for awhile. I think I will take this step-by-step, working on GA and A-class before moving on to FA. I will probably take up on your offer on FAC advice when I get closer to nominating the article. Again, thanks a lot for taking the time. --RelHistBuff 07:19, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Sounds like you have the right attitude - takin' it slow and steady. Lettin' it stew. I look forward to seeing the article at FAC in the future. Feel free to drop me a line if you want any advice. Awadewit | talk 08:09, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

Erik Chisholm

I've been working on this article and would like some feedback as I hope for it to become a good article one day. My main problem is limited sources but beside that I'd like some comments on how to improve the article. Thanks. --Cazo3788 21:18, 24 September 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 14:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Ludwig Ernst von Brunswick-Lüneburg-Bevern

Any suggestions for bringing this article up from B (which it easily reached) to GA? Neddyseagoon - talk 16:08, 26 September 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 14:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Cla68

A few suggestions:

• Expand the intro by one more paragraph so it summarizes in slightly more detail the entire article.
• Instead of using "he" to refer to the article's subject as often, try using Ludwig at least every other time, and especially at the beginning of a section.
• I think you could change the "family" section title to "origin" or "birth" so that it will appear that you have more information on his early life.
• I think you have too many one paragraph sections. Whenever possible sections should contain at least two paragraphs. Perhaps some of them could be combined.
• I would suggest having a citation in at least every paragraph, preferably at the end of the paragraph, even if it's the same citation for the following paragraph.
• The grammer needs going over again, there are some problems. For example, "according to some with the intention restraining William's older sister Carolina" and "It is not impossibly that Ludwig had an influence in bringing prince William V"

All in all, very good work on the article. Cla68 23:16, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Roger Davies

My concerns echo Cla68's. The biggest current problem is the inadequate referencing, which is an absolute bar to further progress. (You will see that it fails B-class for the same reason.) Otherwise, a comprehensive and broadly well-written piece. --ROGER DAVIES ^TALK 10:32, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Ann Bannon

After including, quite literally, all information compiled in a single place about this author (in print or on the Internet), getting her personal approval in its content, and scouring every reference I could find, I think it's time for a peer review. It's currently rated at a B class (by me, you know...) and would like to know if it could be rated higher. --Moni3 21:30, 23 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

Nice job on digging up the sources! Footnote 36 has some more that might help you out. I'll give the article a proper review in a few days. Awadewit | talk 04:51, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I used that source, as well as all but three of the sources listed. I'm not going to stop looking, but those are print sources from 1983 that don't seem to be national publications - I haven't been able to get hold of them yet. I'll continue to work on it, though!--Moni3 11:23, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

Comments from Awadewit

• This article does a nice job discussing Bannon's writings, but I feel that it is thin on biography. As it is supposed to be primarily a biography article, this needs to be rectified.
• More information in this article needs to be cited - I added some fact tags to potentially controversial claims.
• I would suggest moving many of the plot details on the Beebo Brinker Chronicles to those books' pages and summarizing more here. Discuss the writing of the books in relation to Bannon's life - discuss her as a writer rather than the books themselves.
• Laura ends up marrying her best friend Jack, who is also gay, and Bannon illustrated the mind-boggling details of the relationships of people who were gay in the 1950s - Watch out for phrases like "mind-boggling" - that appears to be POV.
• There are quite a few long quotations in this article - can you paraphrase a few more of them?
• The article needs a copy editor - someone who hasn't spent hours poring over the prose - to fix some of the awkward sentences and pick up the dropped words.

This article is a good start and I have confidence that with a bit more work it can reach GA and eventually FA. Awadewit | talk 11:52, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• I appreciate your feedback, thank you. Regarding a more rounded biography, I have thought for a while Bannon's article would not get past a B class since she let a very private life apart from the books for many years, so where I might want to add information about her early experiences, there are not references describing those. If you know of a way to overcome this I'm open to suggestions, but I accepted a while ago its limitations.

• If there is scant info, there is scant info. Other biographies have still made it to FA, such as William Monahan. I think that you have adopted the best policy to overcome this limitation - discuss the works. Awadewit | talk 18:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• I will check out his article and see what I can do with Bannon's. I did add some more personal info from her early life, especially regarding the inspiration for the stories, reaction to the re-release and her "obsessive fantasizing." Thanks for the direction. --Moni3 19:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

• I'll cite the areas that need to be cited. There is one tag that asks for a citation about "the handful of books were published with lesbianism as a subject before the 1950s" in "Longevity". Should I note this at the bottom (I have no notes section as of now) listing the books that were published with lesbian characters until 1950? There would be eight of them (to which availability would be quite limited). How do I quantify that statement?

• You don't need to cite the works, you need to cite a work that makes the claim that there were only a handful - a secondary work in other words. It sounds like that shouldn't be a problem for you, though. You seem to have read about this material.Awadewit | talk 18:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• Done. --Moni3 19:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

• Because the content of the books is quite groundbreaking in light of their 1. uniqueness to popular literature, 2. availability to a very wide audience, 3. atypical characters, 4. impact on the concept of a lesbian identity, and 5. positive portrayal of homosexuality during this extraordinarily repressive time, I think the very brief synopses do belong in the article to give the later impact statements a context for readers. The individual books' articles have much more detailed summaries.

• I think that the points you have just outlined are far more important to emphasize to the casual reader than the details of the plots (and it sounds as if your sources make that claim as well). I would structure the section around those five points and use the plot details to explain them. Awadewit | talk 18:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• All right. I can do that. In doing so, I might be able to take care of the next point. --Moni3 19:54, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

• I will work on rephrasing some of the phrasing and quotations (although I challenge anyone to read the descriptions of Jack and Laura's marriage and not find them mind-boggling).

• That adjective is just rather extreme. Awadewit | talk 18:05, 25 September 2007 (UTC)

• I think the article might benefit from a copyedit from someone who hasn't read it as often as I have. Thanks again. --Moni3 14:22, 25 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

Response to Awadewit

I've restructured the section under The Beebo Brinker Chronicles so as not to depend on the plotlines so much - yet still keeping the information that was essential to the understanding of the aforementioned 5 points, incorporated more personal information, and rearranged some of the quotes to make it make a bit more sense. I've added more references, and will continue to do so as I can. I appreciate your suggestions. I would very much like to see this as a GA, but have no aspirations as yet beyond that. First things first. --Moni3 03:51, 26 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 14:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Chinua Achebe

Mr. Achebe is probably the most important African writer of the 20th century. I have spent the past month taking this article from Start-class to what I hope is near FA-status. For biographical info I have relied heavily on one book, a biography written by Ezenwa-Ohaeto – this is because there is very little info about his life itself. Nearly all of the numerous books called Chinua Achebe are devoted to analysis of his novels. Thanks in advance to those who are able to review the article and offer comments. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

• Excellent work and well-worthy of being an FA, at least from my initial review. In addition to JayHenry's insights, which I warmly agree with, two points seem to need further clarification: the last sentence of first Themes paragraph ("Achebe's depiction of Igbo life is an affirmation of the portrayal laid out by the abolitionist Olaudah Equiano in his Narrative.") and the context for the Albert Schweitzer criticism. Good luck with the FAC nomination, and don't forget your promise, ;) Willow 04:24, 15 October 2007 (UTC)

 Done. Thanks for your support, WillowW. I appreciate it! (And I never forget a promise. That's why I rarely promise anything, heh.) – Scartol · Talk 02:39, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 13:47, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

User: Qp10qp

I'm delighted someone has taken this article in hand. Achebe is brilliant writer, in my opinion, and I've never read another African, including Soyinka and Fugard, who expressed African dilemmas so vividly and universally. The article is professionally written, give or take a stubby paragraph or two, and I'm sure could make FA tomorrow. May cowrie shells rain on colleague Scartol for delivering such a balanced and readable treatment.

However, praise alone roasts no yams, so here goes with the comments.

• Some way needs to be found, I suspect, of reducing the lead to four paragraphs, the maximum tolerated at FA. Not that I really care about this myself.

• Done and done. I moved the Conrad bit up to the second paragraph and shortened that wording. – Scartol · Talk 19:14, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Nailed.qp10qp 22:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• combines straightforward narration with folk stories, proverbs, and oratory. I wonder if this reqires clarifying, because Achebe is not oratorical himself; but allows his characters to be.

• Also done. – Scartol · Talk 19:23, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Smart.qp10qp 22:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• The Achebe family had five other surviving children, named in a fusion of traditional words relating to their new religion: Frank Okwuofu ("New word"), John Chukwuemeka Ifeanyichukwu ("God has performed well", "Nothing is beyond God"), Zinobia Uzoma ("The good path", from an old proverb), Augustine Nduka ("Life is more important [than wealth]"), and Grace Nwanneka. I found this extremely difficult to follow, since the connections are not consistently set out. I am not sure it is worth the effort of trying to anatomise all this in an article about Chinua.

• Yes, I agree. Removed. – Scartol · Talk 19:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

It takes a potential stumbling stone away.qp10qp 22:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• belonged to a group of exceedingly studious pupils who caused the headmaster to ban the reading of textbooks from five to six o'clock in the afternoon. A headmaster who bans the reading of textbooks for an hour a day? I didn't quite understand this. Was it to force them to play sports? Wouldn't they have had compulsory sports anyway? What about other books besides textbooks?

• It was less about forcing them to do sports and more about getting them not to study so hard. (Kind of like in Japan, where the government sometimes has to force people to take vacations.) Other books were allowed – thus the next sentence "Forced to explore the volumes in the school's library…". I'll try to make this more clear. – Scartol · Talk 19:51, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry. Me being dense.qp10qp 22:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• the school was built on what the residents called "bad bush" – similar to the "evil forest" Achebe later described in "Things Fall Apart". I think this needs some explanation. It is significant in showing that the school (what were the "Merchants of Light"?) was built by Christians and represents a challenge to the tribal superstitions. This might be an opportunity to mention, perhaps in a footnote, the story of the twins in Things Fall Apart, one of Achebe's most brilliant encapsulations of Christian ascendancy in the Igbo villages.

• I've taken a whack at this. Let me know if it still needs more clarity. – Scartol · Talk 19:58, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I think that's classy. Not everyone likes substantive footnotes, though, I admit.qp10qp 22:03, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• In connection with that, I think more could be made of the significance of Achebe's parents' Christianity. The Christians had access to the English language and imperial patronage and therefore over a generation or two became the civil service class, which trampled over the village hierarchies; Achebe's immersion in the culture of the English-language novel and its literary tradition stems from that, I believe. Were this addressed, more dots might join up in the article, showing that his path from Igbo village boy to Man Booker prize winner follows an explicable narrative.

• I think you're right, but I haven't seen (in the seven or so books I've read) anything that advances this theory itself. I certainly don't want to add anything WP:OR, and I think I put in as much about his parents' religion as I justifiably can. Any thoughts on where/how to expand it? – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Here's an example, I think (p 80). The information is woven into a basic piece of introductory biography.--qp10qp 22:16, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Currently the most populous conurbation in Nigeria (in Africa second only to Cairo), in the 1950s the city teemed with life imported from the rural villages. The connection seems forced here; if there is going to be a statement about the size of Lagos, I would have expected its comparative size at the time to be mentioned. If this is not known, I don't think crow-barring its present size in works here.

• Agreed. Removed. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

OK.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• According to Alan Hill, employed by the publisher at the time.... What as? One gets the impression from later mentions of him that he was a general editor, submissions editor, or publicist. It perhaps needs to be made clear.

• It annoyed me to no end to find that this was never explained. I was hoping no one would notice, heh. I honestly have no idea what to classify him as; at one point the book refers to him as "a publishing innovator". But this doesn't make anything clearer, and I'm afraid I'm stuck on how to clarify his role. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Hopping around on Google, it seems he was the educational editor when Achebe first sent the book in, but he was later promoted to run the whole of Heinemann, and so it would be different to clarify his position at any one time. I found four different descriptions of his role.qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• He met the poet Sheikh Shaaban Robert, who complained of the difficulty he'd faced in trying to publish his Swahili-language work; at one point he'd had to write a letter of protest to a South African university to get compensation for a book of his poems it had published. I'm not sure I quite grasp this. That the university didn't pay him after publishing a book of his poems doesn't follow from the point that he couldn't get his Swahili-language work published.

• Agreed. Revised. Vici. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Much better. I would lose the contraction, though, I think.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• The bit about not meeting Baldwin seems a little unnecessary to me, particularly as there's so much about Baldwin later on. I sense here and in one or two other spots that we are getting Achebe's own version somewhat, or the official biography version of his student Ezenwa-Ohaeto. Achebe obviously thought it was significant that he was looking forward to meeting Baldiwn and reading up for the big moment, but does this actually amount to much?

• Agreed. Fixed. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

OK.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• The following sounds to me a bit like Achebe spinning a good anecdote, honed upon interviews and speeches: one elderly professor approached him, said: "How dare you!", and stormed away. Another suggested that Achebe had "no sense of humour", but several days later Achebe was approached by a third professor, who told him "I now realize that I had never really read Heart of Darkness although I have taught it for years."

• Perhaps, but it's a pretty widely-known quote, so I think it belongs. Obviously we don't have anyone else's perspective, which would be good but impossible to find. I try to use anecdotes sparingly, but in this case I think it works. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I expect my doubts come from the historian in me.qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• I was equally narrow eyed about this: During their panel discussion, however, an anonymous voice came through the hotel's PA system, interrupting Baldwin and saying: "I am coming up there Mr. Baldwin.… We can't stand all this kind of going on." Baldwin paused, and his cheerful expression vanished. He replied, "Mr. Baldwin is nevertheless going to finish his opening statement … if you assassinate me in the next two minutes, it no longer matters what you think. The doctrine of white supremacy on which the white world is based has had its hour.… Someone has polished that up, I sense; and it's not really about Achebe. I'd prefer such moments to be summarised rather than told as narrative, but I wouldn't blame you if you balked at the idea killing such novelistic moments.

• Yes, I agree that this can go. Removed. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

I feel bad now.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Do we know who Weep Not Child was by?

• Yes. Added. – Scartol · Talk 23:19, 17 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh, Ngugi.qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Why were Achebe and his wife safe in Port Harcourt and Ogidi?

• Explained. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I understand now.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• I wonder if Middle Passage needs a phrase of explanation in situ.

• I actually think this one is okay as a wikilink. If you insist, I'll add more, but I prefer to leave it as is. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

OK.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Same with the People's Redemption Party? I tend to think this sort of thing should be explained rather than rely on the link for the explanation. I had to look the page up to find out what the orientation of this party was.

• This one I did change. I agree that parties should have a brief definition. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

It helps, I think.--qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• He spent most of the 1980s delivering speeches, attending conferences, winning awards, and collecting honorary degrees. I see what is meant, but I don't quite believe this. I mean, winning awards in itself doesn't take any time at all. Had he given up writing? If so, I think that might be worth addressing.

• He hadn't given up on writing; most of his time was working on essays and the sixth novel. Updated. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Much better.qp10qp 23:00, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• Do we know how the paralysis affected his life? The article accidentally gives the impression that it had no effect at all, which one guesses cannot be so.

• No, but neither does the bio really go into it at all. (There's one sentence about how Bard provided him with a specially-outfitted house and vehicle.) I tried to find something along this line, and came up empty. Maybe he sees it as an example of things falling apart? – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a dig.qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• The character of Obi in "No Longer at Ease" succumbs to colonial-era corruption in the city, a metaphor for his peoples' alienation from the functioning of society. With all respect to your source, that doesn't come over to me as a metaphor. The book is a wonderful, funny novel, as I recall, but it struck me as all too realistic rather than metaphorical, certainly in outline.

• Yeah, I felt like this was sort of forced. I found a different way to say it with a different reference. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

The point is emerging; those two sentences are still not quite there, in my opinion.qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• By altering syntax, usage, and idiom, he transforms the language into a distinctly African style. If a source says this, I suppose it must pass; but really I didn't notice much of this in the novels, which, with a few stylistic assimilations of local forms, are pretty much written in the language and literary tradition of E. M . Forster, in my opinion.

• Given that the source is a very comprehensive article going into a ridiculous level of detail analyzing the forms mentioned, I think it's good enough to remain. I think part of what makes TFA so powerful for me is the subtlety of its difference. I notice it, but it doesn't stand out much. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

OK. I'm no literary critic. qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

• This makes Achebe's books easy for English-speaking culture at large to understand and adopt but might give grounds for criticising Achebe; and perhaps there could be a little more criticism of him in the article. For example, there is a point of view that the absorbtion of local proverbs and folk tales into English is a victory for the imperial or global language at the expense of the local.

• Perhaps. Alas, the books I've read have been almost entirely positive (even sycophantic in places, I might be willing to admit). I didn't go out seeking such a thing; my thought is that, given his central importance as a grandfather to the modern literature of an entire continent, it's much harder to find critical criticism (?). If you or anyone else can offer me some, I'll be happy to take a look and add where appropriate. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

I haven't specifically looked, but I came across certain criticisms while I was hopping about on Google Books looking up Alan Hill. For example, some feminist criticism here.qp10qp 22:54, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Anyway, congratulations on a fascinating article. I've enjoyed reading it and thinking about it. --qp10qp 23:32, 16 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your kind praise and attentively detailed review. – Scartol · Talk 00:17, 18 October 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Awadewit

Kudos to Scartol for countering systemic bias! I, too, think this article is excellent. Here are my nit-picks.

Large-ish issue:

• As a literary scholar myself, it does kind of bother me to see a great deal of the lit crit citations in the "Style" and "Themes" sections coming out of what appear to be biographies, especially since I see in the "Further reading" what look like some books of criticism. Any way to use these more detailed books? Biographies usually only offer a limited perspective of an author's work and they are usually pretty praiseworthy. I found this to be the case, for example, with Wollstonecraft. The lit crit was far more willing to criticize than the biographies. Awadewit | talk 08:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

• Actually, I don't know that the article is guilty of this. Although some of the books of criticism I used are named simply Chinua Achebe or some variation thereon, they are actually analytical works. I feel that I used a fairly broad variety of authors for the Style and Themes sections; I specifically veered away from the Ezenwa-Ohaeto bio for these areas. While the critical books are not very critical, I've done the best job I could in presenting the varied perspectives they offer. – Scartol · Talk 17:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Ok - I'll alert my colleagues that we need to publish more. :) Awadewit | talk 18:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

Medium-sized content issues:

• Perhaps more of a distinction could be made between Achebe's reception in Africa and Achebe's reception in the West? I sense it might be a bit different?

• Boy, I'm going to sound like a whiner here. The sense I've gotten is that, if anything (and I've tried to show this, especially with the reactions to TFA, his first novel), the reactions in the West have been more positive than in Nigeria. Either way, his works have (as best as I can tell) gotten overwhelmingly positive receptions which highlight their worth in challenging colonialist literary hegemony and chronicling the postcolonial experience. Again, I worked hard to present the differences where I could find them, but from what I can tell they're not as severe as one might suspect. – Scartol · Talk 17:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• It was the hints already in the article that made me think there might be more to it, but if there isn't, there isn't. Awadewit | talk 18:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I felt that most of the literary discussion revolved around Things Fall Apart. Any way to offer a few more examples from the other works in the "Style" and "Themes" sections?

• Yes, agreed. I'll work on this. – Scartol · Talk 17:49, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hmm. I spent over an hour working on this, and I think it's as good as I can make it. I was only able to change one instance, leaving Things Fall Apart as the dominant novel referenced, for several reasons:

1. It's the novel which has been written about most, by a country mile. I've read two books of criticism on it alone, and most of the in-depth essays dealing with, for example, language address it. The essay on oratory, for example, deals with TFA and Arrow almost exactly as that paragraph in the article – focusing mostly on the former and then a bit also on the latter.
2. Many of the themes and styles which appear in his other novels are very characteristically exemplified in TFA. (Gender roles, for example.)
3. I've taught it for a number of years, and I feel I have a very solid understanding of it. Thus I feel most comfortable drawing from it. Combined with the other two points above, I feel its prominence in these sections isn't so bad. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• Well, that's the way the cookie crumbles. Some high school there. Some day I'll tell you about mine. Awadewit | talk 00:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Small-sized content issues:

• I found the first section of the biography - on religion and naming - a little startling. I was confused as to why we were starting with that, as the lead had not hinted that Christianity was a large theme in his writings or an important part of his life.

• Given the way his novels (especially Things Fall Apart, his most well known by far) dissect the intersection of tradition and Christian colonialism, it seemed pertinent. I added a phrase in the lead to better prep the reader. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Maybe something a bit more explicit? Awadewit | talk 22:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Done. – Scartol · Talk 17:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• When a professor named Geoffrey Parrinder arrived at the university to teach comparative religion, Achebe abandoned his study of geography and began to explore the fields of Christian history and African traditional religions. - I thought he was studying English, history, and theology?

• Indeed. I misread the passage. Fixed. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• A visit to Nigeria by Queen Elizabeth II in 1956 brought issues of colonialism and politics to the surface, and was a significant moment for Achebe. - Perhaps a little more on why it was significant?

• Yeah, I thought maybe I should include such a thing, but the book itself doesn't go into it in depth, so I felt like speculation would be OR. Maybe I should just explain who she was and something about the colonial relationship in general? – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• No, I don't think so. If there's nothing, there's nothing. Awadewit | talk 22:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• If we have to cite "100 greatest novels" lists, must we name Time's? Certainly there must be something a little more prestigious?

• That whole bit was a holdover from the previous version of the article. I tried to find other lists (the original paragraph listed five or six), but I couldn't find sources. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• My preference would be to remove the whole thing, but it's up to you. Awadewit | talk 22:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I have no deep love for them, so I just got rid of 'em. I think the other specifics about its fame speak for themselves. – Scartol · Talk 16:07, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• What about mentioning the inspiration for the title of Things Fall Apart as a way to describe its themes?

• Good idea. Added. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I assume your sources mention why this poem was chosen - just so readers know. Awadewit | talk 22:33, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• They actually don't. I can't find any evidence that he's addressed it directly, but I have found some speculation. After cogitating on it a bit, I feel like a discussion on the meaning would probably fit best on the TFA page itself. (Going into it a little seems cursory, and going into it in the depth it deserves feels out of place here.) – Scartol · Talk 17:28, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Is the prevailing view that Achebe's view of Heart of Darkness is still controversial? I was certainly taught that the book was racist, even in my (ahem) less than stellar high school.

• Oh yes, still controversial. I think the strength of Mr. Achebe's language (calling the author a racist, eg) means that some folks will never accept his comments. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Well, prevailing among whom? There are certainly some English departments in which Achebe's views are probably not considered controversial anymore. Joyce Carol Oates has pointed out that Conrad is a deeply sexist man as well, because the female characters in Heart of Darkness don't have names and therefore... But it's part of the bigger (never ending?) debate of whether or not historical context matters. Was Conrad (or, to take another example from the same debate, Shakespeare: with Caliban's "vile race", the whole of Merchant of Venice, etc.) a racist? Or was the society in which they lived racist? To what extent should Conrad be considered a racist for using a metaphor that wouldn't be politically correct in the late 20th century, even though he was an obvious progressive and anti-imperialist in his time? I can't state to what extent this is still considered controversial within English departments; as a broader societal thing it remains controversial, I think Scartol's treatment here is fair. --JayHenry 21:58, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I actually think that this is one of the weakest parts of the article. It is presented as shocking and appalling professors, not the entire world. The point is, if you were to research Conrad criticism, you would not find Achebe as a lone voice in the wilderness anymore. The fact that he is included in the Norton speaks volumes - only accepted criticism is included there, not ideas that are outside the mainstream. It is really the emphasis that concerns me - Achebe's talk revolutionized Conrad criticism, but somehow it is still presented as being an unheard voice. Awadewit | talk 22:26, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• This essay, for example, describes Achebe's talk/essay as the dividing line in Conrad criticism - there are two epochs. That is different than Achebe being an outside voice.
• This chapter describes Achebe as a minority, but again not as a lone voice (this is a companion book, so it is supposed to be an introductory survey).
• This introduction to the Broadview edition (a good series) is also helpful.

• Yes, but my intention was to portray the effect his lecture had at the time. (I remember some similar discussion come up in some other article I was peer-reviewing not long ago, heh.) Do you think I ought to explain how his criticism has become ingrained into the mainstream view of Conrad since? Because that discussion seems like it might fit better on the page for the essay itself, and/or might open up a door for more extensive commentary on postcolonial criticism in general. – Scartol · Talk 22:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, I see that now. I would add a sentence or two about how it has become part of Conrad criticism (the epoch quote is nice). To me the section seemed unfinished because I just assumed that it was implying that nothing further had happened on that front. Awadewit | talk 22:36, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, will do. Cheers. – Scartol · Talk 22:39, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Awadewit raises a good point about the essay's inclusion in Norton. If we can do it in just a few words, it might be worth mentioning the significance of Norton, as this is probably not widely known among non-English majors. On the other hand, if it's just going to drag it into a debate of how canonical is Norton, maybe it's best not to? --JayHenry 23:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I couldn't find a way to explain the relevance of Norton here. I just added the epoch quote and revised the first sentence to explain the context. I think the quote from Kimbrough does a good job of indicating how important the inclusion is. – Scartol · Talk 17:38, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Prose issues:

• Please include a date for Things Fall Apart in the second sentence of lead (the first time it is mentioned), as well as every other book mentioned in the article - not everyone knows when Pilgrim's Progress was first published...alas.

• Good point. The worry I have is that the article mentions the prose version of Midsummer and an Igbo version of Progress. Readers might assume the date is for those derivative versions, don't you think? Regardless, I've added them. – Scartol · Talk 21:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Ideally, it would like this (1595; x), (1678; y), right? Awadewit | talk 22:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Do you mean I should give the date of the original, and then that of the prose version? Because I don't think I can find dates for the latter. I just included dates for the original. – Scartol · Talk 02:49, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Hard to get those sometimes. Awadewit | talk 06:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• I am confused why sometimes you use Achebe's last name and sometimes his first name.

• In most cases – for example the sentence: his older brother Augustine even gave up money for a trip home from his job as a civil servant so Chinua could continue his studies. – it's because I refer to another family member in a nearby sentence. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• This is not always the case and would Achebe really be so confusing there? This is a minor point. I just like the consistency. Awadewit | talk 22:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I noticed a sprinkling of informal contractions throughout the article. Could you spell those all out?

• I fixed all those I could find (about 5). If you see others, let me know. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I trust you. Awadewit | talk 22:40, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Chinua was born Albert Chinualumogu Achebe in the Igbo village of Nneobi, on 16 November 1930.[6] The crossroads of culture at which their parents stood made a significant impact on the children, especially Chinualumogu. - The "their" may technically be correct, but as its referent comes later, I was initially confused.

• The crossroads of culture at which their parents stood made a significant impact on the children, especially Chinualumogu. After the birth of their youngest daughter, the family moved to Isaiah Achebe's ancestral village of Ogidi, in what is now the Nigerian state of Anambra. - The "their's" are just all over the place in this paragraph! :) Same problem here.

• I'm happy with the antecedent-first construction (obviously, I keep using it even though you keep telling me not to), but I'll change it to eliminate potential confusion. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• In 1936 Achebe entered St. Philips' Central School, a T-shaped building surrounded by mango trees. - perhaps some irrelevant details here?

• Yeah, I got carried away with the description in the book. Removed. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• This trained him to differentiate between the written and spoken word, a skill that illuminated the author's task of writing realistic dialogue - Something about this sounds condescending - as he if couldn't tell the difference between the two before. I know what you are getting at, but I think the tone isn't quite right.

• Agreed. I'll take another stab at it. – Scartol · Talk 21:22, 21 October 2007 (UTC)
• Done. Lemme know if you think it still needs work. – Scartol · Talk 15:46, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps something like "master the subtle nuances between..."? Awadewit | talk 17:09, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• I personally don't think the differences are usually subtle, but I like your phrasing (nuance is such a good word), so I've used it. – Scartol · Talk 17:44, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Oh, I don't think that the differences are subtle either. What I meant was something more along the lines of representation. Somehow your version still sounded like he didn't know the difference. Awadewit | talk 17:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• A huge conurbation, the city teemed with life imported from the rural villages. - Do we really want to suggest that people are imported like goods?

• Good point. Changed. – Scartol · Talk 21:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Achebe was promoted at the NBS and put in charge of the eastern region of Nigeria - the news about the eastern region?

• The eastern region of the network, bringing news of the eastern region. Revised. – Scartol · Talk 21:31, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Having shown his acumen for portraying traditional Igbo culture, Achebe demonstrated in his sophomore work an ability to depict modern Nigerian life. - I think "sophomore" is not the best word here; initially I thought you meant "sophomoric" with its negative connotations.

• Agreed. Changed. – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Achebe and the Okike committee later established another cultural magazine, Uwa Ndi Igbo, to document and preserve the wisdom and knowledge of the community. - I'm not sure I understand what this means.

• Took another crack at it. – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• The Nobel Committee has been often criticized for overlooking important writers, such as Jorge Luis Borges, W. H. Auden, Vladimir Nabokov and Leo Tolstoy. - The last sentence seems a bit off since it has little to do with Achebe and more to do with Nobel politics.

• Yeah, WillowW added this one, and I thought it was odd, too. I guess she wanted to give a little context? I'll ask her how she'd feel if we removed it. – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, I was conscious of the stilted prose when I wrote it, but nothing better occurred to me just then.  :( I felt that some kind of context-setting sentence was necessary to balance the conjecture of some scholars that Achebe was being actively denied the Nobel Prize; without an alternative explanation, the reader might assume that was true by default. It's certainly possible — didn't Borges say that the Swedish national pasttime was to deny him the Nobel Prize? ;) — but I think we should be careful to allow the reader to consider other explanations. But it's no biggie, and if you'd prefer a different sentence or to get rid of the sentence altogether, that's perfectly fine with me. I'm still rather swamped so I'm just glancing in; it's lucky that I looked in so soon after you sent your message! :) Willow 03:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• It is not the information I have a problem with so much as its placement as the last sentence. I think that the article should end with a sentence about Achebe. Awadewit | talk 05:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• I see what you mean. I've moved them around to end with the quote from him. – Scartol · Talk 17:22, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• But the quote is about someone else (sorry to be so picky!). Awadewit | talk 17:33, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• No, it's not. I just worded it confusingly. I've clarified. – Scartol · Talk 17:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

MOS:

• Not all of the quotations have inline citations right after them. For the sake of utter transparency, they should.

• Agreed. It's on my todo list. – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Done. – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Other:

• You know I'm not a fan of infoboxes. If you must keep it, please consider removing the subjective information such as "occupation", "genre" and "literary movement". To describe a writer this way is so limiting.

• Yeah, I'll trim it. (Someone else put it in, so I'd feel weird removing it entirely; besides, I think they're useful.) – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)
• Done and done. – Scartol · Talk 16:05, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• I suppose there is no picture of Baldwin from the 1970s or 1980s? It seems odd to use the 1955 picture.

  Looks like the only other option on commons is Image:Baldwin_Brando_Civil_Rights_March_1963.jpg. It's not a very good option... --JayHenry 18:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Bummer. Awadewit | talk 18:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Why is Chike and the River listed under novels in the "List of works" when the article describes it as a children's book?

  I hopped on and fixed this one. Chike should have been with children's books. Also, "Dead Men's Path" and "Marriage is a Private Affair" were short stories that Achebe wrote as a student, not children's books (they're included in Girls At War as well). --JayHenry 18:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I dislike split reference lists - it is difficult for those wanting to do research and since the lists are primarily for those people, why not combine them?

  Do you mean just that you'd like the further reading section to be right next to the bibliography section? I think for ease of use it's valuable to separate the references that are used in this article from those that are not. But, if the issue is just moving "external links" down, that's an easy adjustment. --JayHenry 18:23, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• No, I mean that all of the sources (whether used for the article or not) should be listed together in one bibliography. I don't think a separate list is all that useful. The notes show users what sources were used for the article and the entire bibliography can help those looking for further reading. It's quite disconcerting to a researcher to jump back and forth between the two lists and very unhelpful, in my opinion, and since it is primarily people looking for further sources who are going to be using those lists, I think we should cater to them. Awadewit | talk 18:34, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I can see your point, but my own experience has been the opposite – when searching for the source cited in a footnote, I hate having to wade through books which aren't mentioned in the article at all. What do you think, Jay? – Scartol · Talk 22:43, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• That is why man invented the alphabet. :) Awadewit | talk 22:48, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• I find it pretty trivial either way really. I don't think it's a significant amount of work to find a book in the footnotes from 36 sources instead of 18. I don't think it's a significant amount of work for the researcher to have the information in two lists. It's a total coin toss for me. I only asked for clarification above because I wasn't sure exactly what Awadewit wanted. --JayHenry 23:16, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• As it is a personal preference, I will say no more after this. To my eyes, though, the split list looks less professional than the single list and we might as well use every tool at our disposal to bolster wikipedia's reputation, even if it is only layout. Awadewit | talk 23:21, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• That's fine. I don't really feel very strongly one way or another, so I'll change it. (Now that I think of it, it does seem silly for me to get nervous when someone adds an item in the Bibliography when it should be in the Further Reading section.) You win again, Awadewit! – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• I prefer to think of it as a friendly discussion. :) Awadewit | talk 05:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• A bit long. Perhaps, like me, you should aim for 8,000 words? (I counted a little over 9,000.)

• I asked Qp about this – he indicated it wasn't an issue, and while I agree that it is long, I also feel that he's such an important figure that he deserves a little extra. (Obviously Priestley is too, so I'm aware that I'm hypocritical here. But let the record show that I never recommended shrinking that article.) – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• I would just be prepared to defend the length at FAC. (I suppose living African writers involved in revolutions are more interesting to people than dusty old theologians who stumbled across an air that they didn't really understand.) Awadewit | talk 05:21, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• By the way, what about a phonetic pronunciation for his name?

• Not a bad idea, but I'm completely baffled by IPA. Any idea where I could go to find a simple version of the rules for transcribing such a thing? – Scartol · Talk 17:47, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Absolutely none. :( Awadewit | talk 17:51, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Does this help page not help? or this page? Awadewit | talk 17:56, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• Indeed they do. Thanks, A. (Is that obnoxious scrolling thing going to be there for the whole fundraiser? I already donated!) – Scartol · Talk 23:23, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

• It just makes me feel guilty. I have to keep reciting to myself: "really, my time is a donation". English graduate students are not paid very well, I'm afraid. Awadewit | talk 23:54, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

* Really, Awadewit, Wikipedia should be paying you. Anyways, you can turn the thing off by adding div#siteNotice {display:none} to Special:Mypage/monobook.css like I did here. Remember to bypass your browser's cache afterwards. --JayHenry 00:00, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks. Awadewit | talk 00:21, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, thanks indeed, JH! – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Very interesting and very well-written - kept me interested and lengthened by amazon.com wish list. :) Awadewit | talk 08:01, 20 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for your detailed review. You rock. – Scartol · Talk 02:42, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Aw, shucks. :) Awadewit | talk 06:17, 22 October 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I think I've sanded down all the edges that need urgent attention. I think it's ready for a FAC! Thanks again to everyone for your diligent help! – Scartol · Talk 00:42, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll look out for the candidacy. i think we should try to get this put on the main page on November 16. I mean, I know we'll be shouted down because African writers are always appearing on the main page, but I think we should try anyway. :) Awadewit | talk 00:59, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

Corey Holmes

I am requesting a peer reveiw for this article to see how high it could be rated. --Sunderland06 20:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 14:45, 28 September 2007 (UTC)

Kenwyne Jones

I am requesting a peer reveiw for this article to see how high it could be rated. --Sunderland06 20:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and WP:CONTEXT.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • is considered
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 20:21, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Y done Turn an external jump I see into proper citation.
• Y done "He has represented his country at every level, and is considered a tremendous athlete." "Tremendous athlete"?! POV.
• Y done Make your citing more consistent.
• In general, all the articles you have submitted need further expansion, in order to become more comprehensive; otherwise, a peer-review cannot be very useful.--Yannismarou 11:41, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Nyron Nosworthy

I want to make it as good as it can be. --Sunderland06 14:59, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were partly generated by a semi-automatic javascript program.

• Y done The article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• Y done Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Y Done Please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.^[?]

Thanks, DrKiernan 15:23, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

• • Can somebody please rate this article. --Sunderland06 22:27, 14 September 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Expand the lead per WP:LEAD.
• "Sunderland" is full of choppy paragraphs making the prose choppy.
• Second half of "Sunderland" is incoherent and full of trivia.
• How many articles did you submit for peer-review? Are you sure you can work on all of them at the same time?--Yannismarou 11:37, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Jack Pelter

I am aiming for this article to be considered as a Good Article?. --Sunderland06 21:14, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program:

• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• Y done Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Y done Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 187cm, use 187 cm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 187&nbsp;cm.^[?]
• Y done This article is short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as it could be. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• Y done Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. Expand ampersands into "and", and note the capital letter after a comma. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 07:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

ChrisTheDude

• Comments: Firstly you need to remove all of this, as it is not written in a NPOV tone: "An athletic, tall centre back, Pelter made the position his own for Canterbury with a string of fantastic displays in the 2005/2006 season, his pace, ariel ability & reading of the game make him a very difficult opponent to come up against". Y done Then you need to move the final one-sentence paragraph saying he played for Canterbury to before the bit that says he won Canterbury's defender of the year, as otherwise it doesn't make coherent sense. However, that'll still only leave you with at most three sentences of text plus an unsourced infobox, so I think the article is still a long long way from GA status..... ChrisTheDude 07:15, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• Hello can i just ask what you would rate this as after the changes by user my-dog-is-shep and i, --Sunderland06 17:40, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

• • That's immeasurably better, although you still need to remove the description of his footballing abilities, or at least re-write it in a more neutral fashion. Also, can I ask where you found the photograph, as I'd be surprised if it is copyright-free.....? ChrisTheDude 20:09, 12 September 2007 (UTC)

I found it on google but i put it on to see if it would be allowed, thanks. --Sunderland06 19:45, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article needs work:

• Y done The prose of the lead is problematic. Three choppy phrases?
• Y done Date of birth in the lead?
• Any free-use photo of him?
• "Pelter spent the summer of 2007 on a trial at Sunderland and featured in the 1-0 defeat against Scunthorpe he then played some reserve games for Sunderland featuring against Berwick Rangers and Hebburn town. He then later signed a 12 month deal with Sunderland." Prose issues again in this stubby section.
• "His pace, ariel ability, and reading of the game, make him a very difficult opponent to come up against." Verbalist and uncited.
• Club and National Carrer have no citations.
• Y done Note 4 is inconsistent stylistically compared to the first 3 ones.
• Y done Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• In general, add more cited info about him.--Yannismarou 11:33, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Johnny Bright

This article about an important mid-20th century American college and professional Canadian football player has been well referenced and cited using a variety of reputable sources. I believe the article should be rated above "B" class, and is worthy of being a "good" and even a "featured" article. I am open to any suggestions to make this article better. Sundevilesq 14:55, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Need a fair-use rationale for the image.
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), when doing conversions, please use standard abbreviations: for example, miles -> mi, kilometers squared -> km², and pounds -> lb.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 2 yards, use 2 yards, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 2&nbsp;yards.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 15:11, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• No info about his family background, and his childhood.
• Your section about ""Johnny Bright Incident"" is almost as long as the main article. Check WP:SS and act accordingly.
• Per WP:MoS do not wikiling single years, only day-month-year.
• It would be nice if you could expand "Post-football career". You could also merge it with "Death".--Yannismarou 18:40, 8 September 2007 (UTC)

New Peer Review Requested

I've been working up the page, and have incorporated most, if not all, of Yannismarou's helpful suggestions. I would REALLY like to move this article up to a GA level, and maybe even get it featured. Sundevilesq (talk) 03:42, 19 May 2011 (UTC)

Kurtis Mantronik

I've requested a peer review in an attempt to get this article rated above "Start" class. The article is referenced, is relevant, and gives a detailed biography of an important old school hip hop/electronic music pioneer, Kurtis Mantronik. The article should rate, at a minimum, a "B" class. Sundevilesq 14:44, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Automatic review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Non-free use images require fair use rationales.
• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (&) in headings.
• Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.^[?]
• Citation tag needs clearing.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 15:05, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Gray Davis, former Governor of CA

I've listed this article for peer review because it needs to be edited, revised, and improved by another editor. I've contributed a large majority of the content and feel I can't take the article much further. I think the article could be a top rated article, even a feature article, with some more work done to it.

Thanks,

User:calbear22 18:44, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• The script has spotted the following contractions: didn't, didn't, hadn't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 10:18, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

Fefe Dobson

I hope to get the article of Fefe Dobson to Featured Article status and I would like suggestions for what needs to be done. Rainer1 19:04, 5 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • “In the year [of] 2000”
• The script has spotted the following contractions: Don't, wasn't, didn't, Don't, Don't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 07:27, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Mary McLeod Bethune

After adding to the article on Marjorie Kinnan Rawlings, I checked the link to Mary McLeod Bethune and noticed there were no references. In attempting to search for them, I noticed that almost the entire article was cut and pasted from other sources. I am a most unlikely biographer for Bethune, but the more I read about her, the more impressed I was by her life and the more astonished I was that her article was not of a higher quality. I worked on it for several days, rewrote most of it, and referenced everything I could find. If not for the information I added, her article should be featured for her extraordinary life. Moni3 16:42, 5 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?] Thanks, DrKiernan 07:26, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I wasn't aware that existed. --Moni3 11:59, 6 September 2007 (UTC)Moni3

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 03:43, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Three Stooges

I would like to eventually get this article to FA status. DTGardner 20:01, 4 September 2007 (UTC)

• Hope springs eternal, but there remains hours of work to do. There are pastel templates for lack of references, original research, and a long trivia section at the end. You need to find a group of editors who can cite in-line references and tighten up the writing style, adding section breaks and organizing the material so that it is easy to read and understand. You don't have to do it yourself: post a notice at Wikipedia:WikiProject Film to ask for help. Shalom ^Hello 20:52, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 03:44, 11 September 2007 (UTC)

Louis Mountbatten, 1st Marquess of Milford Haven

Hoping to bring it to FA standard. DrKiernan 13:09, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Cla68

• Every paragraph should have at least one citation, even if it's a repeat of the citation for the following paragraph. It keeps the article from looking like it has uncited text.
• You don't need to put citations mid-sentence, you can combine them at the end of the sentence.
• You don't need in-line citations in the intro if the same information is repeated with citations in the main body, which appears to be the case here.
• You don't have to have citations next to each other, you can combine them into a single citation.
• The information that gives Mountbatten's opinion on something, such as the naval skills of the Turkish navy, should make clear that this is Mountbatten's opinion, not necessarily a generally recognized fact as the text appears to indicate.
• Quotes that are four lines or longer should be blocked (placed in an indented paragraph-see the WP:MOS).
• The last paragraph in the "final years" section needs a citation.
• Identical citations can use the "refname" citation format to combine them in the footnotes section. Instructions on how to do it are here: [2].

All in all, a well-written, informative, and enjoyable article to read. Nice work. Cla68 04:21, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Thank you! DrKiernan 07:43, 7 September 2007 (UTC)

AZPR

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 00:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Jack White (labour unionist)

I'm hoping to improve this article to a Good Article standard. Exiledone 16:27, 2 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 13:25, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Shigeru Miyamoto

Well, here goes nothing. I've noticed that it had failed to get a FAC, most likely due to the fact that it's not even a GA article. I've noticed the criticism was that there were hardly any references in the article. There was a large trivia section earlier. So I had moved the important parts from the trivia and added to the main article and removed the unneccesary trivia from the article. What I would like to know is if this article is anywhere near a GA status or if it is. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 17:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Another problem I just noticed is too many external links. magiciandude (Talk) (review) 17:52, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Contractions outside of quotations, such as "he'd", should be expanded.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 13:15, 3 September 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Mumia Abu-Jamal

Dave Hillyard

I am hoping to get any and all feedback possible on expanding this article. It is a relevant article about an American Saxophonist. I hope the article to one day be considered at least a "Good Article".

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and WP:CONTEXT.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), please do not link words in headings.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid capitalizing words in section headings unless they are proper nouns or the first word of the heading.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• The script has spotted the following contractions: Can't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• The article will need references. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:48, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Hank Azaria

Speak a few solid days getting this to GA, and now I need some opinions to take it further. Mainly on the layout of the career, if anyone has any sources to expand the early and personal life sections, and the prose (which I think needs work), and anything else. Thanks. Gran² 19:57, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Scartol

Hurray for Hank Azaria! I've loved The Simpsons and Mr. A for years, and I'm delighted to see him get such a thorough, well-written page. The structure of the Career section could use some work; see below.

Here are some notes, in order of their appearance in the article.

• "as she could speak both English and Spanish" – how about "as she was [is? she still alive?] fluent in Spanish and English…"?
  • Done.
• Give an example of how they loved showbiz? We already have the bit about his mom; maybe just say "Their love for show business…"
  • He just says that they love all forms of showbizness and that they most have seen every movie ever made.
• Link up Forest Hills (and indicate it's in Queens)
  • Its already linked once in the same section.
• "…whom he became good friends, Azaria noted that…" this comma should be a semicolon
  • Done.
• "…better than I was…" better at what?
  • I think you've mistyped the quote or something, because it has always said "Oliver was a better actor than I was."
• Nice tidbit about the Italian TV promo gig
• First two sentences of Early career both start with Azaria. Make the second one "he"
  • Done.
• Give names of clubs in which he performed standup?
  • Sources don't mention them.
• Personal beef: I don't like the word "regardless". "Still" works fine here.
  • Done.
• Give the events leading to his being a part of The Simpsons in chronological order. Explain his role in Roger Rabbit, then explain how he got the replacement gig as Moe, then tell us who called him for the audition, etc.
  • I don't understand, surely it is anyway?
• Can we get a source for the Groening/Simon story of "make it more gravelly"? It's a good story, and I'd hate to see it struck for lack of citation.
  • It is sourced, the whole paragraph uses the same source.
• The first Simpsons paragraph is a bit long; find a way to break it in two.
  • I've tried, but it really only works as one.
• "As well as Moe…" Personal beef: I'd prefer "In addition to Moe…"
• Group his basing Simpsons characters on real people all in one place. That is to say, move the bit about Pacino to the later ¶ and then you can follow through with Sellers and Robinson.
  • Pacino is relevant in above paragraph, and is recapped before the others as well.
• "…who Azaria thinks has a similar personality to Apu." This is pretty obvious, I think. It's demonstrated by the fact that he used it in his voices.
  • Not necessarily, he could have just taken the voice. For example, Wiseguy doesn't really act like Charles Bronson, he just sonds like him.
• The laundry list of the other characters is great info, but each sentence takes the form of: A is based on B, while C is a voice he chose for reason D. See if you can't get more sophisticated with your sentence structures.
  • I'll look into it.
• I love the line about Grimey.
• The behind-the-scenes stuff about The Simpsons is good, but it would work even better (for me at least) if we had some actual quotes. Give an example to back up the Groening praise?
  • Groening doesn't give any examples in the source, he just says it.
• "As with rest of the principal cast…" I'd say "Azaria, with the rest of the principal cast…"
  • Done.
• "…he stop working on commercials as he found them…" should be "He stopped working on commercials, as he…"
  • Done.
• Career section structure: I'd give two ¶s on "Early career" – one for the first ¶ as is, and one about commercials and Roger Rabbit. Then just make a Simpsons subsection, followed by one for "Other voice roles". Then one for "TV and film", and one for "Stage productions". (Or, if there's not enough for a separate stage subsection, combine it with TV and film.)
  • I think that would be going a little to overboard on the sub-sections.
• Give a year for Nobody's Perfect. If the year of the award was different, give it too.
  • Done.
• Comma needed after Holy Grail.
  • Done.
• "After beginning a relationship in 1994, Azaria married actress Helen Hunt…" To make this less confusing after the previous sentence (about an earlier relationship/engagement), I'd say: "In 1994, Azaria began a relationship with…"
  • Done.
• "Hunt had appeared in Mad About You with Azaria," better to say that he had appeared with him, insofar as she was a star of that show.
  • Done.
• "In early 2007, Azaria was spotted having dinner with singer-songwriter Sheryl Crow." Murrrrpmmhhpphh.. Feels like something that belongs on Access Hollywood, not Wikipedia. If it's not an actual relationship, maybe it doesn't belong in an encyclopedia.
  • If I can't find any more sources for it, I'll remove it.
• "He has won four Emmys out of a total of seven nominations, he has won one Screen Actors Guild Awards, being nominated four times, and has one Tony Award nomination to his name" – I'd reword it as: "He has been nominated for seven Emmys and won four. He has won one Screen Actors Guild Award and nominated three other times, and has been nominated once for a Tony Award."
  • Done.
• No comma needed after the word "image" in the caption of the Simpsons screenshot.
  • Done.

I hope this is helpful. Again, nice article. Good luck with it, and drop me a line if you have any questions. — Scartol · Talk 21:55, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Done most of the stuff, I disagree with some of your structural propsals, but will consider some form of them. I've gone through each of your points to explain what I have done. Thanks for the review. Gran² 22:47, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 17:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Wade Mainer

Thanks to AnonEMouse, I got some great tips on getting this article up to B class and getting a free picture. Now I'd like to get it up to Good Article status and I wanted to know what I could/should do to do that. Any help and suggestions would be greatly appreciated. I think it's a bit too short, that's my biggest GA concern. I'm willing to do whatever work is necessary. I'd also like to review one or two of the other requests here. Do I need to be a member of WPBIO to do that? Cheers, CP 02:29, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Anyone can review. DrKiernan 07:01, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Emma Watson

As a representative of the Harry Potter WikiProject, I feel that this article meets all of our criteria for featured article status. As a featured article needs to meet all the required standards of all appropriate WikiProjects, I would appreciate any comments from the Biography WikiProject as to what, if anything, need be done from your perspective before it braves FAC. Happy-melon 13:15, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Melty girl

This review was discussed, expanded and responded to at Wikipedia:Peer review/Emma Watson. (Melty girl 03:38, 5 September 2007 (UTC))

I think the article is comprehensive and well-sourced. For me, the main issue to address is the confusing organization of the sections of the article. Their order and hierarchy seems confused, and the section names are often misleading. But these things are easily fixed. First, about the broader outline of the article:

• The first section is called "Biography," yet the following three sections all seem to be biographical; for example, what is "Personal life," if not part of a person's biography? I would indent the second, third and fourth sections under the "Biography" section heading -- this would make them become subsections instead of topline sections.
• I would put Filmography before Awards. I think it's better to read about the parts played before reading which of these roles won awards.

Onto organization within the sections:

• The last three paragraphs in the "Harry Potter..." subsection would probably be better separated into their own subsection, called something like "Celebrity and wealth," because they are about Watson's celebrity, not her involvement in making Harry Potter films.
• I would lose the "Interests" subtitle under "Personal life". It's superflous, since "Personal life" is good enough, and the second paragraph in that section doesn't describe "Interests" anyway, leaving only one short paragraph.
• Similarly to "Interests", the "Watson on Hermione Granger" doesn't accurately describe what's in that section. There's info on Watson herself, as well as Watson on Rowling. I would lose this section title and simply work this text into the "Harry Potter" section -- except for the feminist comment, which I would move to "Personal life," since it's really a comment about Watson herself.
• Minor edit: I would remove the periods that follow the dates in the Filmography box. Those dates are not sentences.

I think that once you rearrange the article some, you'll also find yourself tightening up some of the language and the flow. You've got a great start; I think you just need to be a little more strict about the organization of the article. Cheers, Melty girl 03:13, 30 August 2007 (UTC)

Dave Lombardo

Previous review

This article is on a metal drummer, would appreciate any feedback to get it read for FA. M3tal H3ad 13:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings)#Linking recommends against linking words in headings. DrKiernan 14:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

J Milburn

• Second paragraph of 'Early years'- is that meant to say 'disc jokey'? Presumably it is meant to say 'disc jockey'?

Typo has been corrected. LuciferMorgan 21:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• The list of Hendrix songs played should have speech marks- MoS says it should be formatted- "Song", Album and Artist.

The list of three Hendrix songs now have speech marks. LuciferMorgan 21:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• I know it's a direct quote, but we'll see who makes it to the top, lets place a bet is missing an apostrophe in 'let's'. Is this deliberate?
• Do we know his child's name?
• First line of second paragraph of 'Grip Inc.', album name Nemesis is not in italics.

The album name is now in italics. LuciferMorgan 22:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Second line, Solidify is also not in italics.

The album name is now in italics. LuciferMorgan 22:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

That's all for now, I will take another look later. J Milburn 19:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I know both his kids names but don't know which one was first. I'll look into it. M3tal H3ad 13:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, some more points- J Milburn 16:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

• Ref 24 is a little lacking in detail. Is that a book? Or just something he said at the festival? Can we even reference that?

It's something he said at the modern drummer festival. The video is on Youtube and since it would breach copyright i don't know how to add more detail.

Breach of what copyright? If the video was taken by the uploader, then we can cite it as a source (as long as we are certain it is genuine, I think it is reasonable to believe it is) if it was ripped from a documentary, live stream or DVD or something, we can cite that. Alternatively, have you taken a look on the Internet archives for the relevant concert? J Milburn 12:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

It got deleted of Youtube, but i found the source - http://www.drummerworld.com/Videos/DaveLombardo.html a documentary, thanks for the help. M3tal H3ad 13:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• The article seems to slip between calling the drum set TAMA and Tama- I'm no drummer, so I am not sure how correct that is.
• The last paragraph of 'Return to Slayer', the second set of quotation marks are not closed.
• The line "Apocalyptica Lombardo enjoyed playing a duo – and asked if Lombardo would like to record a song for their next album." doesn't seem to make much sense, and that paragraph repeats 'Lombardo' a lot, too.

Thanks again for the comments. M3tal H3ad 07:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

CloudNine

• The first paragraph is, in my opinion, slightly confusing and doesn't flow well. It should state why Lombardo is notable; I recommend moving the contents of the second para up to the first, and perhaps removing the show-and-tell sentence. Your call though.
• I thought Origin was meant for bands only? Noting his origin and birthplace is a little ambiguious. Also, the flags aren't really required.
• General question: is his birth name just Dave?
• "moved to California"; should this be Downey, California?
• Grade school is a little inspecific (I note that the grade in which he brought in his drums in mentioned above though). You may want to replace it with an age or something; grades are usually country-specific.
• "100,000 years" -> "100,000 Years". "Talk of the town" is quite colliqual as well. "Word of Lombardo's ability spread" sounds a little more formal.
• "This inspired his musical interest in drums, which resulted in him joining the school band playing the marching drum, although he thought the marching drum was "not for him"." Seems like a run-on sentence to me. "Musical" in this context seems redundant.
• ... by listening to the record repeatedly and word of Lombardo's ability spread for being able to perform the drum solo. Due to his new found popularity, he was asked if he could play the song "Moby Dick" by Led Zeppelin." To me, this sounds awkward. Could be better phrased as "... by listening to the record repeatedly. Word soon spread of Lombardo's ability to perform the song's drum solo, and he was asked to perform Led Zeppelin's "Moby Dick". (Also, who asked him? School friend perhaps?)
• "Due to him arriving home at 4:00AM, his parents threatened to put him in a military school." This is unclear; was it every night, or just the once? CloudNine 13:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll add more comments soon. CloudNine 18:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I just noticed the origin in the infobox as you mentioned it - so i removed it. M3tal H3ad 10:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

VisitorTalk

The research and references are fine, but the writing style needs significant editing to bring it up to encyclopedic standard.

The article often bumps together parts A and C without mention of part B of the story.

"With the drumkit, Lombardo purchased his first record..." implies that he got a really bad deal trading in the kit at a pawn shop for one LP! This sentence should be rewritten. Did his father include the record along with the kit?

Moby Dick reference jumps from "was not familiar with the material" to "after doing so" (playing the song with mastery, I assume you meant). Need a transitional sentence.

"...parents threatened to put him in a military school." Did they withdraw the threat? Did he have to give up late night events until leaving home?

"As Slayer's line-up was complete..." Did the band already have everyone but a drummer? The article jumps from King's own guitar collection, presumably at his home, to a full band taking the show on the road.

Hoglan appears and promptly disappears from the article. Is he really relevant?

Lombardo's wife appears without a mention of when they were married.

"Grip" section jumps from appropriate past tense into present tense discussion of events in the past.

He had to miss the 2005 Fantomas tour. Did he ever tour with them?

Should change to "Ten years after departing from Slayer..." and include the name of the manager.

The Christy quote should either cite the exact words for "blown away," or the summary should be rewritten to a less cliche term. Finnish should be capitalized.

VisitorTalk http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Peer_review/Dave_Lombardo&action=edit&section=4 Editing Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Dave Lombardo (section) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia15:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I agree with you on the poorly written part in some places and alot of sentences start with Lombardo did...He then.. I'll see how i can fix this up and the other things that still remain. Appreciate the comments. M3tal H3ad 11:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

You're very responsive to constructive criticism, and I see a lot of improvements in the article. Good job! One more minor point: when describing a purchase made in Los Angeles, you don't need to include "USD" - just "$1,100" is enough. Are you working on other articles? VisitorTalk 16:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The whole Lombardo *insert verb here* has been a problem from the start and I'm slowly cutting them down. I recently re-wrote two articles, Silent Civilian and The Blackening (still needs a recording section and do-away with the "history") M3tal H3ad 07:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on the "Recording" section - I'll try speeding things up a little. LuciferMorgan 11:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

WesleyDodds

I've done a copyedit of the entire article. However, the prose still needs attention and is the weakest component of the article as it stand. I recommend having another editor read and copyedit the page. The article in general seems ok, but I'm not too sure about the exensive use of reviews. Certainly there neds to be critical recognition of Lombardo's work, but since he's only a component of a complete group, single out sentences in reviews that mention him often seems like stretching the point. I'll try and offer more comments soon. WesleyDodds 08:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree with the point as regards the review, since it gives readers a perspective of Lombardo's work as a whole. I do agree the prose needs work though, but I can't think of anyone else who will copyedit the article further. LuciferMorgan 09:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's a thought: could the reviews be better utilized in the "musical characteristics" section? As part of the biography they seem somewhat out-of-place. WesleyDodds 09:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure. In the biography section, it's meant to show the critical reception he has had over the years. LuciferMorgan 11:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Eric Tigerstedt

Would be grateful for any comments or input on style, scope and content of the article. -- Grimne 22:56, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 14 additive terms, a bit too much.
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 08:36, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Your article has no citations. References are not enough. Try to have at least one inline citation in each paragraph.
• Any picture of him?
• Only his name should be bolded in the lead.
• Do not wikilink single years; only full dates. Check WP:MoS.
• "She had been studying the violin in Switzerland and had met Tigersted through her brother Albert Nybom was also studying in Köthen and who was a class mate of Tigerstedt." Prose issues.
• "Tigerstedt returned to Germany in 1913, founding a company with the Swedish merchant Axel Wahlstedt and the Swedish engineer Hugo Swartling. This was the first in a series of unsuccessful business ventures. Although Tigerstedt is able to complete his work with the sound-on-film technology, their laboratory is confiscated due to unpaid rent. It is later returned to them, but it is finally destroyed by a fire." You change tenses here and afterwards. Inconsistent.
• "Unfortunately, his achievements ..." "Unfortunately for whom? POV.
• "His German colleagues however, told him that the vacuum tubes could not be developed further and that there could be no solution to the problem with the weakness of amplification. Tigerstedt however, continued". Repetitive prose.
• Cite your references properly, utilizing Template:cite book.--Yannismarou 11:48, 21 September 2007 (UTC)

Thea Gilmore

I am requesting this article be rated as "Start" as opposed to "Stub". It seems substantially similar, for instance, to the A. J. Croce page, which is cited as a canonical example of "Start" class bio pages. That's all. Jkraybill 16:36, 18 August 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.^[?]
• This article has no or few images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• The article will need references. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 08:37, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Michael Gomez

Hoping to improve this article to Good Article status but I have kind of hit the wall with it. ANy help appricated.--Vintagekits 18:27, 17 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Scartol

This article has a lot of good information and referenced data. Its main problems seem to be organization and grammar (spelling and usage). I'd recommend some thematic reorganization (see notes below) and an afternoon with the Wikipedia Manual of Style, going through and fixing the little bits.

Note: This is my first peer review. I apologize in advance if I lead you astray in any areas. Also, I just noticed that someone did a review of sorts on the article's talk page. I don't think I'm duplicating anything written there, but I apologize if this is the case.

1. A picture in the top-right. I'm sure it's hard to find a free image, and WP:F doesn't seem to offer us much help. But an image would really help the page look better.
2. "Michael Gomez known as "the Predator" (born…" Put a comma after Gomez, and another after the close-parentheses.
3. "He now usually fights at lightweight however earlier in his career has also fought in the featherweight and super featherweight divisions." First off, avoid time-specific terms like "now". If he changes his weight class, the article will have to be modified. See if you can phrase it in a better way. Also, word it: "fights in the lightweight class; however, earlier…"
4. "Gomez, who is compared to Johnny Tapia who also lived a turbulant life, is often…" Try: "Gomez, often compared to Johnny Tapia – who also lived a turbulent life, is often…"
5. "…controversial and explosive fights with all of his last 15 fights have ended within the distance." Unclear. Say "…controversial and explosive fights. Each of his last 15 fights have [explain what "the distance" is]."
6. The word turbulent is spelled in a variety of incorrect ways throughout the page.
7. Explain why he was forced to change his name.
8. Try to group your information in each paragraph along logical lines; if the first ¶ is about his family (as suggested by the first sentence), then the basic info about his family should be in that ¶, not the second.
9. Firstly is frequently less useful than first (as in Background ¶ 2).
10. If two items are in the same sentence ("After they moved to England, the eyesight of Gomez's father…") they really ought to have something to do with each other or at least be related in scope or concept. That sentence is very puzzling, despite the fact it conveys the information itself plainly enough. (As it's worded now, it seems to suggest that the two things have something to do with each other.)
11. The bit about him being a truant and living in children's homes (add the s) should be sourced.
12. "Gomez began training…" is a big run-on sentence. Break it up into two sentences.
13. The info about his fighting style interrupts the flow of that first section. Maybe you could group Some of the paragraphs there into an "Early career" section. When discussing his style, it's best to explain what other people have said about it, rather than putting forth generalizations (even if they seem obvious to you – or indeed to every spectator in the world).
14. In general, a number of the paragraphs and sentences are inserted seemingly at random. For example, the Background section has a ¶ about his style, and then immediately goes into an overview of his career itself. The next ¶ is about a murder charge. A biography page ought to move chronologically – start with info on his family (Background), then move to 'Early career'. (You could incorporate the "Debut as a professional" info into such a section.) Some of this is done already; the "Title fights" section is especially well-organized. But it seems to me that something as significant as a trial for murder deserves its own section.
15. Is Alison the mother of his three children? If not, who is/are? What's Alison's last name? More info on how they met would be good.

Rather than go through and pinpoint every item which catches my eye, I'll end my review here. Good luck with the article and let me know if you have any questions. — Scartol · Talk 01:44, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Florence Farr

Two of my fellow editors suggested nominating this article for peer review (it currently is rated 'B' class), and I would mostly like help in properly formatting and endnoting the references section, have an impartial observer locate any parts in need of citation or expansion, and point out any deficiencies that would keep it from being upgraded to a better class. Thanks! JMax555 21:47, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]

Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?] Thanks, DrKiernan 10:11, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

The article is almost perfect. I made some minor cosmetic changes, such as adding {{cite book}} for bibliography and references. It would be nice if we can get origyear for some of the books in the bibliography section. utcursch | talk 11:03, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Thank you all for your edits and comments! I seem to be having a problem with the actor's infobox: it's mysteriously "added" a field called "Resting place" to the box, but no such field is in the template. Since Farr was cremated and her ashes scattered, there is no "resting place" and I'd just like to make the blank field go away. How do I do this? JMax555 20:02, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

What a pleasure to read this article - I learned so much! I love all of the beautiful images, too. Here are my suggestions for improvement:

Lead:

• The lead needs to be expanded so that is a standalone summary of the article. Ideally it should reference each part of the article (see WP:LEAD and WP:BETTER#Lead section for hints on writing leads.)
• You might mention who all of the famous artists are you list in the lead, such as "author Oscar Wilde, poet Ezra Pound..." - not everyone knows who these people are, sadly. The same goes for all such famous people you mention (e.g. Florence Nightingale).
• It seems a bit odd to list "divorcee" in the first sentence - from the article, I didn't gather that that piece of information was that important - is it worth listing in the first sentence?

Content:

• But it was a disastrous marriage, and she chafed under the restrictions expected of a Victorian wife - Can you expand on this at all?
• An early feminist, Farr was known for advocating equality for women in politics, employment, wages etc. amongst her intellectual circle of acquaintances. - This is a crucial section of your article - don't sell it short by using an "etc."! Spell out exactly what Farr thought and did. Teach us (me included - I'd never heard of her until I read this article!)
• Within a year Farr became Shaw's mistress, who wished to mold her into his idealized vision of "The New Woman" and be the star of his plays. - Are there elements of My Fair Lady, just in a different register, here?

Small things:

• I'm not a big fan of infoboxes, as they tend to intrude on articles and offer no additional information. If you decide to retain it, I would remove everything that is subjective, such as "Occupation".
• The first time you mention a text in the article, it is a good idea to give its first publication date, so that the reader can place it historically.

Prose (if you go for FA, I would suggest a copy editor - someone who hasn't spent hours staring at the same sentences over and over again - it is very helpful to have a pair or two of fresh eyes):

• EX: Her family sent her to school at Cheltenham Ladies College in 1873. - It is always good to start paragraphs with the specific noun rather than the pronoun - it is easier for readers to follow. (This happens a few other times in the article.)
• EX: Farr, May Morris and other friends posed for Sir Edward Burne-Jones' Pre-Raphaelite painting, "The Golden Stairs" when she was 19 years old. - "she" doesn't match the "they" listed earlier in the sentence
• EX: The painting is exhibited at the Tate Gallery in London. - I would put this in the caption for the image. I would also add a caption to the image of "The Golden Stairs" identifying it as such.
• EX: In early 1890 Farr moved in with her sister, Henrietta, and brother-in-law, painter and stage designer Henry Marriott Paget, to Bedford Park, a bohemian London enclave of intellectuals, artists and writers. - awkward
• EX: Shaw was in the audience to review the play, which he called "an hour's transparent Arcadian make-believe",[6] but was greatly impressed with Farr's performance, as well as her "starling beauty, large expressive eyes, crescent eyebrows, and luminous smile." - I don't quite follow the "but" - Shaw's quote sounds like it could be positive.
• EX: dauntless in publicly championing unpopular causes such as campaigning for the welfare of prostitutes. - perhaps just "causes such as the welfare of prostitutes"? there seem to be extra words here...
• EX: who's resonate voice was perfect for reciting his poetry - "whose"?
• EX: Farr was also the first woman in England to perform in Ibsen's plays, in particular the role of "Rebecca West" in the first English production of Rosmersholm, at the Vaudeville Theatre in 1891, which gained her critical acclaim - just the teensiest bit awkward

MOS (if you go for FA, spend a day perusing the WP:MOS and making sure that the article meets every single standard - that way the FAC won't descend into long list of your MOS violations):

• Sometimes you use single quotes and sometimes double - it is best to be consistent.
• Might you add a little note at the beginning of the "List of works" telling the reader where you found the list and how complete it is?
• All of the notes need page numbers so that readers can check your sources. (See WP:CITE and WP:FOOT for how to format footnotes.)
• "University College of London, biographies collection, Reference code(s): GB 0096 MS 982" - Is this a manuscript? It seems to be missing an author, publisher, etc.

Again, this article was so enjoyable to read. If you have any questions about this review, drop me a line on my talk page. Awadewit | talk 07:36, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Reply - Thank you so much for your comments and suggestions! It's exactly what I needed (you're already providing one of those "2nd pairs of eyes".) I'm going to implement as many as I can, and even get some "non-wiki" friends to read it and help too -- I know a few librarians... :) Again, thank you. JMax555 15:11, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

You're welcome! Awadewit | talk 17:04, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

Muhammad Yunus

He is Nobel Peace Prize winner for 2006. I would like to work to upgrade this article at least to a GA status. Please help me with your suggestions. Arman Aziz 01:29, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

Please standardize the reference format throughout.

Please clear the cite tags by adding a reference.

Please consider adding more wikilinks to the article. Thanks, DrKiernan 10:35, 16 August 2007 (UTC)

J Milburn

• To expand on one of the above comments, references should be standardised with [statement][punctuation][citation], with no space, even if there are two references. For instance-

The sun is a star. Correct

The sun is a star. Incorrect

The sun is a star. Incorrect

The sun is a star. Correct

The sun is a star. Incorrect

• Section titles should only be capitalised if they are proper nouns. Not certain which are, but, for instances, 'Awards and Recognitions' should definitely be 'Awards and recognitions'.
• We do not credit the author/owner of images in the image captions.
• Are there really no public domain images, or images released to the press by the authority in charge of the Nobel prizes? They would be very much preferable to an image with obvious commercial value.
• Are all the external links really needed? I think you could afford to lose a few.
• A reference for each award would be rather useful.

Happy to give further advice, contact me on my talk page. J Milburn 20:20, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

Frances Oldham Kelsey

Looking for peer review to determine if the article is ready to submit for featured status. In particular I am soliciting comments on whether the article meets criteria 1(b) "Comprehensive" means that the article does not neglect major facts and details. --Trödel 21:27, 14 August 2007 (UTC)

Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?] Thanks, DrKiernan 06:40, 15 August 2007 (UTC)

Honoré de Balzac

I have taken the HdB page from start-class through a successful GA review. It has been thoroughly combed over by the inestimable Awadewit, and I'm interested in submitting it to FA candidacy. I've worked really hard on it (to which he can attest), and I've got my eyes on the FA star. Thanks in advance. — Scartol · Talk 01:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Ah, Balzac. Haven't read anything of his besides Père Goriot a few years back, but it was the only good novel I read in school that year... I admit my experience with biographies of high quality is somewhat less than my real areas of expertise on the wiki, but I'll try and throw in some good comments at least.

• References: this is just me, but I can see some FAC reviewers wanting more references. Six references isn't too much. But I can't say too much about their quality.
• Lead: to me, it seems a bit disjointed. The first paragraph is fine, but the next three seem to sort of "jump". While they do summarize the rest of the article, they appear awkward, like you threw them in after reading over it once. Perhaps merge the last three paragraphs into one, which flows better? It's especially jarring since the rest of the body prose is excellent.

Other than those minor and extremely subjective suggestions, I have nothing more to add. The flow seems fine, and the layout and organization roughly corresponds to other writer FA's, so it doesn't look like anything is missing. If this comes up for FAC sometime, I'll be sure to chime in my hearty support. :) Happy editing, David Fuchs ^(talk) 15:52, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks kindly. I agree that the lead is a bit jerky, but I'm at a loss as to how to rewrite it. I think I may be too involved at this point (even after a bit of a break), so if anyone has ideas, please let me know. If the sources provided aren't sufficient, I'm at a loss; it's all the local library had on the man, and I think we can all agree that the information paints a pretty detailed picture.

Thanks again. — Scartol · Talk 21:54, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Actually, on my most recent re-reading, it seems to flow more smoothly than I remembered it. But of course I'm not an objective judge. Other folks? — Scartol · Talk 21:56, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 17:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Great article. The biography is really top notch, reviewers at FAC are much pickier than I am, and they might have isolated suggestions, but everything you need about his life is there. You could probably break the bibliography into a second article, if you so desire. Right now, it takes up about half the table of contents.

My only suggestion is to have more about his place in French and world literature. What are the hallmarks of Balzac's work that mark it as realism? Why do some argue that it's naturalism? What was his influence on Zola? On Flaubert? Books on French literature, on realism, or on respective authors that he has influenced should have good bits. (This will also help improve the sourcing—unfortunately David Fuchs is right, reviewers at FAC are going to want to see more sources. You can also use Keim and Lumet, and the anthrapoetics journal articles as sources, rather than external links.)

I think this is very close to featured article quality, it might pass as it stands, but I think that more about his place in the western literary canon will be the clincher. And, as a side note, I just learned about the ability to link references like in the Charles Darwin article. I'd be happy to help implement that nifty linking here, if interested. --JayHenry 00:53, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Some more thoughts on sourcing: when presenting an article with relatively few sources you'll want to have evidence that they're exceptionally good sources. A simple link to a review attesting that they're good, especially comprehensive, etc. should help quell concerns. When you say local library do you mean the 10th largest research library in North America? You probably can't check books out, but I'll bet you can get in and make photocopies. No students will be there on a Saturday morning in September, and in just two or three hours you can probably find a few really good books, skim their introductions for relevant material, take some good notes. Make a copy or two if needed. Some people (me) really enjoy this sort of thing, others not so much. If you think you might enjoy it, it will definitely help push the article across the FA threshold. --JayHenry 01:12, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

One more quick thought -- a little bit more about his place in world literature might also be what's needed to really make that lead pop. --JayHenry 01:14, 3 September 2007 (UTC)

Cillian Murphy

This article just passed a GA review. As the sole major contributor, I would like to get wider constructive criticism and suggestions to ready the article for an FA nomination. Thank you! --Melty girl 23:25, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

Elaboration on goal for review: I think it's a pretty strong article, and is comprehensively sourced. All comments are certainly welcomed, but reviews concerning its overall quality and tone (as opposed to comments only about small details) would be particularly helpful feedback-wise. Thanks. --Melty girl 23:09, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Miscellaneous comments

• Please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]

 Done--Melty girl 16:02, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

• The following contractions: wasn't, hasn't, should be expanded. Thanks, DrKiernan 07:32, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Is this in the Manual of Style? If so, I'll do it. Just wondering. --Melty girl 15:57, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

 Done--Melty girl 22:51, 28 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Enuja

• Wow, this article contains lots and lots of inline citiations -- good job! One thing that some of the facts lack, however, is in-article context. For example, look at the last sentence of "early life," "But at this stage, performing meant dreams of being a rock star." which doesn't have any quotes. As a reader, I don't know who is saying this, and it seems like the writer of the article is editorializing. It's quite possible that this is a quote, but it should be clear to the reader what is being quoted, or the statement needs to be more neutral. The last sentence of the next section, "From music to acting" also lacks context, and in this case it also lacks a source. I think the article needs to be gone over with a fine toothed comb to pick out statements with an editorial tone, and to clearly attribute all opinions. The wealth of citations also break up the flow of the text, but I think most of that could be fixed by linking the words of the text together; by copy editing. I'm also not terribly happy with the lead section. At first I thought it might have too much information, but on a second look I think it's simply that it needs better organization. Maybe the lead isn't the place to put essentially his entire filmography, but if it is, the filmography paragraph needs to be separate from the rock musician paragraph. Enuja 05:50, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for giving the article a read and offering feedback, Enuja. Many questions...

• About your concern re "...dreams of being a rock star." This is a sourced fact. According to Murphy, at this stage in his life, he dreamt of performing as a rock star, not an actor. The citation provided backs up this fact. I don't see it as editorializing, because it's a fact about the subject's life according to the subject, not an opinion (i.e. "he would have been a great rock star!"); it merely relates the fact that that's what he says he wanted to be at the age when he first performed for an audience. Can you elaborate about why this seems like editorializing to you and suggest how it might be changed? I'm confused, because many FA articles I've read make statements of fact like this without constantly using quotations like you seem to be suggesting must be used, and as long as there are citations, it's considered verifiable. In fact, many people seem to complain if there are too many quotes. Do I simply need to keep writing variations of "According to Murphy..." and that's what's missing here? Sorry to be verbose about this, but I'm honestly confused, so any elaboration you can make would be helpful.
• About the citations. I'm a bit confused here too. You first congratulate me for providing citations, then you say it breaks up the flow of the text. I strove hard to provide a citation for every fact introduced, which I thought was necessary for verifiability. So I'm not sure how to do that without inline citations. What did you mean by "most of that could be fixed by linking the words of the text together; by copy editing"?
• I followed WP:LEAD and summarized the article, which is a bit long, and that means the lead should be proportional to that. It isn't his whole filmography -- it's only the career highlights. Also, I think it would be strange to make the one and a half sentences about his brief stint as a rock musician into a whole paragraph, and I don't think it deserves more length than that, since he's a professional actor. The lead is in three paragraphs: 1) the 1-2-3-4-5 basics as per WP:MOSBIO#Opening_paragraph, 2) his performance career highlights, 3) a bit about his relationship to his industry and to celebrity. How would you suggest either strengthening that scheme or changing it?

Thanks so much for your feedback. --Melty girl 07:46, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Sorry I was unclear. Yes, I do think you need to keep writing variations of "according to murphy" because, without reading the source, I didn't know if Cillian said more recently to a reporter that he was still dreaming about being a rock star at that time, if Cillian wrote at the time that he was still dreaming about being a rock star, if friend reported that the was still dreaming about being a rock star, or if a writer in a chatty, editorial "news" article said he was still dreaming about being a rock star.

What I think breaks up the flow of the text is that the format seems to follow the sources instead of the sources following the text. One format I see too much of is "Sentence with fact. (citation) Sentence with fact. (citation)" Instead, the information needs to be broken down and re-arranged in order to make smoothly flowing text, with sources sprinkled wherever the fact happens to come, instead of usually at the end of a sentence. And one source can even cover more than one sentence. Look at this sentence " In 1996,[12] The Sons of Mr. Greengenes were offered a five-album record deal by Acid Jazz Records.[14]" I assume that any source that says who offered what record deal also says when it was, so sources 12 and 14 should both be at the end of the article. The copy editing that I'm suggesting is to re-write most of the sentence, keeping all of the information and citations, but just moving everything around.

If you think that every movie in the lead needs to be there, and that the middle paragraph shouldn't be split, there needs to be a way to make that paragraph flow better.

Don't feel bad about not understanding me; I was afraid of getting kicked out of a computer lab, and I was working very quickly, and think my writing suffered. Again, sorry about that. Enuja 19:17, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

No worries about your writing! Thanks so much for getting back to me.

• Thanks for clarifying about "according to Murphy" and clear attributions. I will need to go through the article carefully like you suggest and address these. (As I am in the process of moving, that may take a few days!) I did, however, fix the two specific problems you pointed out.
• I try to write for the clearest prose, then put the citations after the text they support. Writing with the goal of citation placement seems counter-intuitive to me. I tried to write well, then I did exactly what you suggested above as a practice: the "sources are sprinkled wherever the fact happens to come." Let me address the example you give: "In 1996,[12] The Sons of Mr. Greengenes were offered a five-album record deal by Acid Jazz Records.[14]" The reason for the placement of these two citations is this (your assumption is wrong): the first source states what year his band was offered a record deal, while the second is the only article ever to specify which label offered them a deal and that it was for five albums -- but it doesn't mention the year! That's why I needed two citations. If I put them both at the end, it might seem like inexplicable double-citing, while choosing one would not fully verify the sentence. But putting the first citation after 1996 signifies that it verifies the year, while the second one supports the remaining clause. I don't see a way to rewrite the sentence and still make this sourcing clear or make the prose better -- and I actually don't find it difficult to read this sentence in the first place. The more citations in an article, the more reliable it is, right? The eye has to learn to read past them no matter where they're placed. Isn't it better for the prose to be the best it can be, then have the citations "sprinkled" in where necessary?
• I'll have to give the middle paragraph some thought. I'm not sure precisely why you feel it doesn't flow, but I'll mull it over. Thanks! --Melty girl 21:08, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Well, that certainly seems like the only way to handle record deal citations, as long as you know the two sources are referring to the same deal. I do disagree with "the more citations in an article, the more reliable it is," however. To me, it's "the more reliable and complete the sources, the more reliable the article." Hopefully I'll go over the article in more detail and edit it a little for flow in the next few days. Enuja 22:28, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

Yes, I agree with the distinction you've made re my comment about sources. That is a much better way of putting it. Looking forward to your edits. --Melty girl 22:41, 29 August 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 17:21, 31 August 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Saul

Request peer review for Andrew Saul. Would like to ensure NPOV, and elevate to GA and eventually A-class status. MrPrada 21:27, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

Hm. Sorry, but I couldn't make myself read all this. So, only a few points:

• The lead is way too long.

Heh, I will try to work on that. A few other GAs I've submitted were initially turned down for having leads that were too short--so now I tend to do them overkill. I was attempting to follow the guideline that the lead should be an article in and of itself suitable for inclusion on Wiki for Schools CD or Wiki 1.0 MrPrada 10:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• It's more an article about the TSP and Saul's current campaign. Done

I figured this would be an issue (at least the part about the TSP). However I would like to point out that the TSP section is fundamentally different then the other actual TSP article, except for the section on the TSP funds. The reason that this information isn't on the other article is because it discusses Saul's direct involvement, which I think is more relevant to this article then the one on the plan. As for the "TSP Funds", which I think there smallest case to include, I put it in there because the article goes on to discuss all of these various types of funds and I think it helps the reader differentiate between them. Besides, I've taken it almost directly from the TSP website, because I am by no means a financial expert. MrPrada 10:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)]

• It even links to Saul's campaign website in a most prominent spot. Is that compatible with our NPOV rules? Done

As far as I know, Yes. It is identical to every other politician infobox I've seen. If its wrong, please let me know so I can take it out of the templates (since I know I've added website links to a number of articles and probably won't be able to go back and remove all of them by hand) MrPrada 10:19, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Lupo 10:08, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

I have to agree with the above review that the current article is a disorganized and overlong mess.

I'm not sure I agree that it is overly long, although I have reread it several times and will attempt to organize it better. It weighs in about the same size as other FA bios.

"millionaire businessman from Katonah, New York" should be removed, and his candidacy should be included in the first paragraph. "Andrew Saul is Chairman... and a Republican candidate for United States Congress."

Out of curiosity, what is wrong with referring to him as a millionaire? I'd have no problem taking it out, I just don't really see a problem with stating the obvious. His money surely has had an influence on his political appointments and congressional ambitions.

All but the first sentence about TSP should be removed from the lead. The paragraph about the TSP's finances and his political views re: the TSP should all be moved to the TSP section.

Removing all of that content would bring it under what WP:Lead calls for. It is a summary of everything that follows in the TSP section, there is no new information to merge. Also, are you differentiating between the FTRIB or the TSP?

Cache: "has served on the board" - is he currently on the board? Done

As far as I know, yes, according to the last SEC filings.

Has he been required to set aside his board memberships for the political campaign, or would he be required to set them aside if elected?

No, at least not for his role as Chairman of the FRTIB according to the referenced Senate testimony. He may have to leave the board if elected, however I don't want to violate WP:OR and look it up. Perhaps I can include some prior precedent from another CEO-congerssman?

Bridge and tunnel "some public outcry" should be defined. Were there demonstrations? Newspaper editorials? Specific concerns about transportation safety, or just a general concern that maintenance should be better funded? How did the MTA respond? Done

The article that is cited details the outcry, it was town hall style meetings. Perhaps I could rephrase somehow? It is so recent that the MTA hasn't had their monthly board meeting yet to respond.

The photo caption is completely unneeded. It should simply read, "Andrew Saul (left) at an MTA station." Done

I was trying to follow the summarization suggestions from the how-to-write-an-FA guide. I can remove it.

The "bungled computer project" and "economic weapon" paragraphs read like campaign speeches praising a candidate, not encyclopedia reports of historical events. "Designed the TSP around index funds as a way to stymie..." is opinion unless you have a valid source indicating that this was officially the intention of Congress. "investment consultant" is duplicated. The nature of the conflict with Congress is not specified in the article. Done

Bungled computer project can easily be rephrased. Not sure how you would rework "economic weapon", that is what the divesting is supposed to accomplish, is it not? Also, it is cited, so I am unsure what other valid source I should provide? It is not the opinion of ALL congressmembers, I will reread it to make sure I am not implying that in the text. The conflict wtih congress was over political manipulation of the TSP-funds. I included a section on authority, and REITs.

ALL the background material about the TSP should be moved to a new article about the TSP. The Andrew Saul article should consist ONLY of material that is specific to Mr. Saul's career, campaign, and personal history. Done

The background material on the TSP (specifically, the first paragraph of the TSP section, and the "Fund section") already exist in the TSP-article. They are inserted here to help the reader better understand the difference between the different types of funds, how they work, and what they are invested in, since nearly all of what follow discusses Saul and the funds.

The references section should only be used for citing references. The long quotes should be used within the body of the article itself.  Done

Perhaps I can move the quotes to a footnotes section? I did not want to make the article any longer then it already is in the main portion of it, so the full quotes were left down at the bottom.MrPrada 21:29, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

VisitorTalk 15:49, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Calvin Johnson (American football)

How can I improve this article to (or at least nearer to) Featured Article status? It's been a Good Article since March 02, 2007. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 16:39, 10 August 2007 (UTC)

• Well, this is petty, but are that many references in the lead necessary? If those stats are mentioned elsewhere then 'd prefer they'd be cited there. There's a debate going on about that though, really thugh it looks good so far, I'll give it a more detailed run over later. Wizardman 17:22, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
  • I took a few of those references out of the lead. The ones that are remaining should probably stay there, as the "more than 45" figure is subject to vandalism and the "good attitude" isn't mentioned elsewhere. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:58, 15 August 2007 (UTC)
    • Alright, that's good. I'd cite all the awards he's gotten, just to be safe as well. I actually think this is very near FA status, I'll look to see what else I ca find but this is very good. Wizardman 00:01, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
      • Okay, the awards have all been cited at least once, although I'm sure there are a billion references for them elsewhere on the internet. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 20:17, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

• Quick suggestions: The year of his draft should be in the first sentence as it helps establish his notability and/or timeliness of the article. The lead should be further expanded (see WP:LEAD) just a little bit more. The use of "(see below)" is a bit silly - I think readers know that there's more to the article. That sentence seems a bit awkward anyway; I'm not sure his trip necessarily "exemplifies" his humility. Even if it did, that needs sourcing or it's original research to come to that conclusion. The information that it refers to is under the subheading "Academic activities," which doesn't seem to fit (in my opinion). Did he get course credit for this trip, then? Otherwise, it might just be community service. And who gave him these options? And what's a solar latrine? Is it solar-powered, or are these facilities on the sun? (lol) Oh, and that final sentence in that same mini section doesn't need the word "also." The article, in my opinion, has some WP:NPOV problems as it seems to be just non-stop praise. I'm also a huge fan of occasionally repeating the full name of the article's subject, so good work there. But, under the section "NFL draft," the first subsection starts with "Johnson," then the second sentence has "Calvin Johnson." It's more logical to give the full name first, then use just his last name. Also in that subsection, there is a single-sentence paragraph. Actually, a lot of your paragraphs are very short but, personally, as long as they are three sentences, I approve. Towards the end, I'm not familiar with the term "guaranteed money," and other readers might not be either. That's all I have for now. Hope that helps a bit, and good luck! --Midnightdreary 12:08, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
  • Addendum: It occurred to me, and confirmed by reading above, that his humility, etc. are mentioned in the lead but not further expanded in the article itself. That may be worth doing, maybe with a quote from a coach or fellow player illustrating it. --Midnightdreary 12:09, 4 September 2007 (UTC)
  • I've addressed some of these issues, but not all of them. Good points :) The only sources I have on the Bolivia thing are this and this; they mention that the Georgia Tech Research Institute is somehow involved, but I'm not sure how. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:13, 6 September 2007 (UTC)
    • I sent an email to someone at GTRI and asked them some questions about the project. IMO the remaining tasks you suggested are 1) expand the lead and 2) move that "good personality" sentence into the body somewhere and add a quote talking about him. —Disavian (^talk/_contribs) 17:32, 6 September 2007 (UTC)

Murray William James Bourchier

The article has been substantially rewritten expanded since initially assessed as Start class. Suggestions for improvement would be appreciated. Dbromage 05:46, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by Canadian Paul

Here are my suggestions:

• The lead should be expanded per WP:LEAD. Specifically, it should mention what exactly was notable about him. At the very least, it should include something along the lines of "Bourchier was the Deputy Premier of Victoria from 1935 – 1936" so that it at least differentiates him from any old politician.
• The early life section needs to be directly referenced and could use a lot more information. What was his home life like? What were his parents like? What were his siblings like? How did his early life influence his later career choices/actions? What were his financial circumstances? What were his parent's education levels (this makes a difference - if he was educated was this what was expected of him or did he go out on his own?) What kind of work did he do at Woodland Park and how did it effect his future life? Perhaps the answers to all of these specific questions are not available, but those are the type of questions I would ask if I wanted to know about Bourchier.
• As a side note, red links in the Infobox should be de-linked. They can be red linked somewhere in the article if you believe that there is a possibility of an article.
• The World War I section is interesting, but the big block quotes break up the information and make it difficult to connect from one idea to the other. I'm not sure exactly what you might want to do about that, but it's just my observation.
• Anything that can be expanded upon in the post-war section would be great. What did he do on the farm while was there? (Farming, I'm assuming, but you can do lots of different jobs on a farm too). Any details about interesting things that happened during his military posts and why he was promoted through the ranks would be useful too (again, subject to the constraint of available information). This section should also have in-line citations.
• The Political Career section should be expanded to include his political actions and decisions and should be fully cited and referenced.
• You may want to merge the Personal Life and Early Life sections together to create one large "Personal Life" section. Also, citations and references will be needed.
• The trivia section should be incorporated into the Early/Personal Life section and the In Popular Culture section should be have a mention in the Political Career section after mention of his death. For both of these, citations and references will be required.

Hope this helps! Cheers, CP 18:58, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• If there is not a free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• Generally, trivia sections are looked down upon; please either remove the trivia section or incorporate any important facts into the rest of the article.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 07:15, 31 July 2007 (UTC)

Mathias Rüegg

This is my first request for a peer review. I think the article has grown beyond the bot "stub" rating, and would like suggestions on where to go from here. It is the first musician bio I have written, and I would like to see it reach GA status if possible. Rob C. alias Alarob 23:07, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

Maybe a picture and some references/sources? DrKiernan 06:52, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

I'd echo the need for sources, and I'd also suggest that you try and gather some critical sources that talk about his style of music and/or his cultural impact on music in his field. CaveatLector^Talk 07:07, 27 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. I've tracked down two Downbeat articles with more biograhical info, and some articles in German and French jazz magazines. (Could use some help with the French.) Can't find a non-copyright photo. Do WP editors ever approach the article subject for a pic? -- Rob C. alias Alarob 16:35, 29 July 2007 (UTC)

James Pike

I've put a lot of work into this topic, but am not sure what else can be/should be done. I've added some images and cited content over that last few months. Any help would be greatly appreciated.

RFlynn1000 19:34, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • While additive terms like “also”, “in addition”, “additionally”, “moreover”, and “furthermore” may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 9 additive terms, a bit too much.
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 07:55, 25 July 2007 (UTC)

Yasser Arafat

I have worked hard on expanding the article and the references. I removed several not necessarily relevant external links from the article page and used citation templates for all but two references. They could use a touch of more editing.

I think the Illness and Death needs reviewing and the Aftermath section to an extent.

With minor adjustments, I believ this article could reach FA status Al Ameer son 00:27, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 30 miles, use 30 miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 30&nbsp;miles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • it has been
  • allege
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 09:26, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by Psychless

If you're going for FA some things are going to need fixing. The main problem is referencing. In many paragraphs you only reference quotes; every sentence needs to be cited if you're going for FA. That's not to say you need a little number after every sentence though of course, they carry over multiple sentences as long as they're in the same paragraph. This is what needs to be fixed:

• Early life
  • First paragraph: First two sentences: the citation needs to come after punctuation. The second sentence is also worded strangely.
  • Second paragraph: When did he attend the the University of King Fuad II? And when was the university renamed, for those of us who don't want to click the link?
• Formation of Fatah
  • Last sentence of first paragraph needs referencing.
  • Second paragraph needs referencing.
  • Fourth and fifth paragraphs need referencing.
• Jordan
  • Last sentence of first paragraph needs referencing.
  • Second paragraph needs referencing.
• Lebanon
  • This section needs to follow the referencing rules. If the cite is only for the quote make sure you include a cite for the rest of the paragraph, before that have a different cite and after it at the end of the paragraph.

The rest of the article needs to referenced like described above, especially the Political survival, marginalization and controversy section which is completely unreferenced. I would be happy to go through and place a citation needed tag in all the places I believe need referencing if you wish. You might look over my article Serranus Clinton Hastings to understand what I think is proper referencing. I hoped this helped, Psychless 15:17, 26 July 2007 (UTC)

---

the sentences:

In a move widely criticized, even by a member of his own negotiating team and cabinet, Nabil Amr, Arafat rejected Barak's offer and refused to make a counter-offer. However negotiations continued at the Taba summit in January 2001. This time Ehud Barak pulled out of the talks to campaign in the Israeli elections. Throughout 2001 the al-Aqsa Intifada, or Second Palestinian Intifada grew in intensity and following the election of Ariel Sharon, the peace process took a steep downfall. Ariel Sharon, Israel's Prime Minister confined Arafat to his Mukataa headquarters in Ramallah, while George W. Bush, president of the United States, claimed that Arafat was "an obstacle to the peace". The European Union, on the other hand, opposed these tough policies.

Have major POV violations. "negotiations continued at the Taba summit " - does not mention that this was after the start the the intifada. "This time Ehud Barak pulled out of the talks to campaign in the Israeli elections." - is not true at all. "the peace process took a steep downfall" - implies that Sharon hurt peace process by fighting terror, not that Arafat hurt the peace process by starting terror. Jon513 14:26, 20 August 2007 (UTC)

Review by Scartol

Yasser_Arafat#Formation_of_Fatah

With regard to the last two paragraphs: Was Arafat involved in the bomb leading up to – or the Israeli attack on – as-Samu? If not, that ¶ should probably be shortened. (We need background on major events, but not too much.) On the other hand, discussion about the War itself should have more info (if available) on Arafat's role in the conflict. We see that he won popular support, but it would be good to get more detail on how he did it.

Please note that I'm also including {{fact}} tags where appropriate; I think we need to be super-careful about documenting every tiny thing in an article about such a controversial person. (Please remove these once the documentation has been added.) – Scartol · Talk 00:15, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Arafat I assume, was involved in the attack especially since at the time he could manage a still young Fatah's activities and especially since he led many of them (not this one however). Nonetheless I did shorten that segment somewhat and expanded Arafat's role in the conflict and his various promotions in chronological order and all with referencing. --Al Ameer son 18:00, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Good revisions. In the final paragraph of this section, it's not clear who the "him" refers to – also, I took a stab at what I thought you meant by "he was deferred by him as the leader of the Palestinians." If I chose the wrong word ("deferred" doesn't make sense to me), just change it to something else. – Scartol · Talk 21:30, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Battle_of_Karameh

Re this sentence: As Israel's forces intensified their campaign, the Jordanian Army became involved, causing the Israelis to retreat in order to avoid a full-scaled war. DO we have evidence that this is why they withdrew? It's probably safe to assume it's the reason, but I'd be a lot more comfortable with a footnote on it. – Scartol · Talk 21:36, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Done --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

By the end of the battle 150 Palestinian militants and perhaps civilians were killed as well as 20 Jordanian soldiers and 29 Israeli soldiers. Please cite this. Also, I – like most people reading about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict – get very nervous when we read things like "perhaps civilians". Let's stick to verifiable facts. If there's a quote from a book which suggests that maybe civilians were killed, quote or cite it. Otherwise, leave it out. You can imagine the furor this will cause if someone thinks it's your own opinion. – Scartol · Talk 21:39, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

No civilians is not mentioned and I removed it from the text. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I've consulted another editor about whether we can use the cover of Time under the fair use rationale. I think we probably can, which is good – that block of text could use an image. Looks like it's not a good idea. I'm getting negative vibes. – Scartol · Talk 21:50, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes I added it to the article a while ago but could not keep it there because of some rule about magazine covers. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Black_September_and_official_recognition

I shortened the title of the subhead (it's best to keep these as brief as possible). Re the Ten Point Program: It's necessary to give some more background here. Had certain Palestinian territory been liberated? If so, what territory is being addressed? Or were they addressing future claims and/or conflicts? – Scartol · Talk 22:43, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

The liberated territories thats spoken of of is the territories captured by Arab forces in 1948. I addressed that in the article. This is the reason more militant factions opposed it because of their belief in a complete "liberation" of Palestine. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Israel and the United States claimed that Arafat was in ultimate control over these organizations, and therefore had not abandoned terrorism. This implies that Arafat had previously endorsed terrorism. Does this refer to Dawson's field? If so, it's good to use that word in that section, so this part won't be a surprise. It might also be good to indicate that he was trying to indicate a disapproval of terrorist tactics (if that was the case). – Scartol · Talk 22:47, 16 September 2007 (UTC)

I addressed that also in the Jordan section. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Fatah_involvement_in_Lebanese_Civil_War

Re the paragraph beginning with: The Civil War's first phase ended for Arafat with the siege and fall of the refugee camp of Tel al-Zaatar. Could this be merged into the preceding paragraphs? It interrupts the flow of the chronology. – Scartol · Talk 15:31, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yes it could and it has. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Tunisia

Fatah forces in the West Bank led by Abu Jihad were essential for continuing the civil unrest for the duration. How long did the Intifada last? Please specify here. – Scartol · Talk 15:53, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

It lasted until 1993 which I just added to the text. I also did some text location switching to keep everything in chronological order. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#1993_Oslo_Accords

…a gradual disengagement of Israeli settlements in those areas. Can we use a better word than "disengagement"? Were the settlements supposed to be removed? Or was Israel supposed to stop adding new ones? Or was some other procedure called for? "Disengagement" is a bit unclear. – Scartol · Talk 17:03, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

It was both the ending of settlement building and eventual settlement removal. It has been addressed. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Palestinian_elections_and_other_peace_agreements

We should have some more information in this section about what the PLO (and other Palestinian organizations) was/were doing in the mid-late 1990s, and how involved Arafat was. – Scartol · Talk 17:32, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

This will take some reading into his biography and Carter's book on the conflict. Once I find the information on that I will add to it. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Arafat rejected Barak's offer and refused to make a counter-offer. Explain what Arafat's rationale was. – Scartol · Talk 17:38, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

This also will take some reading into. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Political_survival.2C_marginalization_and_controversy

Arafat's ability to adapt to new tactical and political situations, was perhaps exemplified by the rise of the Hamas… "Exemplified" is an unclear word here. Maybe "tested"? – Scartol · Talk 17:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

I used the word tested. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Arafat's ability to adapt to new tactical and political situations was perhaps exemplified by the rise of the Hamas and Palestinian Islamic Jihad organizations, Islamist groups espousing rejectionist opposition to Israel's existence. Have I categorized these correctly? If I'm wrong in assessing Hamas and PIJ as fundamentally opposed to the existence of Israel, please make the needed change. – Scartol · Talk 18:33, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Overall I addressed most of the issues you have brought up including clarification and reference tags. I removed some uncited and at the same time unimportant info from the article. However if you believe that it should be reinstated then go ahead and we shall hunt for references. Some issues mostly in the elections and peace agreements section will be addressed from the biography and Carter's book --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Excellent. I won't be able to do any more work on this today, but I should be able to keep going tomorrow. Cheers! – Scartol · Talk 21:46, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Thats fine, my recent editing probably needs some copyediting though. --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

Persistent attempts by the Israeli government to identify another Palestinian leader… This sentence needs some context. It's probably clear to some readers why Israel wanted to find an alternative to Arafat, but it's important to spell it out, with citation of official Israeli sources if possible.

Also, at the end of that paragraph: Marwan Barghouti emerged as a possible replacement during the al-Aqsa Intifada, but Israel had him arrested and sentenced to five life terms. The end of the sentence should read: "…five life sentences for his involvement in (describe alleged crimes)." With a citation, of course. – Scartol · Talk 15:36, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Arafat was finally allowed to leave his compound… This feels like it's coming out of nowhere, since the various paragraphs above it are more general about Arafat's influence and dynamic approach. I would suggest first (in the previous section) giving the date that Sharon ordered Arafat's confinement. (In that paragraph, we should also see the reasons -- or at least the stated reasons -- for the order.) Then, at the start of the "Political survival" section, say something like: "Sharon's confinement order was an unusually harsh move against one of the most famous Palestinians in the world." This will give the reader a foothold on the general discussion, and lead more easily into the part where he was allowed to leave. – Scartol · Talk 15:40, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The most frequent criticism of Arafat by the Western and Israeli media was that he was corrupt to the detriment of the Palestinian people. Really? It's not the affiliation with organizations using terror tactics? I'm not being rhetorical – I really don't know. – Scartol · Talk 15:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Financial dealings

An investigation by the European Union into claims that EU funds were misused… Can we get a year for that investigation? – Scartol · Talk 16:08, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Claims by unnamed sources in the PA Finance Ministry stated that Arafat's wife… Can we get a year for this? – Scartol · Talk 16:46, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Illness_and_death

However, a straightforward linear response to the death of Arafat, involved in controversy, conflict and the struggle for national identity as he had been, was unlikely. This is extremely unclear. I assume it means that various organizations were unlikely to mourn in a strict traditional way? It's probably just best to give details on what they did. – Scartol · Talk 17:10, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Yasser_Arafat#Aftermath

I also wanted to mention the renaming of the Aftermath section. I don't really think its an appropriate name for the section since it doesn't really state anything thats his legacy. It mostly concentrates on the aftermath of his death such as his refused autopsy, medical files, his death certificate and burial. At the end of the article it mentions the politicians who took positions in the PNA. Maybe we could make this section a subsection in the Illness and death section and make a separate one for his legacy. We could also remove or seriously cut-down the last portion of the section that addresses the new PNA, seeing that it is unnecessary and irrelevant to Arafat since he did not assign their positions. Cheers --Al Ameer son 22:55, 17 September 2007 (UTC)

To be honest, I sort of changed it without reading it carefully, since most bio pages usually use Legacy instead. But I'll let you take the lead on this – your setup sounds fine. Go ahead and change it to whatever you think is best. I'll look over your new edits and keep moving ahead tomorrow. – Scartol · Talk 02:15, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I feel the need to focus on the phrasing: "…Islamist groups espousing rejectionist opposition to Israel…" Are these groups opposed to certain Israeli policies, or to the existence of Israel itself? Seems like an important distinction which should be made in this article. (The article does a good job of distinguishing between the evolving position of Arafat, Fatah and the PLO -- we should do the same for other organizations.) – Scartol · Talk 15:24, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

General Comments

We don't need a link every time Israel or Fatah are mentioned. WP:MOS-L has guidelines about how to use wikilinks effectively. – Scartol · Talk 15:29, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

If I ever put a {{fact}} tag in a spot that is later covered by a footnote at the end of a paragraph, just delete it (and maybe make a note here or on the talk page). – Scartol · Talk 17:17, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

The information in "Personal life" should be integrated into the article. The part about his wedding, for instance, should be worked into the "Tunisia" section. You can put the info about his daughter and adopted children (best to arrange these chronologically) in the same section. I'd put the speculations about possible homosexuality in the section about his death, especially since they often revolve around the rumors of him having AIDS. Also, the two books mentioned don't have page numbers. Controversial claims like that really need specific references. – Scartol · Talk 17:28, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

Okay, I've made it through each section. Once you're able to make these changes (or explain why they should be left as they are or whatever), I'll give it another pass. Thanks again for your diligence and hard work on it. – Scartol · Talk 17:47, 18 September 2007 (UTC)

I have integrated the Personal life section into the rest of the article. As for the page numbers, I'm not sure what you mean? There are page numbers in the references, are you saying the exact page number? The fact tags for the most part are in the right spot and are not backed by other references. So we will need to hunt for them. I will go over the references once more to be sure. --Al Ameer son 20:11, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

I've fully referenced the Financial dealings section of the article and added some references to the Illness and death and Aftermath sections. --Al Ameer son 19:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

I also wanted to bring up using some sort of protective lock on the article to prevent its constant vandalism as you an see in the article's history. --Al Ameer son 19:21, 29 September 2007 (UTC)

Scartol's second pass

Okay, I'll go through again and make (hopefully many fewer) comments. I'm not very far into it yet, but I'm very impressed by the improvements you've made so far. Well done!

Please let me finish with this overview before responding. I may go back and change things as I progress. Thanks!

Lead

The lead should be longer and more closely mimic the overall structure of the article. I'll have a go at it once I re-read the article. I've rewritten the lead, to make it match the contours of the article. I tried to leave as much of the previous writing intact as I could, but I needed to remove some bits. Feel free to add citations if necessary and/or revert changes.

Formation of Fatah

• The magazine's name is listed as Filastununa, Nida al-Hayat. Is the comma part of the magazine's name? If not, it should be removed.

The Arabic text is not given in the book, only its translation which I just added. I removed the comma anyway. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

• During the 1962–1966 period, Arafat and his closest companions immigrated to Syria, a country sharing a border with Israel which had recently seceded from a union with Nasser's Egypt. This is unclear; did Syria secede from the union, or Israel? (I assume Syria, but I want to be sure. If it is Syria, the comma before "a country" should be a spaced en dash – like this – and another should appear between "Israel" and "which".)

Done. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Fatah involvement in Lebanese Civil War

• The sentence: PLO attacks against Israel also grew dramatically during the 1970s. could use some follow-up. I'm worried that some editors will accuse the article of going easy on details of the PLO's attacks. Let's give one or two sentences of specifics. What cities were attacked? etc.

Coastal Road Massacre, probably needs copyediting. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Political survival, marginalization and controversy

• Marwan Barghouti emerged as a possible replacement during the al-Aqsa Intifada, but Israel had him arrested and sentenced to five life terms. As I think I said before, we could use some context. What was he sentenced for? —Preceding unsigned comment added by Scartol (talk • contribs) 18:25, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Done, once again this also probably needs copyediting. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Illness and Death

• One observer described it as "a very painful scene.… I stuck in "One observer" because the text started in the middle of this sentence. Didn't we have a name with this quote before? – Scartol · Talk 18:32, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Tamimi was the observer who is mentioned in the preceding passage in the section. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

General comments

At some point, it would be good to go through and check the repetition of wikilinks – each country, for example, should be linked once at its first appearance, and only afterwards if it's very essential for the context. (I expect the various instances of extra linking came about because various editors added bits and pieces along the way.)

I'd be more comfortable if we had page numbers with more of the books (especially the ones alleging homosexual activity). – Scartol · Talk 19:29, 3 October 2007 (UTC)

Unfortunately, I don't have page numbers for the book because I don't have the book. If I ever see it in a library I'll take note but until then I have no solution for it. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

More to come. It looks like my work here is done. You've really done an outstanding job in fleshing out many sections and providing references for every little thing in the article.

A second (oops – I mean fifteenth) opinion?

One thought I've had while working on this is that it would be useful to have someone involved in WikiProject Israel review the article. When I read it (as someone who both supports the right of Israel to exist but is also stridently opposed to the occupation of the West Bank, not to mention critical of violations by both Israelis and Palestinians of human rights and international law), this page is impressively NPOV right now; you've done a superb job of juggling the many perspectives, and providing sources for everything in sight.

Still, I can foresee a situation where charges of WP:NPOV are raised in the FAC process, by folks who have a very thorough knowledge of the history involved and may be opposed to seeing any article on Arafat raised to FA status. Getting the opinion of someone at WP:Israel to ensure a very strict adherence to NPOV (as difficult as it may be for an article like this) is a good way to head that sort of thing off at the pass.

That's a wonderful idea, I think I already have two or three popular members of that project to overlook the article. --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again for all your hard work, and please let me know if you have any further questions or concerns. (I may not be able to check here with great frequency, so it's a good idea to drop me a line on my talk page.) Please also let me know when the article is nominated again at WP:FAC. I look forward to seeing it progress. – Scartol · Talk 00:15, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much. You have brought the article to a much higher level and now I see an enormous difference between the article now and the previous times I brought it up for FA status. The only requests I have is to copyedit my few recent additions to your suggestions. Also, I would like your opinion on whether we should replace the image of the PFLP flag with the image of patrol of PFLP fighters in Jordan in 1969. The link is here: [3] Thank you again and of course I'll let you know when the article is renominated (which I hope is very soon). --Al Ameer son 22:24, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, I like the idea of using a picture of people instead of flags, but I wondered if we might be inviting NPOV accusations. I'm probably being paranoid, but I thought maybe if we have a picture of PFLP soldiers, we'd need one of IDF troops, etc etc. I'll let you make the call on this one – listen to your heart. =) I'll have a look at your recent additions. I'm glad I could help out. Cheers. – Scartol · Talk 23:16, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

I don't think we need a picture of IDF soldiers since they are not of much concern in the civil strife between the PLO and Jordan and their forces were not deployed on any front. Also, the PFLP is a member group of the PLO organization which Arafat was responsible for. I think a pic of the IDF could be of good use in the section(s) dealing with the fighting between the Palestinians and Israel. --Al Ameer son 19:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

• Can we get a citation (or two) for the newly-added bits about the Ben Gurion Airport incidents and the other info in that paragraph?

Done and I have added more background. needs copyediting --Al Ameer son 19:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

• I've tweaked some wording; please check and make sure it's still factually accurate (I'm thinking of the bus hijacking especially).

Changed it so it would included passing vehicles that were targeted. --Al Ameer son 19:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

• Just an FYI: "charged with the allegations of killing twenty-six people" is redundant. Issuing a charge is the same thing as alleging it. I changed it.

• That's it. Good luck! – Scartol · Talk 23:30, 4 October 2007 (UTC)

Do you think we should expand the Lebanse civil war section to included battles and massacres between Fatah and the Christian, Shiite, and pro-Syria PLO forces. --Al Ameer son 19:47, 5 October 2007 (UTC)

Quick peer review

Here is a short, informal peer review of the article. The previous reviewer has done a lot so I've just brought up some minor issues.

• Birth & Childhood -> Birth and childhood
• Jerusalem is first linked in the Name section. It is first mentioned in the Birth & Childhood section and therefore, should be linked there instead.
• Citations in first paragraph of name section are redundant, only one, at the end, is needed.
• "However, Arafat did not use the Abdel Rahman part of his name either, and it too was dropped." If you say he didn't use it, does saying he dropped it add anything to the meaning?
• The last sentence of the first paragraph of the Formation of Fatah section is not cited.
• Citations in paragraphs 5, 6, and 7 in section Formation of Fatah are redundant. You just need one at the end of the paragraph.
• Same as above with paragraph 1 in section Battle of Karameh
• And paragraphs 1, 3 and 5 in Jordan section
• Last sentence of paragraph 2 of Jordan section is not cited
• Terrorist attacks in 1970s and official recognition section needs a little work on citations. Make sure every sentence is cited.
• Last two sentences of second paragraph of Fatah involvement in Lebanese Civil War section are not cited
• redundant citations in paragraph 2 of Tunisia section.
• most of paragraph 4 in Tunisia section is uncited
• the last sentence of paragraph 4 and the last in paragraph 6 are uncited.
• Second paragraph of Financial Dealings section is uncited.
• Add a citation so you can removed the citation needed tag.
• Last sentence of paragraph 1 and last of paragraph 2 in Illness and death section need citations.
• Citation needed tag on last paragraph in Illness and death section

Psychless 23:20, 8 October 2007 (UTC)

All except one citation needed tag at illness and death section has been done. In the process I also divided the Formation of Fatah into two more sections and renamed the Tunisia section Tunisia and the First Intifada. You can read over these sections and agree or disagree that they correspond with the text.

I added more info on the Lebanese Civil War (needs copyediting) to include massacres and battles between Arafat's forces and the government. Also to clarify some portions of the text.

Also I think it would be a good idea to make a subsection in the Aftermath section called Reactions. What are your opinions on that. --Al Ameer son 01:45, 10 October 2007 (UTC)

James W. Holsinger

The editors of this page have worked tirelessly to shorten, remove POV, remove OR, and fix references. I would like to have the page peer reviewed to move it from a B-Class to a GA-Class or A-Class article.--Maryrebecca 21:47, 22 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

(Doesn't seem to have picked up much. DrKiernan 09:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)) The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 09:25, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

All dates and years are properly linked per the Manual of Style -- full dates linked, years without context, not linked. We linked "As of 2007" per "Wikipedia:As of".--Maryrebecca 18:33, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by User:Brad

Nice work! Some problems:

• "Holsinger's nomination became controversial due to, according to his critics, anti-gay bias in his work in the United Methodist Church." This would be better positioned immediately after the sentence about his nomination, rather than having a summary of his career in between.
• "Nomination controversy" would be better named "Committee hearing" or similar; nominees for high-level positions rarely sail through hearings unscathed and losing "controversy" would invite editors to write a more balanced account of the hearings.
• The subsections of "Public health stances" might work better as a single section. "Readiness of Public Health Service Commissioned Corps", "Sex education" and "Morning after pill" are just one sentence each. Again, combining them would encourage expansion.
• The language overall is unvaried ("Holsinger this", "Holsinger that"), and I think that's just down to the primary article editors (from the edit history it looks like you and User:Therefore have been the most prolific editors of the article) settling on their own language and it needing some fresh eyes to brush up good work to great work; consider listing the article at the league of copyeditors for extra help. Brad 11:01, 1 August 2007 (UTC)

Leslie Graves

Expected your peer review about the Biography. I hope in a Good Article mark.

Goof 2003 09:49, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 09:23, 23 July 2007 (UTC)

Zita of Bourbon-Parma

I've spent an awful lot of time on this over the last few days. I know it only has one source, but then works of depth about Zita of Bourbon-Parma are somewhat lacking. It should get Good Article status, as I don't think anything's missed out.--Lec CRP1 00:25, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by Psychless

This article still needs a bit of polishing before it's ready for GA in my opinion. Here are my suggestions:

• This one's the biggie... References need to come after punctuation. Sometimes there is a period, reference, then another period; that should be fixed as well.
• Date linking... Stand-alone years should not be linked. Dates like July 1776 should not be linked either. However, dates like July 4, 1776 should always be linked.
• The section: Beliefs about the death of Crown Prince Rudolf needs some referencing.
• What does "Issue" have to do with children? Also, could the section possibly be turned into prose
• The ancestors table probably doesn't need the father, father's mother, etc. labels. That's just an opinion though.
• The references section should be split into a Notes and References section. The notes should have all the citations and the references (could be called Cited works) section should have the book listed. Also, some of the references look like they're duplicates. Just do this: <ref name=whatever>Citation here</ref>. For the duplicate citation replace it with <ref name=whatever/>

If you have any questions on my review just leave a note on my talk page. You've done a great job! Psychless 04:14, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by DrKiernan

The following suggestions were generated by a real person, and are applicable for the article in question. (Yes, I read the talk page!)

• You might consider expanding the lead into a summary of the article.
• "and so rumours of the 'Italian' Zita began to be mutterered" Can you re-phrase or be more specific?
• Dandelion salad is now considered an unusual delicacy, served in top (or pretentious) restaurants. Are we sure the case wasn't the same then?
• The "Crown Prince Rudolf" section should be integrated with the text and any unsourced material deleted.
• Please format the dates in "Issue" section. Psychless, I have asked, elsewhere in the past, whether "Issue" sections should be renamed "Children", but had no response.[4]

Well done – fantastic job at improving the article. DrKiernan 07:34, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

• • I think I made sufficient changes, though there may be the odd dot or comma I've missed. Still not quite sure about all those notes, but better safe than sorry. I've put it up for Good Article nomination now --Lec CRP1 16:32, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Fred Craddock

The intent is for this article to become a Good Article, and the contributor(s) to gain skills in bio writing. Joeraybray 06:30, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:05, 18 July 2007 (UTC) Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Parâkramabâhu I

Richard Hawes

The editor who reviewed (and passed) this article for GA recommended that I make an FA run with it. Since I'm hoping to eventually include this article with GA George W. Johnson (Civil War) and FA candidate Confederate government of Kentucky in a featured topic, taking it from GA to FA would be a great help. Is it FA-quality, or can it be made so with a reasonable amount of effort? What can be done to improve it? Acdixon 13:37, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 100 miles, use 100 miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 100&nbsp;miles.^[?]
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:07, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Hayley Westenra

From this peer review I am hoping to get this article up to the level of FA. It is already a GA and I want to know what needs to be improved and added/expanded upon to improve it. Andrew D White (talk) 23:25, 19 December 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Just some trivia:

• "for Her Majesty The Queen". You link the term "Her Majesty" but not the queen, Elisabeth, herself!
• "At the Sydney Opera House she received a rare standing ovation.". I would cite that.
• "On 5 September 2006, Westenra was named as one of the ten outstanding young people in the world by the Junior Chamber International." Citation for that. Is it maybe in the next phrase?
• "Westenra is known as a vegetarian/pescotarian, and is currently nominated for PETA's 'Sexiest Vegetarian' for 2007.[33][34][35][36]" Two many notes in a row. This is something personally I donot lke, but this may just be subjective. Check how Sandy combines notes in Tourette syndrome.
• The two last paragraphs of "Beyond her initial success" I think do not follow the story of the rest of the chapter and they look a bit like trivia put there, because there was nowhere else to be placed. But again I do not know if there could be any better structure in this or in a separate chapter.

Very nice indeed! I think this article is on the track to be FA! And I do not see any serious copyright problems with the pictures. Good chance in FAC!--Yannismarou (talk) 14:24, 25 December 2007 (UTC)

Ok I added the source for the standing ovation and the Junior Chamber International. Good thing I still remembered where I got these pieces of information. I guess I missed putting them in. I'll look at the other stuff that you noted. Andrew D White (talk) 22:28, 4 January 2008 (UTC)

So here is a question. Should I leave it how I now have it linked now (Her Majesty linked to majesty and The Queen to Elisabeth) or just to Elisabeth? I looked at the talk page and discovered why we have so many sources on that one sentence. Its because we wanted to make sure that we showed that she is known as a vegetarian/pescotarian. Without all of the sources it seemed that it could seem under sourced to say known. I agree with you the last two pararaphs do seem a bit out of place but alas I have not been able to come up with better placement for them. Maby someone else has a good idea of how to make them flow. Andrew D White (talk) 14:45, 7 January 2008 (UTC)

James Mitchell (actor)

I've been sporadically maintaining and updating this article for a couple of years, and have decided to work more seriously on it to bring it up to Good Article status.

Some queries:

• Further subcategories in the career section? How many?
• More detailed account of television work?
• List the de mille, Champion, Loring, Robbins roles in tables, instead of bulleted lists?
• Would a section on critical responses to Mitchell's dance career be a good idea?
• Where are further citations desirable?

Lector 17:03, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?] (Surely, the current image is a screenshot and should have a fair use rationale?)
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:15, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

(Surely, the current image is a screenshot and should have a fair use rationale?)

Thanks; but the image, which was apparently inserted by either the subject or someone close to same, is not a screenshot & is identified as public domain by the creator.

Lector 21:44, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

You might consider changing the summary description and caption as it says its "from the motion picture, The Turning Point", which implies it is a screenshot. Claiming to be James Mitchell is not sufficient for a free-use claim, you have to prove it. The copyright status of the image is still unclear in my opinion. DrKiernan 08:01, 20 July 2007 (UTC)

Having seen the film, I can definitely say that whatever the image is, it isn't a screenshot! :) I'll change the description for now, and will try requesting further clarification from the user who uploaded the shot.

Lector 01:22, 21 July 2007 (UTC)

Tsui Po-ko

The article was tagged as having little or no context. It has now been completely re-written. I don't think the context is a problem any more, but would benefit from being thoroughly reviewed. The Chinese biography is a lot more comprehensive, probably quite a bit too much detail in my view, bearing in mind a separate article exists on the Tsui Po-ko incident, which covers some of the ground twice. This is a very exceptional case of a police office officer going mentally AWOL, and I hope this could become a featured article. Ohconfucius 08:48, 6 July 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:18, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Francis II, Holy Roman Emperor

I've spent several hours over the last few days expanding and referencing this article. It was assessed as B-Class yesterday before added references, some pictures and templates - aiming to give a good overall picture of a significant figure in European history. I'm hoping to get it to Good Article status. Lec CRP1 13:40, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and WP:CONTEXT.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:20, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Review by DrKiernan

Once again, you've managed to make a substantial improvement in a short space of time!

• I've amended the footnote placements, but the single years without accompanying dates should be unlinked, according to the Manual of Style.
• "The federal Diet..." is a short paragraph, can it be expanded or integrated?
• "Francis was a son..." maybe put this at the start of the early life section, with the birth details?
• "where many died in the conditions" sounds a little strange, I think I would prefer "where many died" (which I suppose might be misleading as to cause of death) or "where many died in the poor conditions".
• Personally, I'd move the "Marriages" section to between the "Early life" and "Emperor" sections. Also, note the redlinked years that need to be unlinked.

As you know, one or two sources might not be considered sufficient for a major figure, and the article is shorter at 22 kb than the articles on British rulers, which may indicate room for even further expansion, if you wanted to aim higher than GA. DrKiernan 09:46, 19 July 2007 (UTC)

Bono

The article was created on August 27, 2002 by Bernfarr and has since undergone nearly 3,000 edits. My first edit to Bono was made on December 16, 2006 and I've been actively working on it since that time. There have been many great contributions to this article since it has started and it has most definitely come a long way.

I'd be interested in knowing what we could do to get this article to FA status. I've written a couple of the sections, and the bottom line is I'm not that great of a writer :). Any grammatical, flow or simple formatting recommendations would be appreciated. In addition, the "criticism" section has always been a source of heated debate among editors. Any recommendations on how that section could be improved would be appreciated. And of course, I'd like to know any other recommendations the reviewers have for the article that could help it get to FA status.

Thanks, and I look forward to getting to work on it! Chupper 16:53, 4 July 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
  • The image at the top right is copyrighted conditional use, only requiring attribution. I don't think we'll be getting an image better than that anytime soon. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
  • Cool template! It's been added. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
  • I ran through the article and hopefully fixed any date links so they are now included. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?]
  • Corrected. I've switched the name of "Bono and U2" to "U2"
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
  • I reformatted the reference sections. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
• Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): Don't, Won't, doesn't, doesn't.
  • It didn't find any contractions outside of quotations. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]
  • I've looked over the article. Copyediting should be OK. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your comments DrKiernan! They were helpful. I've made responses to your recommendations above. Chupper 23:43, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

William Cooley

Hello! This article has been rated as a B-Class recently, and I would like to know what other editors think could make it GA-class. Thanks!--Legionarius 19:45, 1 July 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.^[?]
• Avoid including galleries in articles, as per Wikipedia:Galleries. Common solutions to this problem include moving the gallery to a separate page, like Gallery of William Cooley.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:21, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Tōru Takemitsu

Hi I've been working on this article on my favourite composer of the second half of the 20th century for ages now, mainly on my own. I've used as many sources as I've been able to get hold of to get all the info, and I've tried to be as thorough as possible, using the Messiaen article as a guide at times.

It's not all finished, the last two sections of the biography need a lot more, and I think the presentation of the awards section could do with some work. But I need some people to have a good look, see what they think, and suggest any changes, improvements etc. - hopefully with some knowledge of Contemporary Classical music, and at least a decent knowledge of 20th Century Classical music.

Cheers. Matt.kaner 14:27, 24 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honor (A) (British: honour), honour (B) (American: honor), metre (B) (American: meter), organise (B) (American: organize), recognize (A) (British: recognise), ization (A) (British: isation), isation (B) (American: ization).
• Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): hadn't.
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:22, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

I'm not sure that any of these apply to this article! Matt.kaner 00:13, 24 July 2007 (UTC)

Scott Bradley

I've attempted to improve this brief bio beyond start class, so I'd like peer review on my changes. Thanks! --BigScaryMike _{(Talk/Contrib)} 20:20, 27 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.^[?]
• Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and WP:CONTEXT.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:24, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Benyoucef Ben Khedda

The first article I've really worked on. I started by translating what was on fr, then sourced using what I could find. Looking for general opinions and what can be done to improve it. Bnynms 16:11, 26 June 2007 (UTC)

• The image (Image:1101620316 400.jpeg) should probably not be included. Firstly, it has no fair-use rationale for use in this article. Secondly, if you read that licensing box carefully, it says that with few exceptions, we don't use magazine covers to illustrate articles about the people on the cover. (ESkog)^(Talk) 16:31, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

• Removed. I'll look around for a free image. PD-Algeria might reward us with something. Bnynms 00:05, 29 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Consider removing links that add little to the article or that have been repeated in close proximity to other links to the same article, as per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and WP:CONTEXT.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:26, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Dave Bishop

I'd like to get this up to at least GA standard Embassy 14:49, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• This article is a bit too short, and therefore may not be as comprehensive as WP:WIAFA critera 1(b) is looking for. Please see if anything can be expanded upon.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:27, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Steve "Cahoots" Nash

Hi i am putting this article up for a peer review at the bequest of Warrush. I am sure that all comments will be greatly appreciated. Thanks Woodym555 18:03, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

From a quick review, I can tell you a few things:

• Needs to be referenced more thoroughly. The introduction for instance, has no citations at all. The Early life section is also in need of better referencing. As a general guideline, you should have at least one reference per fact/group of related facts. For instance "While in college, he played for the Canadian National Team" should be referenced, since that is a complete thought. (See WP:CITE for more detail)
• Along the same lines, you should use citation templates wherever possible.
• I also noticed some prose issues, some of which don't sound very objective or encyclopedic ("Nash continues to be the pivot of one of the league's most potent offensive teams." for example. Which is true, but is worded as if it is a point-of-view rather than a fact.)

All in all a pretty good job - lots of good information and a pretty broad scope - just needs to be cleaned up wherever possible.

Good luck! Drewcifer3000 09:34, 7 July 2007 (UTC)

Sai Baba of Shirdi

This article is at present rated as B, I think it deserves higher rating/status. I would like to raise it first to GA status, than to A class and than to FA status. (I have already requested ordinary peer review and I already nominated the article for FA but without success). Please inform me about any mistakes in the article or things that should be improved. Kkrystian 09:12, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Max Fleischer

I have done major editing and cleanup on this article. I have concerns that much of the information on this page overlaps with Fleischer Studios. Obviously some overlap is necessary, but it's also a pain to maintain the same info in multiple places. (I believe the two articles are at least consistent.)

I believe the article is considerably improved, but since I'm fairly new at this process, I'm requesting peer review. --Bigscarymike 04:01, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• This article has no images. Please see if there are any free use images that fall under the Wikipedia:Image use policy and fit under one of the Wikipedia:Image copyright tags that can be uploaded. To upload images on Wikipedia, go to Special:Upload; to upload non-fair use images on the Wikimedia Commons, go to commons:special:upload.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:31, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Yuji Ide

Someone with a very brief F1 career. I've added references, copyedited and given serious attention to this article, but I am looking to make this even stronger. I want to get ol' Yuji up to B-class in part for sh--- and giggles. Guroadrunner 14:23, 13 June 2007 (UTC)

Psychless

This article covers his racing career very well and is well referenced. The only problem is it really doesn't tell me much about him as a person, just as a racing driver. It needs some info on his childhood, family, personal life, religion, etc. If you can do that the article would be great, I would peer review it for you. Oh, and if you could find a picture that would improve it as well. Pictures that wikipedia can use are always hell to find though... Regards, Psychless 19:41, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:33, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Itzik Zohar

• I hope to get this page as good as it possibly can be. Perhaps in the distant future, a featured article. But that would take many more resources and perhaps for the subject to gain some worldwide recognition. -NYC2TLV 07:20, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• The article is a little short, can you expand on his playing career?
• Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): didn't.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:36, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

J. R. Richard

This is currently at FAC, and it has run into some snags regarding grammar, style and such. I would really appreciate it if some editors could take a look at the article and make some copyediting corrections soon. Thanks, Nishkid64 (talk) 20:06, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 93 miles, use 93 miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 93&nbsp;miles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]
• Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): Couldn't.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:36, 30 June 2007 (UTC)

Serranus Clinton Hastings

I think it would be interesting to have an article on an Iowa representative get GA status. I've worked fairly hard on this, but I know this would not come close to satisfying criterion 1a. If I was going for FA that is. Whether it can get GA status or not I'd just like to see the article improved from the peer review. References are a problem on this one since the ones I have are basically the only ones there are. --Psychless 04:26, 19 June 2007 (UTC)

Review by karanacs

Overall, I think almost every sentence is well-written, but you need to work on your transitions between facts.

• Lead should be expanded a bit.
• When did Iowa become a territory (for those of us not from the state)
• I'm confused about the 1838 election -- were his two terms consecutive or concurrent and was he elected to both of them at the same time (or was one of them in 1839)?
• Last four sentences of the first paragraph of career seem to be kind of thrown in there -- don't flow at all with each other or the paragraph before.
• When did Iowa become a state?
• Why was his first term in the federal legislature so short?
• Need to transition more smoothly between march 3, 1847 and Gov. Ansel Briss appointed him...
• Any information on why he decided to move to California?

*Is it important that he converted to Catholicism? If you can't find any information on his reasons or whether it affected his life, this is trivia and could be removed. Likewise, the information on his personal appearance could be considered trivia unless you can find a better way to work it into the article.  Done Good luck! Karanacs 02:03, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

I don't know why he moved to California, and can't find any source that tells why he did. I've removed the personal life section and incorporated the marraige and children bit into the career section of the article. Catholicism is just listed as his religion in the infobox now. I've tried to expand the lead as best I can. Any further comments on the article would be appreciated. Psychless 23:11, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Your changes look good. Here are some additional suggestions

• suggestion: "When Iowa became a territory in 1838, he got involved in the territory's politics. In 1838, he was elected as a member of the House of the First Legislative Assembly." -> "When Iowa became a territory in 1838, he became involved in politics, winning election to be a member of the House of the First Lesiglative Assembly."
• You might be able to expand the article a bit by talking a little about the "Blue Book" of Iowa laws. What did it encompass and what is its importance? You could also mention some of the early laws that were passed by the assemblies in which he served.
• The two sentences on the border conflict with Missouri should be rewritten. Possibly expand.
• You mention in the lead that the law school he founded is now the Law Department at UC. This should also be mentioned in the body of the article.

Karanacs 17:39, 21 June 2007 (UTC)

 Done-ish. It's now a good article candidate. If anyone has any more suggestions feel free to leave them. --Psychless 18:21, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Joe Rogan

Let's try and clean this up and get it to good article quality Embassy 15:18, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Woodym555

It is a start. There are many things that can be done to improve it though.

• The lead section needs extending. You may find it helpful to read this guideline to get an idea of how long this section should be and what it should contain.
• A good lead section is built around a strong and full article which it currently is not. Most if not all sections need expanding such as UFC and early life. These are all stubs at the moment.
• The television career section needs to be turned into prose. It is currently just a list.

There is a basis for a good article but it needs a lot of cleanup and the point of view questions will obviously need to be addressed. I hope that this is of some help. Woodym555 21:20, 22 June 2007 (UTC)

Waite Phillips

Thank you for considering my Peer Review. Expanding the Waite Phillips stub was my first experience writing biographical information on Wikipedia, and I want to make sure that I am not violating any consensus rules that I'm not aware of. Also, I'd like to know how I can improve my writing. I don't think that I'll have time to take it to FA, but I would be happy with good article status. I went of on a Philmont trek last year, so the topic has a personal connection for me.
Thanks for looking it over,
Pnswmr 00:30, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

• Comment Citations need to be added to the article. Oneworld25 06:08, 10 June 2007 (UTC)
• Article changes reverted June 10, 2007 due to copyright violation. Don't worry about further peer review yet, I need to find new sources. Sorry about the confusion! Pnswmr 16:18, 10 June 2007 (UTC)

Make-Up (band)

After working on this page for quite some time, I hope to have it assessed as a Good-Article or possibly, though unlikely, a Featured-Article. Please leaves some comments if there is room for improvement. Thanks! Drewcifer3000 01:19, 9 June 2007 (UTC)

• comments - the article needs work on punctuation and grammar. examples include, but are not limited to:

1. in the musical ideology section, the first sentence has a misplaced period after the word glance. within the same section, the words "its" in the second sentence of the first quote should be "it's" to indicate "it is" rather than the possesive form.
2. the term "rock and roll" appears in different formats in the article, e.g. rock'n'roll, rock and roll, etc. using a single format would increase consistency across sections.
3. the word "their" appears throughout the article, sometimes multiple times in the same sentence. reducing the occurence of the word will likely increase the descriptiveness of the article and improve readability.

a good start overall, but probably not ready for GAC based on the comments above. ChicagoPimp 23:07, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

 Done Fixed all of the issues above, except when contained within a direct quote (such as the its vs it's and one instance of "rock 'n' roll"). Also, for readability's sake, I left some "their's" in the article, but took out about half. I'll read through the article one more time, just to try and find anything else. A reevaluation would be greatly appreciated. Drewcifer3000 23:44, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Please Note: I added quite a bit of content to the "History" and "Politics" sections. Sorry for doing this after peer review is already underway: I just got inspired. Drewcifer3000 08:10, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

Katie Hopkins

Myself and some other editors are trying to improve this artice, and I would like to see it at G or F status sometime in the future. Please can you inform us about any changes you think needed to be made and which sections are the poorest. We have previously been informed that the "Romantic Interests" section is poor and suffers from poor sentencing/wording. If you agree, please copy/paste the related sentences here and make any corrections you see fit. Thanks. Dalejenkins 13:18, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Gran2

Okay, overall its pretty good, and well sourced, but here are a few problems.

• The image is a fair use image, its needs to go. It either can be replaced by a free use image, (an image you or another ha taken themselves, or has been uploaded by someone else to Flickr under an appropriate license) or just have no image at all.
• The lead needs to be expanded, with info about here early life and personal life, and any other projects. Also a little more info about her appearance on the Apprentice. See WP:LEAD for more info, the lead needs to summarise the article. The "Exeter, Devon, England" birth location can go in the lead as well. Katie Hopkins (born 1976, in Exeter, Devon, England)
• I would rename "Romantic Interests" to "Personal life".
• All section headers should not be capitalised on both words. For example, "Early Life" needs to be "Early life", and so on.
• Ref 38 is broken.
• Ref 1 needs to be properly formated with cite news.
• In the response section (this so very minor, more a personal request), could you change "Love, Actually and Four Weddings and a Funeral writer Richard Curtis" to "Four Weddings and a Funeral and Notting Hill writer Richard Curtis". As his most famous film, FWaaF should go first, and NH was more of a critical and commercial sucess than LA so is probably his second most sucessful film. But this doesn't really matter, as said, it would be a personal request as I got NH to GA status and want to have the article linked as much as possible. Also, the sentence could work fine with just saying "Richard Curtis", as he is a well known person anyway.
• As for the prose, I'm not really much of a copy-editer. If you don't get many other comments about it from other people, I suggest submitting the article to WP:LOCE.

Hope this helps. Gran² 14:36, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

I've just noticed that most of the refs have (English) written after them. This isn't needed as this is the English Wikipedia, meaning most refs are in English. Its only needed when its in another language. Gran² 17:42, 16 June 2007 (UTC)

Review by karanacs

This article is unfortunately nowhere near GA-ready. If you are willing to do a bit of work you should be able to bring it up to that level, however. The biggest issues are the structure and the fact that the prose is not formal enough.

• Lead
  • Does Reality TV need to be capitalized? I think this should be lower case
  • "You're Fired leads to a disambig page. It is really necessary?
  • The lead is a tad short -- it should be at least twice this long.
• An encyclopedia should use a more formal tone, so refer to her as Hopkins instead of Katie. This is also the rule for others, such as Paul Collins (after first reference, refer to him only as Collins, not Paul and not his full name again).
• The structure of this article needs a lot of work. I think you should try for a more chronological organization. Instead of having a separate personal life section, incorporate that information into the other parts of the article (it is confusing to talk about her relationship with Paul Callaghan in detail, and then to go back in the Apprentice section and talk about the same relationship. Likewise, the early life section does not really cover her early life; it's just a hodgepodge of facts about her.
  • A lot of the first half of the article borders on trivia, which shoud not be included in the article. Is it really important that she thinks she can out press up most men?
  • If possible, I'd like to see more information about her professional background. There had to be a reason that she was included on The Apprentice -- what about her previous profession was notable, other than lots of travel?
  • I'd like to see more information about her performance on the Apprentice. Did her team win when she was Project Manager? What did the tasks include during her project management stint, and what did her teammates think of her leadership skills? Why was she brought into the boardroom by the other contestants?
  • In what way did the tabloids compare her to real people? A few quotes (if they are printable) might be good.
• The tone of the article overall also needs to be more encyclopediac. There are many instances, but these are a few that jumped out at me as needing fixing: "hit the headlines," "walked", "slammed"
• full dates need to be wikilinked (June 12, 2007); partial dates should not be wikilinked (May 2007)
• Citations
  • Citations should not occur in the middle of sentences; you can consolidate them at the end of the sentence instead. This helps to improve readability.
  • Need a citation for the salary information
  • Need to use cite news or citation template for the references to newspapers. That will help properly format the names of the newspapers.
  • Must include date of newspaper/tabloid articles, and the author if there was one.
  • The Internet Forum will most likely not be considered a quality source when you get to a GA or FA review. Try to find different sources for those facts.
  • Citations 53, 58 do not have a publisher listed
• This is not a complete sentence: "Although, Mel Collins found out about both this new affair and the fact that she was expecting another child." Also, who was expecting another child -- Katie or Mel?

Karanacs 01:50, 20 June 2007 (UTC)

Bishop Henry

GA level article targeting now FA. IMHO, the article starts to have at least partial FA quality. Please comment on the possible shortcomings and suggest improvements. Contributions to the article are naturally very welcome! --Drieakko 12:04, 28 June 2007 (UTC)

Review by Psychless

This article is definitely a good article, and with a little improvement should be FA. After taking a look at the article these are my suggestions...

• In the persondata you have his death date listed. Could you put this in the parentheses at the beginning of the article? Put a semicolon after Latin and then: d. circa January 20, 1150. If you can approximate a birth date you would put this: ...Latin; Birth year–January 20, 1150. Also get rid of the equals sign before his death place in the persondata.
• Referencing is the only real major problem in the article. Some parts of the article are not referenced, I will point them out to you.
  • Vita and miracula
    • First paragraph, first sentence is referenced but the rest of the paragraph is not.
    • Second paragraph
    • Fourth paragraph to end of section
  • Development of the legend
    • Last sentence of last paragraph
  • Veneration
    • First paragraph, starting at Vadstena Abbey
  • Political usage
    • First paragraph
  • Folk traditions
    • Second sentence
  • Henry's origins
    • First paragraph, starting after ref 24.
    • Third paragraph
    • Last sentence of last paragraph
  • Death and burial
    • Second and third paragraphs
  • Development of folk traditions
    • First paragraph, and also, the first sentence doesn't sound very neutral. Maybe: The death-lay has been described as a (continue on..)
  • Historical sources
    • First paragraph, looks like only the first half of the second sentence is referenced.
    • Last sentence of second paragraph
  • Bishop of Uppsala
    • First paragraph
  • Bishop of Finland
    • First paragraph
    • Fourth paragraph, last sentence
    • Fifth paragraph, last sentence
    • Sixth paragraph, everything except first sentence
    • Seventh paragraph
  • Relics
    • Henry was allegedly buried in Nousiainen, from where his bones - or at least something that was thought to be his bones - were translated to Turku in 1300 → Henry was allegedly buried in Nousiainen, from where his bones—or at least something that was thought to be his bones—were translated to Turku in 1300.
    • First paragraph, last sentence
    • Second half of third paragraph
    • Fifth paragraph, last sentence
  • Henry's status today
    • Last two sentences

Other than forgetting to reference a few places you've done a great job on a complicated subject. If it's at all possible to incorporate the links in the See Also section into the main article please do. I also assume there are no external links? He doesn't have a blog or myspace page I suppose ;). If you're ready, then take it to FA. Psychless 19:50, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Thank you very much for taking time to review the article. The reference frenzy is exhausting :) but I'll get to work! --Drieakko 20:16, 3 July 2007 (UTC)

Almost all done, 2 unreferenced claims marked for adding the references as soon as I find them. --Drieakko 04:58, 5 July 2007 (UTC)

Jackie Chan

Jackie Chan is currently a GA class article. I've made some substantial edits to his biography, and rewrote the entire trivia section into prose. (Image and Celebrity Status) A new section has been created about his stunts, and the injuries list is linked to it. I hope to make the article eventually achieve FA status.--Kylohk 15:07, 15 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 174 cm, use 174 cm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 174&nbsp;cm.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 174 cm.
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: favorite (A) (British: favourite), favourite (B) (American: favorite), recognize (A) (British: recognise), criticise (B) (American: criticize), isation (B) (American: ization).
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:32, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

William Bruce (architect)

I've put a fair bit of work into this over the last couple of weeks. I'd welcome any comments which would help it get to GA quality (or better!). Thanks, Edward Waverley 13:20, 7 June 2007 (UTC)

I think it is GA quality, and may well be able to reach FA, if you listen to any comments that come up on the FA review. Great work! Adam Cuerden ^talk 19:23, 2 July 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DrKiernan 11:34, 18 July 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Cunningham, 1st Viscount Cunningham of Hyndhope

Hi, this has recently passed an A-Class Review on the Military History project and i now want to get any additional comments from this project. I have the intention of taking it to FAC once any comments that arise are acted upon. Thanks Woodym555 19:16, 19 June 2007 (UTC)updated:Woodym555 18:45, 8 July 2007 (UTC)

I have archived this as it has been through a peer review and an A-Class review on the MILHIST project. I take the no comments in 3 weeks as a postive sign and will take it to FAC now. Thanks for your attention. Woodym555 12:22, 11 July 2007 (UTC)

John Mayer

I and several other dedicated editors have been toiling away at this article for almost two years, and I think it has improved dramatically from its stubby roots. All disputable claims, statistics and quotes are cited by reputable music and general topic sources of today. All the images are free or have appropriate fair use rationales, and likewise for the music samples. The article is apropriately wiki-linked and connected with other Wiki projects. Efforts have been made to improve the prose, eliminate bias, and trim fannish information. I feel that the article is thorough, but not overly-detailed. Specific topics have been spun off into new articles (ie - John Mayer discography and John Mayer Trio). We editors have made every effort to conform it to the Manual of Style. I have copyedited the darn thing ad nauseum. All it needs is a final set of eyes before it goes to the judge and jury: the FAC committee. Please be that set of eyes. Thanks in advance!--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 15:34, 31 May 2007 (UTC)

Review by Karanacs

I found a few issues that you probably want to fix before attempting FAC. There were some more general prose issues too, but I didn't note all of them. At times, sections or paragraphs seem to read more informally, like a magazine article, than formally like an encyclopedia article. There are also several instances of clunky sentences, where you've tried to stuff a lot of information into one sentence and it makes it hard to read. Sometimes if you read the article out loud to yourself you'll be able to catch some of these (although I recommend doing that when you aren't around lots of people ;) )

• don't wikilink single years (1998, 2005)
• instead of "latest studio album" can we use a year? That way the lead doesn't become out of sync with real life
• Prose Issues
  • "has also gotten involved" -> he is also involved in
  • second paragraph in early life does not read well
  • and even now he keeps Xanax (an anti-anxiety drug) with him, just in case. - >and now he keeps Xanax, an anti-anxiety drug, with him.
  • "Cook's insistence proved successful" -> this doesn't make much sense
• did he meet James Blake at school or in his hometown?
  • Comment: In his hometown, which I think is pretty clear in the article. It says

    Born in Bridgeport, Connecticut, Mayer grew up in nearby Fairfield, the second of three sons. There, he became friends with future tennis star James Blake.

• Is it important the it was believed that Mayer's father gave him a Stevie Ray Vaughan album, or just that he got one?
  • Comment: It is such a common misconception, that it should probably be at least noted as false, since editors come in and re-add popular fiction (particularly this factoid). But it does clog up the paragraph, and is not pressingly important. I put it in notes.
• Under Major label Success, three paragraphs in a row start with "In <year>"
• "This album also brought critical and commercial success" - can you expand on the critical success for any of the albums? It would be nice to know what the critics thought of them.
• Need a source for first paragraph of John Mayer Trio
• The section Continuum and beyond is missing sources
• Make sure all full dates are wikilinked
• Don't embed external links in the text (Meyer's auction site)
• Need a source for "Tape trading was also instrumental in Mayer becoming better known in the early stages of his career."
• The selected events section may border on trivia. Is it important that this be included in the article?
  • Comment Still included but trimmed.
• I don't know if MySpace links are allowed.
  • Comment: I believe that is only if someone is using it as a reference about, say, genetic engineering. Mayer is a major blogger. I think mentioning his MySpace page and then linking to it is only logical.
• You probably don't need all the interviews as external links -- if any of those are in the sources already, don't include them here.

Good luck! Karanacs 14:17, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Thanks so much for your critique. It is really helpful.--Esprit15d (talk ¤ contribs) 14:11, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Kevin Whitrick

I've done a great deal of reformatting based on the Biography project template, and I think this is a few steps above a stub now. How did I do? BodyPride 11:07, 27 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Isn't there any public space or allowed to use image? By the way, there are better ways to introduce external images like the one of BBC. Check Roman-Spartan War.
• The article needs a proper structure. For instance, the lead is almost as long as the rest of the article (check WP:LEAD), and "Marriage and children" is too stubby.
• Format properly you on line sources, using Template:cite web or Template:cite news.
• "The death has been widely reported in the press and is notable due to the fear of it inspiring other suicides, [5] the possibility of the web cam footage being made available on the Internet,[6] and discussions over the culpability of web users who encouraged the man.[7]" I think you could expand on all these issues. These are interesting parameters of the incident.
• "At the time of his death, he was survived by his former wife, Paula, and 12-year-old twins." If you want to write a proper biography, you should tell us some more things about his life.--Yannismarou 18:29, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Eminem

This article has improved a lot since it was last rated.--Peterm1991 22:01, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Please review {{citeweb}}. LuciferMorgan 03:22, 28 May 2007 (UTC)

CloudNine

A few points:

• The logo shouldn't be in the infobox; it doesn't seem to meet the fair use criteria. (This is the case for a lot of music articles by the way).
• You may want to begin the article with "Eminem (born 17 October1972 as Marshall Bruce Mathers III) is an..." (like Frank Black). I would leave Slim Shady for the "Also known as" section of the infobox.
• Is "Marshall Mathers" really an a.k.a? It's his birth name, so I would remove it from the infobox and refer to "Marshall Mathers" throughout the prose,
• "Early Life" should be "Early life". See WP:MOS.
• "Born..." should be "Marshall Mathers was born ...".
• More inline citations are needed in the biography.

I'll add more comments as I go through the text. Otherwise, it's a promising article! CloudNine 19:17, 2 June 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Why do you bold "Bassmint Productions"?
• "enjoyed the professional sylings of Josh Houlihan [], going...". Avoid external jumps like this one - instead, create proper citations.
• "Recent events" needs rewriting. It is too listy, and many paragraphs are too short.
• Overall the citing is not good. Try to have at least one citation in each paragraph.
• Stubby paragraphs in "Acting career". It needs rewriting.
• Your citations need formatting. Use Template:cite web and Template:cite news.
• After reading the whole article, I am not sure that the lead is properly summarizing.
• I would like a more coherent, and comprehensive approach of his art. Controversies is an issue, but what about the clearly artistic part of what he has done? What critics say about his lyrics, music etc. What Seamus Heaney says is a part of such an approach, but we need more material.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 18:57, 4 June 2007 (UTC)

Gore Vidal

This article has the potential to become a featured article, but currently it seems to lack a lot about his younger life. CAN 03:38, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

• The lead should be a summary of the entire article per WP:LEAD.
• I would delete the two "influences" fields from the infobox since such information is so debatable. Moreover, not all of the influences listed in the box are discussed in the article - that is confusing for the reader.
• The article is sorely lacking in sources. The "Writing career" and "Political views" sections, for example, have almost none. Perhaps even more egregiously, the article has unsourced quotations.

• Note: Links to websites should be placed in footnotes, not at the bottom of the article in the "External links" section.
• I would suggest that the editors do a substantial amount of research as they revise this page. There is a lot of material written on Vidal by literary scholars - they should avail themselves of it.

• The "Early years" jumps oddly to the death of Auster; it seems that that information should go later.

• The structure of the article is not entirely clear to me. Do the editors want to cover all biographical material first and then turn to an analysis of Vidal's works or do they want to follow a chronological pattern, integrating the works with the life? Right now, it seems a bit unfocused.

• There are several very short (even one-sentence paragraphs). These should be combined with other paragraphs or fleshed out.
• Can you choose a representative work or two in the "Fiction" section and expand on it? This would help readers gain a sense of Vidal's style as an author.
• The "Essays" section appears to be a prose list. Expand this section and describe Vidal's style as a prose writer.
• The "Political views" section should probably be divided into subsections and its paragraphs made longer.
• The "Trivia" section should be removed - any information you want to retain should be integrated into the article.
• The article needs a thorough copyedit for dropped words, long and convoluted sentences, and punctuation.

• Ex: The senator's steadfast isolationism contributed to one of the major principles underlying Vidal's political philosophy, which has been consistently critical of what he perceives as a foreign (and, by extension, a domestic) policy shaped by the imperatives of American imperialism.
• If you eventually want to go for FA, check out the manual of style before doing so. Awadewit ^Talk 19:05, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

• • Thank you very much for the review! CAN 19:14, 29 May 2007 (UTC)

Review by Karanacs

I think if you can properly source the article this would be a good candidate for GA, but it needs more work before it will reach FA status. Some of my comments duplicate those of User:Awadewit -- I didn't read his review first.

• Need citations for
  • "His second middle name honors his maternal grandfather, Thomas P. Gore, Democratic senator from Oklahoma." I would have assumed that the Gore was simply because it was his mother's maiden name
  • Last three paragraphs of Early Years
  • Writing career must be sourced or it appears to be WP:Original research
  • Pretty much everything after Writing career must also be sourced, especially quotations.
• need to remove red links
• The last two paragraphs of Early Years do not speak of his early years but of his later years.
• Fiction section should not start with "The man" -- which man? for simplicity, simply say "Vidal"
• don't spell out numbers over 10
• I don't like the way you use a semicolon and then add more information -- this appears to be overdone in writing section
• I recommend adding more info on critical response to his books in writing section
• What made his novels "highly successful" in the 1960s? Sales or critical response?
• The first paragraph of political views and activies should be removed. Most of that information is already in the early years section
• All citations need to be formatted properly There are several in political activism section that are not footnotes as the rest of the article uses.
• The Trivia Section needs to be removed
• The external links section needs to be cleaned up. If at all possible, use these interviews as sources instead

Karanacs 14:38, 1 June 2007 (UTC)

Calogero Vizzini

Just wondering how the article would be assessed. - Mafia Expert 19:34, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "In the media he was often depicted as the "boss of bosses" – although such a position does not exist in the loose structure of the Mafia, and later Mafia turncoats denied Vizzini ever was the boss of the Mafia in Sicily." A bit repetitive the prose here, don't you think?
• I see a quite long short in the lead. I do not think if this is compatible with the lead's role as summary of the article. Check WP:LEAD.
• In general, maybe the lead should be rewritten, so as to get a proper thematic and stylistic (proper paragraphs) structure.
• Try not to have uncited paragraphs.
• "Mafia in Villalba" is a mixture of assessments about the mafia and Vizzini. The latter IMO could be placed after Vizzini's biography in an "assessment" section. The first one could constitute an introduction in the biography sections (the first one is "early years").
• I think the article is under-wikified; it could have more links to Wikipedia articles (e.g. Catholic Church).
• I think that per WP:MoS you should not use italics, when you quote.
• "In the middle of the start of the Cold War, the 1948 elections were a triumph for the Christian Democrats, who would govern Italy for the next 45 years." Too simplistic. They were not governing alone, and the Italian politics during these 45 years had many ups and downs.

I rated the article as B, although I am not still sure about my voting! Some sections have no citations. I think there could be further improvements in terms of content, referencing, structure.--Yannismarou 17:18, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Robert Benchley

A featured article possibility, a few things I do know: I'm working on a public domain image for the infobox with his grandson (really!), so that's forthcoming. The subpage with his works is incomplete, but is being compiled as I write this and may, in fact, be done by the time anyone sees this. I also need help on the lead. Outside of that, pointers would be appreciated. --badlydrawnjeff talk 04:04, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks! Resurgent insurgent 06:39, 22 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Maybe you could stub this red link in the lead. Not really an obstacle for FA status, but some reviewers do not really like red links; especially in the lead.
• The lead could be a bit more expanded, in order to constituted a proper summary of the article. Maybe some more things about his career or his life, but again do not overexpand it; keep it concise. Two paragraphs (a bit bigger than the current ones) is fine.
• For citing books you could use Template:cite book. Keep also in mind theexistence of Template:cite web and Template:cite news. It is practical, and will relieve you from any possible inconsistencies.
• "Although Benchley was known for misleading autobiographies of himself". Why was he doing that?
• The first four paragraphs of "Biography" are what? Early years? Personal life? General instriduction (I do not think so)? Family?
• "irreverence of the magazine". Irreverence towards? The Tribune editors? And irreverence was expressed with the pacifist articles?
• "The two were given a good deal of freedom, but Benchley's coverage of the war and focus on African-American regiments as well as provocative pictorials about lynching in the Southern United States earned him and Greuning scrutiny from management." Is the prose here OK? I may missing something here (as a non-native English speaker).
• "The Algonquin Round Table" is too stubby. Maybe you could merge it or expand it a bit, but again not a very serious flaw.

In general, I think the article is well-written, and comprehensive.--Yannismarou 16:59, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

Stanley Marcus

I'm trying to get this article up to GA status. So far, I have tried a few different suggestions:

• Looking to see if there are articles on the topic on the wikipedias in other languages. There were none, although German Wikipedia had an article on Neiman Marcus that mentioned Stanley Marcus. (I've since gone on to create a stub in Spanish Wikipedia and a start-class Simple English Wikipedia article.)
• Using Google to find articles and reliable sources online. I've used several reliable sources and cited them as thoroughly as I can.
• Using print materials that meet the reliable sources criteria. To tell the truth, I got so interested in this topic that I even paid for access to an article in Commentary magazine. (See my user page for my "Are you a Wikipediholic?" score; I even edited the test to include an item on those of us who pay for materials to use in editing.) I used a book by a local author and searched a database of U.S. newspapers. I haven't been able to locate the family copy of Marcus' Minding the Store.

I don't know of a good way to get pictures for the article, so suggestions on that are welcome, as are suggestions for other appropriate forms of illustration. Incidentally, I had to find ways to write around some inconsistencies in the data; for instance, there seem to be different answers on exactly which degrees Marcus had from Harvard Business School, as well as the year in which he started with the company. I also have some additional data and sources I haven't quite figured out how to work in appropriately.

FYI, I have no vested interest in the article other than being a Dallasite and daughter of a Jewish-American Texan and salesman who's a great admirer of "Mr. Stanley," as he's known around town. I started the article because a person complained about a line in the Neiman-Marcus article about Stanley Marcus' death being "mourned by the fashion world." (I've no problem with a complaint about the use of a non-NPOV, uncredited quote from the N-M web site, but instead, the person seemed to be saying that Mr. Marcus was non-notable, which is just not true.) Lawikitejana 23:17, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

P.S. Note that Stanley Marcus the retailer should not be confused with Stanley Marcus the judge, who appears to work (to have worked) in the same region. Lawikitejana 23:21, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Further update: I can see from a look at the other articles submitted for peer review that mine is far skimpier. Nonetheless, I'd be grateful for input, and please consider me a newcomer to the review process.

Yannismarou

• You could add an infobox.
• Isn't there any public space or free-use photo available?
• "The Advertising Hall of Fame notes: "Stanley Marcus was among the most important figures in the history of American retail merchandising and marketing. Through his many innovations, he transformed a local Dallas clothing store into an international brand synonymous with high style, fashion and gracious service."" 2/3 of your lead is a quote. I do not know if this is OK with WP:LEAD. Don't forget that the lead is supposed to be a summary of the article. Maybe some recasting into alternative language would help.
• "did not feel the raise he was offered by Sanger's was sufficient to support a family". What was Herbert doing in Sanger's, from where he left? You do not clarify that.
• "and made his the first department store". What do you want to keep here: "his" or "the"?!
• "(including pairs of animals), camels, and live tigers.[6][1][7][4]" Personally, I do not like so many citations in a row. Maybe, you could consider combining them per the model in Tourette syndrome.
• "and industry leaders." (Biderman, p. 60)[2]" Get rid of the parenthesis, and make a proper citation, where you can also mention the page. After all, when you have printed sources, you should always in the notes mention pages.
• "Later life" is not actually "later life" but trivia (writing, collections etc.). I would suggest that you create the respective sections with appropriate headings, and then work the prose, and expand them, if yoy have more material.
• "Quotes" again look like trivia. Maybe you could incorporate the quote in one of the previous sections. Maybe Demosthenes or El Greco could give you some ideas about how to do that.
• Is note 9 OK? <-- not sure what this one meant, but think it's fixed
• Some of your know online sources have no author no publisher and no work mentioned. You should have at least an indication, about where this comes from. Have fixed where possible; some items simply have no named author (for example, older TIME magazine stories found online)
• Couldn't "Additional references" be merged with "External links"?--Yannismarou 15:05, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Terry Wogan

This article has gone from unrated to GA status in about a week, and I feel it has the potential to advance further. So I am requesting Peer Review to help point out how the article can be improved, ultimately to Featured Article status. I am aware that facts are missing with regards to his parents names, and I'm taking steps to track that information down. But I'm not sure what needs doing with the rest of the article. Any comments are welcome --Fritzpoll 15:43, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Many more sources needed-the article is a bit big and there's only 15! Dalejenkins 15:48, 16 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Slp1

• Ah yes, Terry! I remember him well. I enjoyed reading this article and learning more. Thanks very much for all your work on this article. I see that you have been getting suggestions from other sources in other places, but here's mine. I have made a few changes directly into the article itself: I hope you don't mind!

The Lead: to go further than Good Article this needs to be longer and summarize all the main ideas in the article. If I was you, I would say "But it does already!" and you are right, but I think you will find that you can expand it and give a little potted summary of his whole life so that if that is all people read they would get good overview.

• Early Career-Is it relevant who followed him on the breakfast show?
• Return to Radio- I don't know anything about Katie Melua and her lies so this needs some more explanation.
• A general comment is that you have a number of subjective comments in your article: e.g. "seemed to appeal to have become popular" "is particularly noted for his sardonic commentaries" "Many British viewers consider his comments to be amusing, but his comments are far from being universally liked?" It will be important to find sources for all of these kinds of statements.
• You have chosen to organize sections by medium (radio/TV etc). My preference would be to do it more chronologically as I find these things easier to follow. Something to think about perhaps?
• In general, and I think you know this already, the article needs lots more sourcing and citations. But it is a very good and interesting start and it is definitely worth the hunt for some biographies etc to nail things down with appropriate sourcing. Good luck --Slp1 00:19, 21 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• I agree that the lead should be rewritten, and a bit expanded per WP:LEAD.
• "and is often referred to as a "national treasure"". What does this mean exactly? And why was he called like that? You should expand on that in the main article.
• "He participated in amateur dramatics[clarify]" "In 1981, he had a chance to host a one-off[clarify]"You should fix these tagged by other users phrases.
• "Personal life" is a mixture of early life, personal life, and quotes. Maybe you should reconsider both the prose and the structure.
• Try to have at least one citation in each paragraph.
• Do not wikilink month-year or year alone; only day-month-year (per WP:MoS).
• "Many British viewers consider his comments to be amusing, but his comments are far from being universally liked." Assertions like this one need citing.
• "He claims that the BBC also wanted his scheduling slot for the ill-fated soap Eldorado." "He claims that presenting the programme is a light relief after so many years on radio. Wogan also designed the set for his new show, allowing him to get a better feel for it. He even claims that the seat he uses is designed to support the lower back since he suffers from back complaints."Again: your source?
• Format your online sources using, Template:cite web and Template:cite news.--Yannismarou 14:47, 26 May 2007 (UTC)

Aga Khan II

I've been working on this article for a while and I think it is ready to be reviewed. Right now it is rated as Stub-Class. I'd like to see this article become a Good Article and perhaps eventually even a Featured Article if possible. Any suggestions to improve this article would be greatly appreciated! Thanks! - Erdling 04:11, 15 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Per MoS, do not wikilink single years; only year-month-date. I have fixed some of them.

• Thanks! I'll keep that in mind for future reference! - Erdling 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• In the "The Ismaili Imamat" I read only nice things about him. You know, I don't like so much (after my second rewriting of Pericles!) hagiographies. Any critics of his imamat?

• Given the fact that he was the Nizari Imam for only four years, there is not a lot mentioned in the sources. - Erdling 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• "Like his father before him, Aqa Ali Shah maintained close ties with the Ni‘mat Allāhī Sufi order. This relationship was no doubt facilitated by the common ‘Alid heritage that Aqa Ali Shah and the Ni‘mat Allāhīs shared: both Shāh Ni‘mat Allāh Walī (d. 1430-1), the eponymous founder of the order, and Aqa Ali Shah traced their ancestry to Imam Ja'far al-Sadiq and, hence, to Ali..." Many names and terms here. And the rest of the paragraph gets even worse! I see no link for the Ni‘mat Allāhī Sufi order? Is it possible to have two words for it. Again, I say that from the view of a guy who is not familiar with the Muslim orders, schemes, dogmas etc., and what I say may just be stupid! But this is the voice of an ignorant who needs some kind of explanation for what he reads, in order to understand it.

• I agree - the names would make the article difficult to read for someone who is not familiar with them. I don't think what you say is stupid; on the contrary! It certainly makes sense to provide more information about the mentioned Muslim orders, doctrines, etc. I'll provide a link from the Ni‘mat Allāhī Sufi order to the Wikipedia article written about them, and try to make the rest of the paragraph clearer. - Erdling 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• "Aqa Ali Shah became Imam of the Ismailis" About which geographical region or regions do we speak about (again the voice of the ignorant ...)? India mainly?

• The Ismailis are a branch within Shia Islam. I'll try to make that clearer in the article. - Erdling 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• You rely a lot on Daftary and 2-3 more sources. Not a great problem, but some more sources and maybe some removal of burdain (if addtional sources are available) would be nice.

• I'll try to dig up a few more sources. I used Daftary's book (published by Cambridge University Press in 1990) as he's generally considered the leading authority on the subject in academia, so I feel he's the most reliable source to use. - Erdling 20:17, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Happy to see you back here after your first successful FA with another nice and well-written article!--Yannismarou 19:19, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for all your suggestions and encouragement, Yannismarou! I'm quite new to Wikipedia, and this being my first article, its great to have experienced Wikipedians like you and Cimm who have FAs under your belts to show me the ropes! - Erdling 20:15, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

50 Cent

A lot of people have worked hard to improve this article, I think it's close to GA. Comments are welcome, Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 04:11, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:58, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

I've already mentioned this on the talk page, but I think the main thing holding this back from a GA is the controversies, especially the "Other New York rappers" section, which simply names other artists without context. Spellcast 08:50, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

• • I cut and pasted the automated suggestions here, I'll work on them tomorrow. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 02:59, 18 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I'll strike out the points that have been accomplished. Spellcast 04:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
  • Comment I expanded the lead it's still two paragraphs however, not sure if that's long enough. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 14:51, 19 May 2007 (UTC)
    • I think it's fine now, I just summarized the article and made it three paragraphs. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 15:07, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]

Done. I don't think years alone such as '1997' need to be linked. Spellcast 13:12, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

*See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]

• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]

• Done. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 12:49, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 8 Mile, use 8 Mile, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 8&nbsp;Mile.^[?]

Here, 8 Mile is a soundtrack/movie, not a unit of measurement, so it doesn't need a -  . Spellcast 11:00, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

*Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]

Done. Spellcast 13:35, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

*Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]

The only heading starting with "The" is "The Game", which is allowed because it's a pronoun. Spellcast 04:41, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

*As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), please do not link words in headings.^[?] *Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?] *Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.

• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]

*Avoid using contractions like (outside of quotations): didn't, Isn't, couldn't, didn't, didn't, couldn't, Don't, don't, wouldn't, didn't, didn't, didn't, doesn't, wasn't, wasn't.

As well quotations, I'm assuming contractions are allowed if it's the title of a cited source. Spellcast 04:30, 18 May 2007 (UTC)

• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

I'm not crossing this out because no matter how well you think an article is copy edited, there always seems to be something that can be improved. But I still think the prose is pretty good. Spellcast 19:57, 16 July 2007 (UTC)

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, APR _t 23:57, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "and a small but permanent slur in his voice.[8][9][25]" When you have many citations in a row, you can combine them in one. Tourette syndrome indicates ways to do that.
  • Comment I think the only way you can do that is if they're not repeated refs. Like if all three refs only occur in that spot, two of those are repeated refs. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 00:22, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment But those 3 refs are needed to verify each of those injuries. Ref 8 verifies the swollen tongue, ref 9 verifies the slight voice change, and ref 25 verifies the lost wisdom tooth. Spellcast 20:08, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment He's saying if the refs only appear in that spot you could do this <ref> ref 1 info <br> ref 2 info <br> ref 3 info </ref> from what i can tell by looking at that article. But that only works if none of the refs are repeated (incidentally the "br" makes the next ref go down a level but all three refs will appear in one footnote). Tayquan ^holla _{My work} 00:38, 26 May 2007 (UTC)
• "Interscope then granted 50 Cent his own label, G-Unit Records in 2003.[34] He appointed his manager Sha Money XL as the president. The label signed ..." I think the prose is a bit choppy here.

If there's no objections, I'll cut the part on Sha Money XL being president. It doesn't seem that significant to the article as a whole. Besides, Sha Money is no longer president. Spellcast 07:17, 30 May 2007 (UTC)

No objection here. Tayquan ^holla _{My work} 14:59, 3 June 2007 (UTC)

• "In March 2000, 50 Cent was punched by brothers Christopher and Irving Lorenzo (head of Murder Inc. Records) and then stabbed in the chest by rapper Black Child outside The Hit Factory studio in New York." Child's article just say that "on West 54th Street, future multi-platinum rapper 50 Cent had an altercation with Ja Rule, Black Child and others from Murda Inc." My point is that you make sure you describe all events in a NPOV way.

Comment Ok I tweaked the wording and also corrected a factual error. This New York magazine article said 50 Cent was treated for a partially collapsed lung after being stabbed in the chest, but in this interview, he says it was three stitches. Spellcast 08:18, 8 June 2007 (UTC)

• "50 Cent released a song and video called "Funeral Music", in which he insults Cam'ron. Cam'ron also released a diss track and video called "Curtis". He also made a second derogatory video, "Curtis Pt. II". Young Buck and 50 Cent responded..." Again choppy. Take an overall look to the prose.
  • Comment I agree. I added some info about what Cam'ron said, but I didn't know someone replied to this peer review. I'll definitely work on that part. Spellcast 14:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
• "When the album was released, 50 Cent felt The Game was disloyal for wanting to work with artists G-Unit was feuding with. He further claimed that he was not getting proper credit for the debut of the album." Citation for what you say 50 Cent claimed?--Yannismarou 16:07, 23 May 2007 (UTC)
  • Comment I added a fact tag, I'll look for that later on. Tayquan ^holla_{My work} 00:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)
    • Comment Done. I also added 4 citations. The Game is currently a GA and it also has a feud section with 50 Cent, so we can use that as a guideline. Spellcast 14:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Rich Vogler

This was rated as a stub class, however I believe it is start class now, hence the review for assessment purposes. That's pretty much all. -- Guroadrunner 12:44, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Gran2

Yep, definitely start class now. Gran² 15:17, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• You star straight away with his racing career. Personal life? Family? Early years?
• I suggest you turn the red links into stubs.
• Add in your references publisher or work or writer.
• You have many stubby paragraphs which are not good for the prose and the article's flow. You need to work on that.
• A second review will be definitely needed, because the article is at an initial stage of writing.--Yannismarou 11:10, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Josh Howard

I'd hope to sometime have this article upgraded to Good Article status, and was hoping to get some advice on how to improve the article. I believe its current state just needs expansion of information surrounding possibly his collegiate career as well as his professional career. CanbekEsen 00:18, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

Quadzilla99

• Comments I'll give some advice here:
  • Lead needs expansion, per WP:LEAD.
  • Refs should be fully formatted including author info, publisher info, publication date, and access date. See WP:CITE/ES for mroe details.
  • Prose needs a lot of work see if you can find an experienced copy-editor.
  • "then co-rookie" should be fellow rookie, co- usually indicates when someone shares an award, like co-rookie of the year, co-MVP, etc.
  • Link to United States men's national basketball team when first discussing the Olympic basketball period.
  • See WP:UNITS for all the height, weight, and measurement formatting that needs fixing. Quadzilla99 05:20, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks! I'll get to these right away. CanbekEsen 16:56, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• I think you should split the lead into paragraphs.
• The prose problems are obvious from the lead. No variety in expression, which often gets choppy. Maybe you could find some assistance in the Lead of Copyeditors. This is a characteristic example of repetitive and problematic prose: "Howard, whose legs were bowed, had to have his legs below ...". And the monotonous "Howard did this ... Howard did that" gets tiring for the reader.
  • I've put up a {{copyedit}} tag but haven't had any responses. I'd do it myself, but I tend to get too POV. CAN
• The addition of a fair-use or public domain photo would be nice.
  • Note: "Fair use" would not be applicable, see WP:NFCC#1. Josh Howard is still alive and has not retired, so it would be quite easy to produce or obtain a free photo of him (though his team did retire early from the playoffs so you might have to wait until next season). — CharlotteWebb 16:54, 25 May 2007 (UTC)
    • What about flickr.com? If given permission for a picture from a user, are we allowed to upload them under Creative Commons licensing? I've never gotten the hang of this copyright stuff. CAN
      • The "cc-by-2.0" and "cc-by-sa-2.0" licenses are compatable with the GFDL (specifically, they permit derivative works and downstream commercial use, unlike the other CC licenses used by flickr) and are permission in themselves. Images under these licenses can be uploaded to Wikimedia projects as "free" content, without the need for specific consent or a "fair use" defense. However, you might like to send a congratulations/thank you note telling them that their work can now be found in Wikipedia articles. If the image you want is only available under a more restrictive license you can either ask them nicely to re-tag it (on flickr) to something more "free", or if they have privately given you consent (by e-mail for example) you would need to have them contact the project directly to confirm that they know what they are agreeing to. More information at the flickr upload page [5]. — CharlotteWebb 15:24, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
        • Thanks for the help! CAN 15:59, 27 May 2007 (UTC)
• "Howard earned third team All-ACC and second team NABC All-District while trailing Darius Songaila in team scoring with 13.9 points per game during his junior season." Avoid choppy paragraphs like this one. Merge or expand.
• "Personal life" is too stubby. Can you expand it a bit?--Yannismarou 11:04, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the review! CAN 17:14, 25 May 2007 (UTC)

Josip Skoblar

hope for Quality rate : B (perhaps A) or at least Quality rate : Start. priority : Mid And some feedback/comments

Dionysostom 12:16, 2 May 2007 (UTC)Dionysostom

Quadzilla99

• Comment Needs expansion (if possible) and inline citations. Quadzilla99 12:56, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

For expansion, I'll see later (possible expansion on International Career), for notes and references I'll do it as soon as possible :)--Dionysostom 15:22, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Not much to add to what Quadzilla99 said. The article is a stub, and without expansion a review cannot be yet helpful. Just two additional remarks:

• A picture would be nice.
• The are problems with MoS, such as the wikilinking of single years.--Yannismarou 19:20, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply : I ve tried to add wikilinking on all single years. --Dionysostom 13:21, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

Annika Sörenstam

We're ultimately looking for FA status here. The article recently got promoted to GA status, and a further promotion would be ideal. However, the article needs an improvement, so it would be great to know of anything that needs improving to meet FA criteria. - • The Giant Puffin • 09:13, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

JoeSmack

Oh my, please, stop dropping so many 'In 2006's and 'In 2003's - that sort of thing. It hurts my eyes! ;) Also, read User:Tony1/How_to_satisfy_Criterion_1a thoroughly and incorporate its suggestions. Tap me on my talk page if you need me to respond further, but keep article comments here for everyone's sake. JoeSmack ^Talk 20:24, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Copy editing has started. How are we doing against the other criteria? Mudforce 17:34, 3 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 03:24, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "whose achievements rank her as one of the most successful female golfers in golf history." Although you overcite the lead, you leave this assertion which needs desperate backing from sources uncited. About the overciting issue, have in mind that you don't have to cite in the lead things you source later in the text.
  • Fixed Mudforce 15:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• "She has won eight Rolex Player of the Year awards (a record),[3] is a six times Vare Trophy winner (the award given to the LPGA player with the lowest seasonal scoring average)[4] and is the only female golfer to shoot a 59 in competition.[5]" Cite in the middle of the sentences only if it absolutely necessary for emphasis reasons. Otherwise, gather the citationd at the end of the sentences so as not to make the article difficult to follow for the reader.
  • All sorted Mudforce 15:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• "She was also a good skier. The coach of the Swedish national ski team suggested the family move to Northern Sweden so she could improve her skiing year round.[12] She also played football in her hometown team Bro IK.[13]" In some parts like here the prose looks a bit choppy to me.
• "(Annika got the odd numbered clubs and Charlotta the even) and got". I don't like got ... got ...
  • Fixed Mudforce 15:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• "Amid notable controversy". I think it is important to expand a bit on the controversy. Just a link to the main article is not enough IMO.
  • Expanded Mudforce 19:33, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
• "She continued her dominanance in 2004 earning her seventh LPGA Player of the Year award tying Kathy Whitworth for the most in LPGA history. She posted 16 top-10 finishes in 18 LPGA starts, including eight wins, becoming the first player to reach $15 million in LPGA career earnings. She took her own LPGA single-season scoring average record to 68.69696[6] but played too few rounds to win the Vare Trophy. She had ... " A bit monotonous the prose, don't you think? The next paragraph is not better.
  • Copy edit changes made to make the prose a bit more "compelling" Mudforce 21:15, 9 May 2007 (UTC)
• "Other awards and honours" is listy. Desperately needs better prose, and better paragraphs. Similar problems in "Off-course activities".
  • Will attempt to merge Other awards and honours contents into other sections Mudforce 15:05, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

A good article, but IMO not yet ready for FA status; not even sure about A-Class status.--Yannismarou 19:17, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

David Mitchell (actor)

For an article about an English actor and comedian who isn't known that well outside if Britain, I think I've gone about as far as I can go without requesting other's opinions. It was rated as B class a while ago (no comments were left). I'm aiming for GA class with this, as right now it doesn't have the scope for FA. I need really to know if there are any prose issues, if anything else needs a reference (or if another as yet unused reference can be found) and if its covers everything. Plus of course anything else. Gran² 15:36, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 03:04, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Personally, I would focus in the lead more on Mitchell himself and less on Mitchell and Web. Reading the first paragraph of the lead, I thought: "If the most important elements about his career are about M & W, then why do we need an extended seperate article about him?"
• "At prep school". I don't like very much abbr. like prep etc. I think that in encyclopedical articles full words are better ("preparatory school").
• The "Mitchell and Webb" section of this article is longer than the Mitchell and Webb article. This is connected with my remarks about the lead. Maybe the main focus on the duo should be in the main article about the duo.
• "He has also written for series five of the BBC2 impressionist sketch show Dead Ringers.[26]" Avoid one-sentence stubby paragraphs.
• "Personal life" section is more of a "Personal opinions" section. The current content is still interesting, but do you have any real information about his personal life to add?
• It is nice the "Solo" section is enriched with critical approaches of his work. The more you add, the best for the article.

I think the article will go through GAC, but I'm not yet sure for FAC.--Yannismarou 19:00, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I was going for the angle of including everything he has done in detail. And as alot of that was him an Webb it only makes sense to include it. The actualy Mitchell and Webb article is a stub, that I wasn't even aware of until a month or so ago, I don't even thin its that necessary. About his personal life, there are a few sentences about his romantic life, which basically consists of him not having one, as he said on Parkinson the other week. He isn't married, and hasn't had any long term relationships as far as I can assertain. The other two changes you said have now been made. Also, thanks for the review! Gran² 19:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

I found a recent interview (May 5) with him, which helped add to the PL section. He cannot drive, and never learnt to, and has OCD! Didn't know that myself, but there we go. Gran² 20:40, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Counting Crows

I would appreciate advice and comments on this article's present state and suggestions as to what it needs to make it better. I did some major editing and added a lot to the article, including all the references now present within it. I'm not really sure where to go from here though.

Tom s252 16:36, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Fritz Saalfeld

The images should be removed from the discography (See WP:MUSTARD#Discographies, Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Images, WP:FUC #3 and 8, and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(lists_of_works)#Discographies). Also, anything notable and sourced in the trivia section should be moved to the appropriate areas of the article, and the rest removed. I also think the lead should be re-written. Instead of giving a summary of the article, it currently seems to be a place to "dump" information that didn't fit elsewhere (influences, origin of name). --Fritz Saalfeld (Talk) 13:27, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your help. I've sorted the discography, and moved everything of interest in the trivia section either into the main body of the article, or into Adam Duritz, the singer. I'll work on the lead. --Tom s252 17:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Try to add some pictures, at least one for the infobox.
• Expand the lead per WP:LEAD.
• Check WP:MoS for proper linking of dates and years (principle: we link full dates not single years, unless it is years in music etc.)
• Try not to have uncited paragraphs, and fix all the {fact}}s. In some parts the article looks heavily cited; in others under-cited. Have a good balance.
• "Various songs from this tape would later resurface on the band's debut album August and Everything After; the songs contained on the tape featured different music and in some instances different lyrics." Try to avoid stubby one-sentence paragraphs like this one.
• Get rid of "Trivia". It is recommended not to have trivia or listy sections. Incorporate useful information in your main text.
• Format notes 17-19, using Template:cite web or Template:cite news.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• You could add more about their musical influences, and about how critics have commented on their albums and on their music in general. I also think that this sentence "The band has covered artists such as Rod Stewart, Pure Prairie League, Rolling Stones, Grateful Dead, U2 and Oasis." is blur and, if you want to include it, it needs further analysis.--Yannismarou 12:14, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Many thanks for this.
  • There was a picture in the infobox, which was removed, I can only assume because it wasn't public domain. I've had difficulty finding a public domain replacement? Any tips?
  • I'll get to work on the rest of these, thanks again. --Tom s252 17:43, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 02:34, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

William Bliss Baker

Previous peer reviews:

• Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/William Bliss Baker (1st)

It's been nearly five years since the previous peer review in April 2007, and the article has changed significantly (diff) (gained about 10k in content). I'd like opinions on where the article stands now: Does it meet B-class standards? If not, what needs to be done to bring it up to that level? I've gone out of my way to include a lot of sources (as many as I've been able to find). I'm working on getting additional sources, but the going is slow as I try to find articles and other references which discuss this lesser-known but important artist.

Thanks for your time! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 08:24, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• I'd removed the characterization of several paintings as masterpieces, because they were unsourced and seemed a bit hyperbolic. Generally such a description--a fairly profound assessment--would seem to require sources of greater reliability than those provided. Bentley's article provides helpful information [6], but there is no indication that he is an expert whose assessment is valuable, and his article was written for an advertising publication [7]. Perhaps more dubious is the inclusion of the St. Bonaventure page as a source, which is aimed primarily at selling prints of the painting--the use of the term 'masterpiece' has a decidedly commercial application there [8]. Otherwise this is a well researched and written article. Bringing it to B-class may be difficult, given that the most voluminous scholarship on Baker--and there's not a lot--comes from 19th century sources. It would help if there was at least one major article about him from a recent publication--his work merits rediscovery. JNW (talk) 09:48, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
  • How do you cite a plaque at a museum? The Fallen Monarchs display at the museum where it's housed states it's considered his masterpiece as well. I don't know that I'd discount commercial sources describing two of his paintings as masterpieces, either, as those are the only two of his works I've seen described that way, including in other commercial sources showing others of his works. I agree with your assessment of finding reference materials on his works; it has been quite difficult to find what I've included in the article. It took almost 5 years to find his birthdate. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 10:29, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
    • I'd err on the side of caution and not describe it as such, unless the museum's text was written by an acknowledged scholar in the field. And I flat don't put much value in the overtly commercial sources--I think they're rather meaningless. When I include a laudatory description, as at May Night (Willard Metcalf painting), it's a direct quote taken from a preeminent scholar in the field--I may or may not even agree, but it's solid ground. The fact that he's been largely ignored by scholars and historians for the last century makes it all the more important to cite one or more 'heavyweight' sources when referring to works as masterpieces. The bigger picture is that you've done an excellent job hunting up information on a veritable ghost. JNW (talk) 10:40, 29 December 2011 (UTC)
      • I've found a few other refs, including one showing he was considered a well known landscape artist (per a well known art critic of the time). I've removed the "masterpiece" descriptor from the "Morning" paragraph, but I'm still hunting down more refs for the description of "Fallen Monarchs" as I've seen that painting described as the masterpiece in multiple places. Just have to find them now. Thanks for the comments and suggestions. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

Personally I think the introduction is a bit long relative to the size of the article. It should serve as a summary and anything else moved into the body of the article. For example, a suggested intro could be:

William Bliss Baker (November 27, 1859 – November 20, 1886) was an American artist born in New York City who began his studies and career just as the Hudson River school was winding down. Baker began his studies in 1876 at the National Academy of Design, where he studied with well-established artists such as Bierstadt and de Haas. His paintings were created using oils and watercolors, including several works done in black and white. While Baker is relatively unknown to the general public, his works are considered "characteristic[ally] American" and done with "amazing skill." Baker completed over 130 paintings in his career.

The info about his summer house and the cause of his death should definitely not be part of the introductory summary IMO Sionk (talk) 13:49, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

• I've shortened the lead a bit, though I'm hesitant to shorten it any further. I think two short paragraphs is good for the length of the article. Thanks for the comments and suggestions. ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 21:43, 29 December 2011 (UTC)

I just expanded the bio a bit, as well as rearranged it a bit to flow better. Thoughts? ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 02:37, 30 December 2011 (UTC)

The first paragraph should say why he is notable. It doesn't now, and leaves the reader wondering why there is an article about him on Wikipedia? The easiest fix is to rearrange the sentences. FurrySings (talk) 08:01, 1 January 2012 (UTC)

I added "award-winning" to indicate notability. Which awards are explained later in the article and in the infobox. Thanks for your time! ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 00:44, 2 January 2012 (UTC)

---

Any additional comments or suggestions? ···日本穣^? · 投稿 · Talk to Nihonjoe · Join WP Japan! 07:47, 20 January 2012 (UTC)

K Foundation

At WP:KLF, we've been out of action for a little while and have got a bit rusty. I would like to request a peer review on this GA-Class article, 1) to help us get back into the swing of things, 2) to prepare the article for FAC. I believe it's 90% there, but would like a little guidance please. Getting this Featured would be quite exciting, as it would be the third creative partnership involving Jimmy Cauty to become Featured (the others are The KLF and The Orb). --kingboyk 17:41, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you to the people who've taken the trouble to review so far; I will respond over the weekend. Cheers. --kingboyk 14:55, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Better late than never, I'm here now. Got rather distracted by other on-wiki events. Apologies for that. --kingboyk 18:34, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

WesleyDodds

While it's well-written and extensively referenced, I do think a lot of the background material in the "context" section is unnecessary. For all intents and purposes, the important part of the section starts halfway through ("The KLF had become one of Britain's biggest bands . . .)" I suggest condensing the first few paragraphs and adding some "See also"/"main article" templates. Also, possibly group the adverts, Turner Prize, Money, and money-burning sections under a larger heading, like "Stunts" or something else that would be appropriate. These are preliminary comments, so I'll try to get back as soon as possible with more. WesleyDodds 06:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. In past FACs we were told that articles should stand alone, and include context and background. However, I think you might be right - perhaps we don't need to start in 1987, when Drummond and Cauty began their partnership; perhaps we could indeed start in 1992, when they retired the KLF name. I'll put this on the talk page/todo list for further discussion/action.

I don't like the sound of "stunts". We could perhaps come up with a more objective term like "Projects", but you haven't yet convinced me the current sectioning scheme is "bad" :)

Thank you again for your comments, any further comments are welcome. --kingboyk 18:37, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Yeah, it occured to me a few days after my comment that "Projects" is probably the best header. WesleyDodds 10:54, 28 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "In 1992 they machine-gunned a music industry audience at the 1992 BRIT Awards (albeit with blanks)". I did not fully understand what happened here.
  • They appeared live on stage at the 1992 BRIT Awards, and at the end of the performance fired a machine gun into the crowd. It's explained in more detail at The KLF#Retirement. Maybe if we start our context section in 1992 (or 1991) we can expand on that a little; if not, can you help me make it clearer now that you know what happened? --kingboyk 19:04, 27 April 2007 (UTC)
    • OK! I think it is clear!--Yannismarou 18:27, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
• "it was all ploughed back into their extravagant productions." Their productions as KLF or KF? You mean their music productions as KLF? And what does "extravagant" mean here exactly? Were they spending too much money for their productions? Why? What was the purpose of these "extravagant" productions?
• "this money-destroying machine". I would not repeat this characterization of the previous quote. I think the point was made clear.
• What I also do not understand is what was the purpose of these "K Foundation adverts". Was there any? They were just for fun? It is the Situationist thing you mention in the lead, and which might be interesting to be a bit further explained?
• "The 1994 K Foundation award was an award given by the K Foundation to the "worst artist of the year"." Again did they want to pass a message? Just to subvert the Turner Prize? Or I just shouldn't look for an explanation!
• "these announced the "amending of art history".[33] During the evening, Rachel Whiteread was announced as the winner". Maybe the prose could be a bit better here.
• "On the 23 August 1994, in a boathouse on the Scottish island of Jura, Drummond and Cauty incinerated £1,000,000 in cash." No review comment here! I just decided to write it down, in order to try to realize what they actually did!!
• "Reid admitted to first feeling shock and guilt about the burning, which quickly turned to boredom." I think you should cite here.
• "Drummond and Cauty quickly became bored of questions about their burning of one million pounds.[citation needed]" You should fix the tag here, adding the requested citation.
• "Drummond and Cauty would next work together in 1997, when they attempted to "Fuck the Millennium" as 2K (music) and K2 Plant Hire (conceptual art)." Stubby paragraph and I don't see any correlation with K Foundation. You want to tell us what they did next? Then create a better context.

This must be the weirdest article I ever read in Wikipedia! This does not mean that it is not nice. It is; as a matter of fact, because it is weird, it becomes very attractive. When I started reading the article, I got the impression that I am stupid, I forgot my English, and I fail to understand what the hell is going on here! But this is just the first impression. Then, you start to understand better the "K Foundation's world". Could we have a more "gentle" entrance to this world for the ignorant reader? I cannot explain better my suggestion here, maybe iinfluenced by the way K Foundation worked (!), but this is the first thing I thought after I read the article. Maybe a more explanatory prose (at least at certain selected points and in the lead) would be helpful. In any case, a very intriguing article!--Yannismarou 13:34, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 03:31, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Amy Diamond

First, as a non-native English speaker, I'd like someone to read through the article and comment on the language. Secondly, as I have re-written most of the article, I want to ask senior Wikipedians advice on how to proceed with it. Should I add more info on some areas? My ambition wants to seek a GA or A status, but is it sensible as she is still active and releasing a new album? Moorvis 18:41, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Nswinton

I fixed one minor typo, but this article is honestly in very good shape. I'd suggest you nominate it for GA. Mandy Moore was recently a FA, and she's still active in acting and music, so I don't think her future career would cause any trouble. Nswinton 21:28, 26 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Indeed, the language needs work. The article should be copy-edited by a native English speaker. You can file a copy-editing application in Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors. In the lead for instance, there is no variety of expression (you repeat the same forms of expression and words like "Sweden", "hit" etc.).
• We do not wikilink single years (2005). Only date-month-year (e.g. January 1, 2005). Check WP:MoS.
• It is not nice to have so many citations in a row. Maybe you could combine them per Tourette syndrome or Actions along the Matanikau.
• I know she is too young, and the biography cannot be long enough. But any possible expansion and addition of information would be welcome.
• "This Is Me Now" and "This Is Me Now" are not part of her biography. Maybe you should create a new section, in which to incorporate these sub-sections under "Career" or "Hits" or something similar.
• "The third album" is stubby. Could you expand it a bit?
• Are there any critics' comments about her talent, her voice, her future maybe as an artist?
• I am afraid that the images should be removed from the discography (See WP:MUSTARD#Discographies, Wikipedia:Non-free_content#Images, WP:FUC #3 and 8, and Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style_(lists_of_works)#Discographies).
• The fact she is active is no problem for GA or A-Class Biography project nomination. You will have of course to update the article when something new happens.--Yannismarou 10:46, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 03:15, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Gwen Stefani

Currently listed as a good article. I'd like to take this to FAC after I nominated Rich Girl (Gwen Stefani song) (also at peer review). Any comments or suggestions about how to improve the article before then would be much appreciated. Also, it might be nice to have some input on how the No Doubt section looks. Considering it spans 15-20 years, I wasn't sure how to best summarize it, so I tried to do a very brief summary and then add the information that's relevant to Stefani herself. ShadowHalo 00:19, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated review

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:29, 10 May 2007 (UTC)

Dalejenkins

• The "Harajuku Girls" mini-section is a bit too trivial, maybe a move to Love Angel Music Baby? Dalejenkins 06:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)
  • I would say that they're a major aspect of Stefani's career, and they've generated quite a bit of controversy. There are already descriptions at Harajuku girl and Love. Angel. Music. Baby.; would it work better if I maybe removed a quote from the section about her being accused of racism? I could also try adding information to the section about how she adopted a "Dior-meets-Japan" look for promoting the album and how Japanese fashion was an influence in her early L.A.M.B. collections. ShadowHalo 23:07, 13 May 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• The third paragraph of the lead looks to me like a collection of trivia. Maybe the prose there could become a bit more cohererent.
• "Her brother Eric was the keyboardist for No Doubt, but left the band to pursue a career in animation on The Simpsons.". Maybe these could go to the previous paragraph, where you talk about her family.
• "The album received mixed reviews by critics, who found that it "has a surprisingly moody, lightly autobiographical feel...[but] Stefani isn't convincing as a dissatisfied diva".[43] and called the album ..." Is the punctuation OK here? Is something missing?
• "The couple discovered in 2004 that Rossdale had an illegitimate daughter Daisy with model Pearl Lowe when Rossdale took a paternity test." Do we have any clue (without violating personal life data) if and how this incident influenced the couple's life?

I can't find any major flaws. The article is comprehensive and well-written. Maybe some more attention to the prose when it becomes a bit choppy ("As a child, Stefani's musical interests consisted of musicals such as The Sound of Music and Evita.[6] After making a demo tape for her father, she was encouraged not to take music lessons to train her "loopy, unpredictable" voice.[6] Stefani was on the swim team at Loara High School and graduated in 1987.[10][11] She then attended California State University, Fullerton.[12] Her first job was scrubbing floors at a Dairy Queen, and she once worked at the makeup counter of a department store.[13] Her brother Eric was the keyboardist for No Doubt, but left the band to pursue a career in animation on The Simpsons."), but, in general, I can say that it is a very nice article.--Yannismarou 15:46, 23 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll try to go over the Early life section again. A bunch of that is stuff that I found and inserted last night, so I think I just need to go over it to smooth out the text and add some better transitioning. Daisy Lowe was born sometime around 1989, so it was several years before Stefani and Rossdale were dating; I've clarified that in the text now. ShadowHalo 01:36, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Oops, I missed the last part of the last bullet. I've added some context and information about the couple's reaction and split it off into a separate paragraph. ShadowHalo 09:42, 24 May 2007 (UTC)

Forest Whitaker

I'm interested in getting some specific suggestions about how to improve this to at least a "good article" rating.—The preceding unsigned comment was added by Vbd (talk • contribs) 06:35, April 17, 2007 (UTC)

• The only issues I see are the pair of one-sentence paragraphs and the inline link in the "Personal life" section (that can be converted to a cite template). Otherwise it seems pretty good to me. Once the issue below are addressed I'd go for GA and see what type of feedback you get. — RJH (talk) 18:23, 14 May 2007 (UTC)

LuciferMorgan

Find critical feedback for his acting roles and add it to the article to give some context about his rise to fame. Try Roger Ebert and the usual suspects. LuciferMorgan 09:07, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• You could expand a bit more the lead per WP:LEAD.
• "His mother put herself through college and earned two Masters degrees while raising her children (Forest has two younger brothers, Kenn and Damon, and an older sister, Deborah). The family moved to the Los Angeles area when Whitaker was a toddler. Whitaker commuted" The prose is a bit choppy here I am afraid.
• "He was accepted to the Music Conservatory at the University of Southern California (USC) to study opera as a tenor, and was then accepted into the Drama Conservatory. He graduated from USC in 1982. He also earned a scholarship to the Berkeley, California branch of the Drama Studio London." Choppy again. Maybe an overall copy-editing would be helpful.
• "His performance earned him the 2007 Academy Award for Best Actor in a Leading Role, making him the fourth African-American actor in history to do so." Repetition of almost exactly the same phrasing from the lead.
• "Television work" is full of stubby paragraphs that make it listy. Similar problems in "Film work".
• "Whitaker has a medical condition called strabismus,[14] which is sometimes referred to as "lazy eye."[15] Whitaker, who has a 1st Degree Black Belt in Karate, is a vegetarian.[8] He and his daughter, True, have recorded a public service announcement promoting vegetarianism on behalf of People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA)." Trivia amassed together! Re-organize the section, make the prose more encyclopedic, and get rid of this "trivia sense".
• Your narration is too "dry". Make it more vivid, and add assessments, praises and even negative criticism concerning his work.--Yannismarou 12:51, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 02:47, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Henriette Valium

Does the article qualify for at least a b rating? Martiial 21:26, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

Haus

It's in the ballpark for B-class, but I think it just misses. First off, good use of the infobox and persondata. The first thing to do is to cite as many of the statements in the article as you can. I put in an inline citation and references section to get you started, and you can find out more at WP:CITE#HOW.

The next thing I'd do would be to fill in some information from 1959 to 1980. By that time, I think you'd have all the pieces on the board and would be able to write a solid lead per WP:LEAD. After that, I'd take a look at a few articles in Category:B-Class biography articles and compare and contrast -- you'll probably have a solid b-class article and can start looking at WP:WIAGA. Good luck! Haus^Talk 23:43, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

Moorvis

In addition to the fact that there aren't really enough references to the sources, I think this article could be improved by:

• More wikilinking
• Samples of his work to illustrate his style

Martiial

Thank you for your comments!

Yannismarou

IMO, it doesn't, because it has almost no citations and references, and the biography is incomplete with important chronological gaps. Enrich your articles with sources, cite properly, and you'll achive not anly B-Class but also higher quality ranks! Some additional suggestions:

• Anything about his personal life? What was going on in his life before 1981?
• "Valium also completed The Survivor, a monumental painting centered around a Joseph Goebbels family picture that was shown at Gallery Clark[1]" Avoid external jumps like this one. Make proper inline ciations, using Template:cite web and Template:cite news.
• "Influences: * Benito Jacovitti ..." Couldn't this be a section with proper prose, where you'll analyze his influences? I also find "Fellow artists" listy. Add them in this "Influences" section I propose, telling us which are exactly their artistic affialiances.--Yannismarou 12:41, 21 April 2007 (UTC)
• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 02:32, 5 May 2007 (UTC)

Shimon Peres

Have looked through the article and think it could be a Good Article candidate. Flymeoutofhere 10:06, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

oneworld25

This article needs more information on his race against Netanyahu in the 90s. The section about the Lebanon war needs to be expanded or deleted. It seems to me this article suffers from recentism, there is lots of info on his election for Labor Party Leader in the 2005, but not much on his terms as Prime Minister. --Oneworld25 23:31, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

WindsorFan

It's very well written. However, apart from the above comments, there are only four inline citations ("In Peres's own words" needs a citation after the quote, for example and "Peres was at one time considered something of a hawk" is a bit weasel-ish). The family life section could be fleshed out some more and there are some minor issues such as full dates not being Wikilinked. WindsorFan 15:13, 16 April 2007 (UTC)

He's like 1000 years old, right? Aren't there any pics of him from the 1940s, 50s, 60s, etc? Kaisershatner 16:05, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

I think the article is not ready for GAC. It needs some work for GAC, more work for A-Class, and a lot of work for FAC! Are you ready to go for it; a personality like Peres is a great challenge for a great article! Don't you think? These are some tips (a new review may be needed after the implementation of this review's suggestions):

• "He became Vice Premier". You tell us that twice in the lead. The same with "having led the Labor Party for many years." Don't repeat yourself in the lead. ANd this one-sentence stubby paragraph at the end of the lead is not nice.

Re-worked. Flymeoutofhere 15:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

• I also do not like the chronological order in the lead. First paragraph all his important offices. OK! Then, his career between 2005-2006, and finally his career between 1934-1956? For a reader not knowing well Peres's career this is confusing I'm afraid.

Re-worked. Flymeoutofhere 15:26, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

• Citations go after the punctuation mark; not before, and not with a gap between the pm and the citation. You are inconsistent. And you article is overall undercited. Check WP:CITE, and fix properly the online sources you have as citations, using Template:cite web and Template:cite news.
• Per MoS do not wikilink single years. Only year-month-date.
• "Peres' efforts went superbly well with..." Maybe POV.
• "Family life" is stubby. Expand or merge with "Early life". And "Peres is a relative of actress Lauren Bacall (born Betty Joan Perske)" is: a) uncited, b) is this such an important information for Peres' biography? And, if yes, I think it should be in "Early life"; not in "Family life".
• "he was implicated in the Lavon affair with Moshe Dayan." How was he implicated? Give us some info. Don't keep us in the dark!
• "He had been Rabin's chief rival for the post of Prime Minister after Golda Meir resigned in the aftermath of the Yom Kippur War. Peres continued to challenge Rabin for the leadership of the party. While again narrowly defeated..." An example of choppy prose.
• I compare this "Peres has never won a national election" with this "However they won more seats than any other party in 1984 and Peres became Prime Minister...", and I wonder if these assertions are in harmony with one another.
• "Political career" is a huge section. You could divide it in some sections, offering more info in each of these subsections. But reasearch is necessary in this case.
• "After two years they would trade places. After leaving the Premiership in 1986 he became foreign minister. In 1988 he led his party to yet another narrow defeat. He agreed to renew the coalition ..." Again choppy prose.
• "However, Peres remained active in politics, serving as Rabin's foreign minister from 1992 and briefly succeeding him after his assassination in 1995. During his term". Mmmmmm ... This is one of the most important periods in Peres's political career and you summarize it in one sentence?! Tell us more about the negotiation with Arafat, his collaboration with both Arafat and Rabin, how this triangle worked etc.
• "Had he won, as was expected, he would have been the first ex-Prime Minister to be elected President. Instead, he lost in an upset to Likud candidate Moshe Katsav." What were the causes of this "upset", as you call it?
• "Shimon Peres is one of Israel's most durable politicians and is currently the longest-serving member of the Knesset." Misplaced assertion, and I think I already read that in the lead.
• "His bitter exchanges with opponents began when former Prime Minister Barak began backing the holding of primaries early that year, as Amir Peretz and Haim Ramon, two staunch anti-Barak Knesset members vowed to support Peres at any cost to defeat Barak. In a bizarre change of events, Peretz soon declared his own candidacy, a move viewed by Peres as the greatest betrayal." I think better prose, and clearer narration of events is needed here.
• The last for paragraphs of "Political Career" are terrible! I don't understand what is the purpose there: assessment of Peres's overall career? Analysis of certain particular events? I do not know ... In any case, restructuring is needed here.
• "More recently he has been seen as a dove" By whom? And the whole "hawk"-"dove" analysis there for me who follows the Israeli-Palestinian-Arab conflict for some years is far too simplistic. And why don't you put this info about PLO talks in the correct chronological order above in "Political career"?
• "Peres was perhaps more closely associated with the Oslo Accords than any other Israeli politician (Rabin included)" How excactly? By doing what? I also raised this issue above. Put this misplaced info in its proper chronological order and analyze.
• "Peres' image is an unusual blend of visionary dreamer and ruthless and opportunistic wheeler-dealer." Again simplistic and vague. Who and why says that he is a "visionary dreamer"? Who and why says that he is "ruthless and opportunistic wheele-dealer".
• I would also like to have further analysis of the Peres-Sharon relationship, as well as of the Peres-Arafat and Peres-Rabin relationships (I have already mentioned that issue above).
• "Often, Peres acts as the informal "spokesman" of Israel (even when he is in the opposition) since he earned high prestige and respect among the international public opinion and diplomatic circles. Peres advocates Israel's security policy (military counter terror operations and the Israeli West Bank barrier) against international criticism and de-legitimation efforts from pro-Palestinian circles." IMO vague and unsourced statements, proper maybe for "The Economist" but not for "Wikipedia". Source, rephrase, work on these assertions, having in mind that this is an encyclopedia.
• "Awards"+"Interests"=Trivia! "Interests" should be part of the sections about his personal life, and "awards" could be easily merged in "Political Career".
• "Quotations" is listy. Incorporate the quotes you think as useful in the main text (and cite them), and remove the rest of them.
• "Katzav was chosen over Peres in 2000 by the Knesset to fill the largely ceremonial role." You already tell us that in the main prose. Why do you repeat the same thing in the note? And this "Katzav is now facing serious legal charges and his seven year term expires in mid-2007." could also be placed in the main text.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 12:31, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 04:03, 4 May 2007 (UTC)

User:Quadell

A quick note: some of the quotes ought to be incorporated into the text using {{cquote}} or something similar (see here and here for examples of how this can be done), but other quotes belong on Wikisource, not in the article itself. Also, there are lots of redlinks: Vishniova, Kibbutz Alumot, Labor-Zionist youth movement, etc. etc. – Quadell ^{(talk) (random)} 12:57, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Jack Nicklaus

WikiProject Golf has been working on this article over the past month or two to try and improve it to featured status. It has recently been promoted to GA status. I was wondering what improvements need to be completed for the article to be considered for FA status. I would also like an opinion whether this is an A-Class article, which i'm not sure it is.
Thanks from WikiProject Golf and myself. Grover 23:56, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Turangalila

Pretty nice article. I'm no expert on WP:FACR but I'll give it a shot. A couple of specifics first: Obviously the {{fact}} tags in the lead, while perhaps overzealously applied, should probably be addressed. I added a {{clarifyme}} tag in the "Record setter"" section where it was unclear what year was being discussed.

Some more general thoughts:

• The infobox is kinda problematic for me. It's very big, and maybe a bit too detailed. I think of an infobox as ideally an "at a glance" look at what makes the subject notable/important/interesting. The infobox here doesn't contain the word "golfer" or "golf", but lists each major title individually, which seems more appropriate for the lists at the bottom. The baseball infobox, eg here, seems a bit more convenient for the general reader. Also I notice it seems to be coded manually rather than from a template, which seems odd, or did you just "subst:"?  Done Grovermj 01:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
• I know WP image copyright policy is a nightmare, but images of a younger Nicklaus would be a big help. In particular, it would be nice to visually demonstrate the transformation from 1960s crewcut "fat boy" to 1970s blonde-locks icon that was so integral to his evolving public image.  Not done. I dont think i'm going to find one. Grovermj 01:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
• Speaking of which, more about his public-persona/celebrity might be a good idea...though that's kind of tricky from an NPOV standpoint. Still, for a while there Nicklaus essentially was golf for the American public, and he remains something of an icon in and out of the game. That status could be addressed. In particular, the "rivalry" with Palmer is teased in the lead & I don't think it's mentioned again.
• The lead needs a copyedit for grammar. Also "was a professional golfer" doesn't sound quite right for a living person.
• Shouldn't the total of 19 runnerups in majors be mentioned somewhere? Maybe whatever the ridiculous total is for Top-10s? Also doesn't he always say he really won 20 majors because the US Amateur should count?
• In this passage (under "Career downturn"): "...he was thrilled to have won The Open at the home of golf, St Andrews," the phrase home of golf should probably be in quotes & attributed to someone, ideally Nicklaus himself; or at least explained. I know it's a commonplace in the golf world, but for the lay person it sounds funny.
• I notice all the cites are from online sources. I'm sure plenty of print sources could be found, and might prove useful. One of John Feinstein's books, for instance, or another general golf history, might be a good source on his celebrity & role in popularizing the tour. I think there are a couple of book-length Nicklaus bios, which could be good even if only listed as "further reading." Nicklaus' own books should certainly be mentioned. (Didn't Tiger Woods read Golf My Way 600 times or something? I may have the title wrong.)
• Those complete major-winners lists at the bottom are kind of overwhelmingly huge, & tend to reinforce a vague impression that the article is for the golf fanatic rather than the general reader.  Not done. They're collapsable so it seems fine to me. Grovermj 01:29, 26 November 2008 (UTC)
• I guess it can't hurt, but does Jack Nicklaus really need to be disambiguated from Jack Nicholson?!  :-)

Sorry this is so wordy. My handicap is somewhere north of 20, so feel free to heed/ignore as you see fit. Happy editing. —Turangalila ^talk 03:16, 14 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Let's start from the lead:

• It needs expansion per WP:LEAD.
• Who put these s in the lead? Fix them or remove them, if you cite these assertions later. For issues cited in the main text, you don't have to repeat the citing in the lead.
• "and during this period accumulated 18 major titles, because of this fact". I think before "because" it would be better to put a full-stop, instead of comma?

• Do we know something more about his family?
• Per WP:MoS do not wikilink single years. Only year-month-date.
• "This win made him the youngest player, age 26, and the only one after Gene Sarazen, Ben Hogan, and Gary Player (until Tiger Woods at age 24) to win all four major championships, now known as the Career Slam." I don't see any reason to bold here.
• "Nicklaus did not win the Grand Slam in 1972, as Lee Trevino repeated as the British Open champion, and Gary Player prevailed in the PGA Championship." Avoid short, one-sentence, stubby sentences like this one. Merge or expand.
• Maybe a wider prose variety would help. I read the same monotonous style: "In XXXX NIcklaus won C and D"."In FFFF Nicklaus won F and G" etc.
• "Champions Tour career" and "Close of playing career" look under-cited. My advice is to have at least one citation in each paragraph.
• Two things about "Playing style":

• First of all the prose. It is choppy!
• Then, the context. Why so poor! I think it is very important to analyse the playing style of such a great golfer (you know, in Greece we know amost nothing about golf - but I have heard about two golf players: Woods and him; this proves what a great sport figure he is!).

• "Records" is all listy. It looks like trivia. If you to FAC with such a section, you'll be in trouble. Can you turn it into proper prose?
• In "See also" don't put articles you have already linked in the main text.
• Wikify your online sources you use as inline citations, using Template:cite web and Template:cite news.

In general, an artice with potential, but it needs work.--Yannismarou 20:40, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

David E. Kelley

I have done a complete rewrite of this article, including the addition of filmography, table of tv shows and awards. I would like to get this into shape for at least a GA rating with an eye towards making it a featured article. Therefore 18:27, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• I would expand a bit more the lead per WP:LEAD.
• "Born in Waterville, Maine, raised in Boston, Kelley was the son of a hockey coach[1] and played the game himself." Try, wherever possible, to have the citations at the end of the sentences.
• "Kelley was the son of a hockey coach." His mother? Do we know their names?
• You use many fair-use tagged photos. This might (or might not!) be a problem in WP:FAC.
• "Towards the end of the fifth season in 1999, facing cancellation, Kelley fired all cast members added since he had left the show, brought back Mandy Patinkin and began writing episodes again." Had this change any positive effects?
• "Casting" is uncited.
• You have seperate criticism for each show. Maybe some of it should be incorporated in the relevant articles. In any case, I would like to have criticism about his work, his writing, his talent as a whole.--Yannismarou 19:11, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Woody Guthrie

I am trying to clean up this article and get into good article status. Some comments would be appreciated. I recently added a lot of citings from pages in the published Woody Guthrie biography by Joe Kline and cleaned up some of the grammer as per comments on the talk page. Dannygutters 20:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

WesleyDodds

Some suggestions:

• • Remove a lot of the subheadings in "Biography" and combine the sections.
  • Remove statements like "Guthrie's laid back temperament and disheveled dress disguised a sharp wit and observant eye. This wit can be seen in the lyrics of his many songs which evoke the spirit of their subjects quite astutely" unless they are direct quotes someone has said.
  • Soundclips would be useful.
  • Write more about his musical style.
  • Convert the items in the "Guthrie's influence" section from list format to prose.

The references are a good start, but the structure of the article has a way to go. WesleyDodds 11:30, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "and for his abhorrence of fascism, politicians, hypocrisy and economic exploitation." I am not sure if this wording is in accord with WP:POV.
• "He was a small lanky man with curly black hair and frequently dressed with little regard for his personal appearance. Guthrie's laid back temperament and disheveled dress disguised a sharp wit and observant eye. This wit can be seen in the lyrics of his many songs which evoke the spirit of their subjects quite astutely." This is the lead. Such information shouldn't be here. In order to understand what is exactly a lead, check WP:LEAD. And, the prose does not look very encyclopedic.
• "The breadth of his song topics ranged from the plight of the migrant worker to children's songs about riding in cars.""He traveled around the USA many times and spent much of his time on early trips learning traditional songs and creating new American folk songs of working people." Aren't you a bit repetitive here about the songs? In general, maybe you should think about restructuring a bit the lead.
• "His life seemed to be full of tragedy." Uncyclopedic.
• "Mary Jennings, first wife" Stubby section. Merge or expand.
• "he did express sympathy towards the party many times, which was not unusual among 1930s folk singers.[1]" Avoid external jumps like this one. Turn them into proper inline citations.
• "Originally titled "God Blessed America"; It was inspired in part by his experiences during a cross-country trip and in part by his distaste for the Irving Berlin song "God Bless America", which he considered unrealistic and complacent (and he was tired of hearing Kate Smith sing it on the radio)." Cite please.
• I see a series of stubby sections. Maybe you should think about expanding or merging them.
• "Despite his love for children, he was unpredictable in his support for his family." Meaning? Specify and cite.
• I am a bit about the chronological line you follow in the biography. For instance, why are you placing "Prolific writer" before "Deteriorating health, late 1940s" and after "Marjorie Mazia, second wife". Have in mind that his writing activity could also be analyzed in a seperate section after you have exposed his biography.
• "In California Woody lived in a compound owned by Will Geer and some other old folkies. Here he met his third wife Anneke Van Kirk and had another child, Lorina Lynn. The couple moved to Florida briefly. In Florida Woody was injured trying to light a fire and damaged his right arm. Eventually the couple returned to New York in 1954.[23] Eventually caring for Woody became too much of a strain on the much younger Anneke and she filed for divorce. Lorina Lynn was adopted by friends of Anneke." Choppy and repetitive prose.
• "Folk revival" is uncited.
• "Musical influence" is listy and looks like a trivia section. It would be better if you could turn it into proper prose. The same in "Woody Guthrie archive".
• Have in mind that in "See also" section we place articles not already linked in the main text.
• You don't have to repeat the ISBN of the same book in each note it is referred. I would also propose to vary a bit your sources. You seem to rely a lot on a single source.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 18:51, 12 April 2007 (UTC)

Shirahadasha

Suggest saying more about his politicial leanings and activism and summarizing this in the introduction. Also suggest more about his influence on other forms of American popular music, if possible by providing a big-picture summary view of his influence, in addition to the list of specific allusions to Woodie Guthrie in more recent music. --Shirahadasha 04:49, 13 April 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Paine

I happened to stumble upon this article and it appears to be well written. I haven't contributed anything with the exception of a requested inline citation but I think this article may soon be worthy of GA status and thought it could use some feedback. I will alert those who have contributed significantly to the article about this review. --Oneworld25 16:10, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

I'm happy to see that people have been working on the Paine article. Unfortunately, it is not yet of GA caliber. Here are my suggestions to help it achieve that (and perhaps more, someday):

• First off, this article cannot be considered for GA status yet because it contains so few citations. Also, those citations are almost all to web-based sources. There is no reason to do this for a person who has been written about as extensively as Thomas Paine. I wrote my Master's Thesis on Paine's Age of Reason several years ago and I can tell you that the books listed in the Bibliography of the page itself are good (I think I've read them all) - why aren't they being used as sources? Instead, we have sites like "ushistory.org."
• Listing his occupation as "pamphleteer" seems a little reductive, don't you think? You might think about including "revolutionary" or something along those lines.
• The lead jumps around a lot and its represenation of the Rights of Man is dubious at best.
• The "Early life" section begins in a confusing way - start by referring to Joseph and Frances as Paine's parents. Notice also that the first mention of "Thomas Paine" is actually "he" - how is the reader supposed to know that the "he" in the sentence refers to Thomas Paine? Grammatically, it refers back to Joseph.
• The article says that Paine failed at corset-making - I thought he just hated it and refused to work. This is why we need sources! By the way, the article states just one sentence later that he set up a corset shop, so clearly he didn't fail, even according to your own account.
• Link or explain "supernumerary officer".
• "The "Early life" section jumps around quite a bit - try to make it flow more. Also, Paine's interest in science seems to be just tacked on, but when I read about him, biographers make a big deal about that. More should probably be said about that.
• The "American Revolution" section should begin with why Paine published Common Sense; it is odd to suddenly read that it is popular. The last thing the reader knows Paine is nearly dead in America - why is this pamphlet now popular? The reader has no idea why he wrote it or why he got invovlved in American political issues so quickly.
• Paine's strength lay in his ability to present complex ideas in clear and concise form - this is debatable - this is why sources are so necessary; other sources I have read would claim that Paine wasn't presenting sophisticated ideas, he was distilling the "philosophical ideas" the article mentions later down into their most basic elements and presenting them with rhetorical vigor - he was a great propagandist, in other words.
• Again, the "French Revolution" section begins without any context - why is Paine writing the Rights of Man? You have to set the scene for the reader by beginning with Burke's Reflections and the ensuing "Revolution Controversy." See my attempts to do this in Mary Wollstonecraft (the section on the Vindication of the Rights of Men) and A Vindication of the Rights of Woman (the "Historical context" section).
• It was an abstract political tract published in support of the French Revolution - the Rights of Man is partly this, but much more - you might begin by reading the "Introduction" to Marilyn Butler's Burke, Paine, Godwin, and the Revolution Controversy, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press (2002).
• You have to explain why the Age of Reason was such a reviled book.
• The "Views" section is very disjointed - I would suggest a radical revision of this section or integration of this information into the biography section of the article.
• The last paragraph in the "Legacy" section seems like an advertisement.
• This article needs a careful copyedit. There are lots of awkward sentences, grammatically incorrect sentences, puncutation mistakes, spelling mistakes, etc. You might want to list it at the League of Copyeditors after you have finished revising it.
• There should be a list of works that Paine wrote. See Mary Wollstonecraft for an example. It is up to the editors whether or not they want to include the publication information for the first editions (see Talk:Thomas Paine).

There is a lot of work to be done on this page, but I feel that with some dedicated editors it could become GA in a few weeks and maybe even an FA in a couple of months. Awadewit 18:12, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

John Martin Scripps

I have written this article on a British serial killer in about a week, based primarily on a book I borrowed from my local library. However, the book includes a lot of trivial information that I tried to keep out of the article, but in the process I may have omitted information that may still be important or valuable even after 12 years. I am also afraid that in my desire to write a good article the prose may be too sensationalist. Please advise me on how this article can be improved, including any information that needs to be added or removed, to reach Featured Article standards. If this article makes it to FA, it will be the first crime biography FA. :) Resurgent insurgent 04:30, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Review by Psychless

Review by Psychless ^{Type words or read things!}

Lead:

• The nationalities of the victims should be removed. They are mentioned later in the article and not that important.
• "several" should be removed or replaced with "three". "various countries" could be replaced with a better phrase

Early Life:

• First sentence should be revised to: John Martin Scripps was born in Letchworth, Hertfordshire, England to Leonard and Jean Scripps. His father was an East End lorry driver and his mother a Fleet Street barmaid. Just my opinion on how it should be structured, if nothing else just add the links.
• Cancun → Cancún, Mexico also Montreal → Montreal, Quebec, Canada
• abscond is an obscure word and a more commonly known word or phrase should replace it
• Please give Ken Cold's full title, not the abbreviation and/or a wikilink to the appropriate article on it.
• Period after revenge instead of semicolon. More information on how he persuaded her to divorce him and his relationship with her after that would be nice. It has also been stated that her hometown is in Mexico (if you follow my suggestions that is) so "in Mexico" should be removed.

Imprisonment for drug trafficking:

• switched to → started
• had he not escaped → had he not escaped again
• I think the sentence: "He was trained to bone out fore quarters and hind quarters of beef, sides of bacon, carcasses of pork, and how to portion chicken.", is unnecessary as the sentence that talked about his butchery training is enough in my opinion.
• The part about Maria and her child seems to belong somewhere else. Also who is the father of her child? His relationship with her needs more explanation like said above.

Victims:

• The title of this section should be changed as it is talking about the murder of the victims. Not the victims themselves. Their needs to be more of a beginning to the section also.
• Third sentence could use less detail. The exact goods he was purchasing is irrelevant.
• I don't think the wikilinks to human legs, knees, torso and thighs are necessary.
• The sections Timothy MacDowall and Others? could be merged together into one section called Unconfirmed Victims.

Appeal and hanging:

• "you are told every day that you are not a member of the uman rase." Capitalize "you" and provide a short explanation of "uman rase" not just linking it to human race.

Overall: Wikify links like: May 2007 or May 1991. This is a really good article. Good Job on including the Persondata template. The things I pointed out are very small changes that will be easy to fix. I suggest first trying to get GA status. If successful try for A-class in WikiProject Biography. If this article can succeed in both (you will probably get a review of the article on both steps) it will have a very good chance of becoming a Featured Article. So implement my suggestions and try for GA. Good Luck! If you have any questions come on down to my talk page. --Psychless ^{Type words or read things!} 22:05, 19 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply by Resurgent insurgent

Lead:

• • Fixed.
  • Fixed by replacing "several" with "three" and omitting "various countries" altogether.

Early life:

• • Changed as suggested.
  • Changed as suggested.
  • "Abscond" replaced with "ran away from jail" (a bit too colloquial perhaps?)
  • Link replaced with unlinked "Police Constable".
  • Fixed, and whole new section on Family added that has all the information on the Martin-Maria relationship I can find. Unfortunately, no source I can find states how Maria was persuaded to leave Ken.

Imprisonment for drug trafficking:

• • Fixed.
  • Fixed.
  • Deleted the quote altogether, as it was just restating the preceding summary and in a not very interesting way.
  • Relationship with Lara moved to Family section.

Victims:

• • Section title changed to Murder of tourists.
  • Sentence shortened to just say he was "buying electronic goods".
  • Links all removed.
  • Sections merged as suggested.

Appeal and hanging:

• • "You" capitalised, and I added "[misspelling of human race] after "uman rase". Is that what you had in mind? I'm loathe to put [sic] anywhere because the notes were misspelt in so many places.

Overall

• • I am reluctant to wikilink dates similar to "July 1992", because I must confess I'm the type who doesn't find these links relevant to the context.

But now that I added in a new section and split out the escape into its own section, you might want to review a second time. Thank you for your patience! Resurgent insurgent 19:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

LuciferMorgan

• ""I will call you the moment I check into the hotel to give you the contact number. If you do not hear from me on March 10, it would mean that I would have a seat on the plane to return to South Africa and would arrive home on March 11. But if I do call you on March 10, that would mean that I have not managed to get a seat and would return on March 12.""

The above is a quotation, so needs a citation. All quotes need citations. LuciferMorgan 12:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

• "Quigley later testified, "[Martin] was instructed in butchery over a six-week period in March and April 1993. He was trained to bone out fore quarters and hind quarters of beef, sides of bacon, carcasses of pork, and how to portion chicken.""

This is another quote which needs citing. LuciferMorgan 12:16, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply by Resurgent insurgent

• • The first quote has been given a inline cite, and the second one has been removed for being a simple restatement of preceding text that lacked "spice" value. Resurgent insurgent 19:14, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Second Review by Psychless

A throrough GA reviewer suggests wikilinking dates similar to July 1776. Just note that if you do get her as a reviewer (I feel sorry for you if do) she will expect them to be wikilinked. Anyways, onto the review.

• In the infobox the country name needs to be in his birth place.
• Death place should be: Changi Prison, (insert city where the prison is here), Singapore
• Update Persondata accordingly
• Wikilink murder in infobox and death penalty in lead.

Arrest:

• Wikilink Changi Airport

Trial:

• When describing his statement should you make it sound more like a statement? Would that make it more or less NPOV?
• judge needs to be capitalized

Conclusion: As you can see these are extremely minor things. Nominate it for GA is my opinion. Go to my talk page if you have any questions. --Psychless ^{Type words or read things!} 21:18, 20 May 2007 (UTC)

Rudolph Cartier

This article is already a GA, but it has been suggested to me that it might also be good enough to nominate for FA status. While I am quite pleased with it, I am not sure whether it will entirely satisfy the FA guidelines for comprehensiveness, and would welcome some feedback on that issue, as well as any general criticisms and comments. Angmering 10:40, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

• Crop the black from Image:Rudolphcartier01.JPG. Λυδαcιτγ 18:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
• More info seems necessary. Perhaps split main sections into subsections and begin expanding? Λυδαcιτγ 18:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I'll have a go at that image. As for the expansion, yes that's what I thought — there simply isn't anything more, that's the problem. Angmering 18:41, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

It isn't a problem though if it's classed as comprehensive. LuciferMorgan 19:14, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Well, as I mentioned on your talk page, ideally I'd like to find out what he was doing from the time he moved to Britain in the mid-1930s to when he reappears on film credits in the late 1940s, but he doesn't seem to have left much of a trace in the usual places (The Times digital archives, etc). Angmering 21:19, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

I see you've employed Google Scholar. Have you used Google Books? Λυδαcιτγ 03:24, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

I've never even heard of "Google Scholar" I'm afraid! However, I have looked through the Google Books link, and although I haven't turned up any leads on what he was doing during the War, I have found a nice bit of criticism to help balance out some of the praise in the article. Angmering 10:22, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Oh, well then you've already found many of the results Scholar turns up. It still might be useful, though; here's the link. Λυδαcιτγ 00:08, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Yes, shockingly I actually went to the library and used some real books! ;-) Thanks again for the link, though! Oh, and I've had a go at chopping those black borders out, by the way - any better? Angmering 09:36, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

Perfect. A few more things:

• Last sentence of the second intro paragraph is confusing. Perhaps change to something like this: "He went on to produce and direct over 120 productions in the next 24 years, ending his television career with ____ in 1976."
• "He was married three times, lastly to Margaret Pepper, whom he married in 1949 and remained with until his death.[1] He had one daughter with Pepper, and another from a previous marriage.[3] He died on 7 June 1994, at the age of 90; his death was overshadowed in the media by that of Dennis Potter, another important figure in the history of British television drama, who died on the same day.[28]" — the repetition of "he" is tedious
• This site credits him for 1977's Gaslight, which appears to contradict the sentence "His final directing credit came on the play Loyalties, screened in 1976."
• Any idea what he did in his later years or how he died?

Λυδαcιτγ 20:18, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• I've made the change you suggested to the lead, and also edited the paragraph about his death to try and remove the repetition of "he". The article used to mention Gaslight a long time ago, but another editor removed it, saying it was never made in the edit summary. Both the IMDb and — perhaps more reliably — the British Film Institute seem to agree with this, both having Loyalties down as his final directing credit. On the subject of his later life and death; given that he was over seventy when he retired I'd suggest he didn't do a lot, but obviously that's not sourced! Neither his MOBC bio, nor the Screenonline one nor his Times obituary mention any activities in the 1980s or early 90s (aside from the Late Show interview) and none mention a cause of death. Given he was 90 though, I don't find it especially odd that they presumably just assumed old age. I'll keep looking, though. Angmering 20:49, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

A NY Times review of 1946's "The Man from Morocco", which was adapted by Warwick Ward from an original short story by Cartier. May be worth adding. LuciferMorgan 23:44, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:09, 8 May 2007 (UTC)

• I've added a general biography infobox — I was pretty amazed that there was not an "infobox director", but it seems the film people are happy with using slightly-bent-out-of-shape "infobox actor" templates. I've also added the suggested non-breaking space to 35 mm film, and I think all the full dates given are properly linked. Angmering 06:56, 9 May 2007 (UTC)

Robert Garran

Most of the prose here was written by myself, so I'm looking for some fresh eyes and some comments about the quality of the writing, as well as comments about the overall standard of the article, since I'm ultimately looking towards FAC for this one. There's also a regular peer review open at Wikipedia:Peer review/Robert Garran/archive1, I hope it's not a problem submitting this in two places, I'm just hoping for plenty of comments. --bainer (talk) 00:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: this is an old peer review, I ran out of time to implement the suggestions that arose last time before I went away on holiday over the New Year period, but I've come back to them now. I've relisted this peer review to hopefully get some more comments. --bainer (talk) 07:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• I'll try to re-review it tomorrow!--Yannismarou 20:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• I do not like some prose stuff in the lead. First sentence: "Robert Randolph Garran (10 February 1867 – 11 January 1957), Australian lawyer, was an early leading expert in Australian constitutional law, the first employee of the Government of Australia and the first Solicitor-General of Australia." I would rephrase "Robert Randolph Garran (10 February 1867 – 11 January 1957) was an Australian lawyer and an early leading expert in Australian constitutional law, the first employee of the Government of Australia and the first Solicitor-General of Australia." Then:"Garran was also an important figure in the development of the city of Canberra, organising the creation of the Canberra University College and later contributing to the establishment of the Australian National University, and founding several important cultural associations in the new city." This second end extends a sentence which should have ended. According to my IMO, I think you should split the sentence.

• I agree, I've shuffled the sentences around.

• "Garran, like his father, was strongly involved in the Federation movement." You could explain us in a few words what is this movement.

• I've included a brief description, and the term "Australian Federation movement" is linked to a page discussing it fully.

• Too many read links. Officially this is not an obstacle for FA status, but it would be nice if you could reduce them, creating some stubs.
• "Garran and his fellow staff aimed for a simple style of legislative drafting, a goal enabled by the fact that there was of course no pre-existing federal legislation on which their work would have to be based." I think we do not need "of course" here.

• It does read better without that clause.

• "Garran "consistently advocated the establishment of what he prophetically called 'a National University at Canberra'"" Who's the quote? Since you use quotation marks, I think you should mention the name of the person saying that in the text. Otherwise, recast into alternative language.

• The whole sentence was cited, but only the first part of it was a direct quote, the remainder was paraphrased. I've added a comma following the direct quote and repeated the citation to make this clear.

• "This vision was evidently influential on the establishment of the Australian National University (ANU) in 1946, the only research-only university in the country (although in 1960 it amalgamated with the University College to offer undergraduate courses)." I would like a citation here.

• Done.

• Try not to have inline citations in the middle of the sentences, unless it is absolutely necessary.

• Apart from a few citations following direct quotes (see two points above), the only citations in the middle of sentences are details of books that are mentioned in the prose. It would be misleading to offer the citation at the end of the sentence as it would imply attribution to that source.

• Garran's "personality, like his prose, was devoid of pedantry and pomposity and, though dignified, was laced with a quizzical turn of humour." Again, who says that? The same problem with the next sentence: "His death "marked the end of a generation of public men for whom the cultural and the political were natural extensions of each other and who had the skills and talents to make such connections effortlessly.""

• The quotes are cited, did you want me to name the source?

• The last quote of "Legacy" is Garran's. What has to do this quote with his legacy? Maybe you should place it in the sections you discuss his work for the Federation and the Constitution

• It's his answer to the question 'has federation turned out as you expected?' posed to him near the end of his career. I think it nicely illustrates his own view of the things he gave his career to and is appropriate for that section.

• Your printed sources have no pages (except for the articles). I'm afraid this is a problem for FAC. You should rewrite your citations, by adding specific pages..

• I've done this for the book that's referenced the most. The first source is a specialist encyclopaedia entry, and it's all on the one double page IIRC, so I doubt it's necessary to split that one up into individual citations.

• Unfortunately with the business of the Christmas period I've run out of time to implement these suggestions before I leave for my holiday tomorrow, but I'll definitely do so when I come back. --bainer (talk) 14:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ok, now that it's definitely no longer Christmas, I've come back to take a look at these. My responses are in blue. --bainer (talk) 07:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Additional comments

• "Garran graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree with first-class honours in 1888, winning the University's Medal in Philosophy, and a Bachelor of Laws degree in 1889." I would cite that.

• That was from the same source as the preceding sentence, I've clarified that by adding another footnote.

• You have some red links. Though red links are not an obstacle for FA status, some reviewers do not like it, and you might lose some supports. Maybe, you could stub some of them.

• I'll do so if serious objection arises. I would prefer to do the articles properly when I have the time.

• "In June 1893 ... the following five years." This paragraph has no citations.

• I've remedied that. I've also mentioned the Bathurst conference alongside the Corowa one.

• "The creation of the office and Garran's appointment to it was to some degree recognition of his existing role". IMO this assertion should be sourced.

• I've done so, and clarified the point by rewording it and bringing in material from another source.

• As far as the prose is concerned, I am not the best judge, since I am not a native English speacker, but I don't see any major flaw. Maybe, in some cases it could be further improved ("The family lived in Phillip Street in central Sydney. Garran's mother "had a deep distrust, well justified in those days, of milkman's milk" and so the family kept a cow in the backyard, which would walk on its own to The Domain each day to graze and return twice a day to be milked.[2] The family later lived in the suburb of Darlinghurst, just to the east of the centre city.), but, again, not any huge prose flaws I think.

• Hmm, a failure to read that sentence out loud on my part :) I've substituted alternative words for those cases.

In general, the article is very nice - some thinks I do not like very much are probably just personal preferences (such as the long quotes in "Legacy", which are long and IMO interrrupt the flow of the prose) - and I think I would support it in FAC. But, if you don't feel sure about it, you can go first to GAC - it is another way to get feedback.--Yannismarou 11:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, responses in blue. --bainer (talk) 07:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this could go to FAC as it is - it's an excellent article. Rebecca 02:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Terry Dehere

I have just recently expanded this article. It is listed as a stub, but I have never worked on a stub before and am seeking feedback. I don't even know if it is ready to have the stub tags removed at this point. I would like to get this bio up to GA status, but need to find some more references and information on the subject. Jim Miller 13:43, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

CloudNine

A good start. A few comments:

• Try to use the {{cite web}} format in your references.
• Mention of early life in lead needs its own section. Who were his parents etc.? Check any featured biography, such as Michael Jordan, for more on this.
• It would be nice if a free photo could be found; I'm sure politicians are keen to release photos. Try sending an e-mail; see Wikipedia:Example requests for permission.
• Lead will eventually need expanding per WP:LEAD.

Kenny G

Hi. I'm interested in getting this article from B-class (which it is at the moment) to GA status, but I'm not really sure what I could do to improve it. I've made many contributions to the article, and would appreciate some guidance on expanding it further. Your comments are most welcome. Cheers, -Panser Born- (talk) 14:44, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Chubbles

Just a small suggestion here - one resource you might find very useful for expanding this article is the article on Smooth Jazz and Kenny G in a book called Bad Music: The Music We Love to Hate, edited by Christopher Washburne and Maiken Derno. (I know this sounds like a joke, but it's not - the book is available on Amazon and in most good University research libraries.) Chubbles 18:04, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, I'll look into that. =) -Panser Born- (talk) 20:22, 8 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Personally, I would expand just a bit more the lead.
• In early life, we have nothing about his family. Isn't there any relevant material?
• "Influenced by the likes of Grover Washington, Jr., his own albums are usually classified as smooth jazz." Cite please.
• "he was publicly criticized by two notable jazz guitarists." Why don't you tell us straight away who they are? You have another phrase about further criticisms, and then you return to the guitarists, whon you hadn't named in the first place.
• IMO many quotes in a row in "Musical criticism". Maybe some recasting into alternative language wouldn't go amiss.
• I don't think that I can help you with sources about Kenny G.--Yannismarou 13:44, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, I'll try and do something about all those points. Cheers, -Panser Born- (talk) 10:48, 11 April 2007 (UTC)

Ramón Emeterio Betances

Folks, Ramón Emeterio Betances' 180th. anniversary of his birth is coming up (8 April). The original article wouldn't take more than two pages when printed. It had the WikiProject Biography banner added a while back, and a B classification added since the very beginning. One of WP's consistent editors, Tony the Marine, added a few paragraphs to have it improved. He then commended me for improvements on a few articles I've done or de-stubbed, but suggested that I improve at least one to at least A status (perhaps even to GA status) following all guidelines for it, which I've since done. I chose Betances because he's a gigantic historical figure to everyone in the Caribbean but us Puerto Ricans, for reasons (mostly political) that don't belong in here. I also chose him because a nephew of my wife's had to pick a similar article about José Martí since the Betances' one was so poor. Yet, Martí constantly told people that Betances was his mentor...

I don't know if I've overdone the article, so to speak, but to me Betances would deserve credit as a medical doctor and scientist alone. Four Caribbean countries claim him as being responsible as a leader and/or coordinator of their independence and/or sovereignty struggles. Before him, Puerto Rico wasn't a bleep on the screen to most of the world; after him, there's a Puerto Rican nation of close to 8 million people, all over the world, which recognizes itself as such. Based on this, I think he deserved a GA-quality article, and hopefully even a Featured article if it was improved well enough. Of course, I need your feedback... please give it a look and rate it! Demf 20:32, 2 April 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

This is a good article and I learned a lot from reading it. Nice job contextualizing Betances' actions. Here are my suggestions.

• I added these comments after my exchange with Awadewit; my apologies to the confused, but I wanted to preserve his bullets. My comments for the time being are in blue. Demf 14:42, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• I think you should remove the "Dr." from the first sentence and just use his name. Check the manual of style for sure on this, though.

• You are correct; done.

• main leader of the Grito de Lares revolution - diction - "main leader" is a little vague - "primary instigator"?

• Point well taken. Betances, of course, was not physically in Puerto Rico at the time of the Grito, which was going to be a distributed revolt had its date not been hastily moved to an earlier date. He was definitely the instigator, logistics coordinator, and the rituals and communication style between the revolutionary cells all had Betances' imprint as a freemason. "Instigator" is too weak a word to describe his role, yet it is the best one I can come up with myself. Done.

Or "Inspired and planned"? Awadewit 16:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• he is considered by historians to be the father of the Puerto Rican independence movement - do Puerto Ricans consider him the father of the movement as well?

• Yes, even if may too many people tend to say: "Dr. Who?" Removed the reference to historians.

• Besides being a medical doctor and surgeon, he was also a diplomat, public health administrator, poet and novelist. - a little awkward; the "besides" makes it sound like you have referred to his medical career before

• Language deficiency on the side of the editor. Fixed

• I would suggest expanding the lead a little more so that it is true summary of the article. See WP:LEAD.

• Will work on it... I'm tempted to move some of the "Legacy" paragraphs here, but I'm also aware that they have to be brief and to the point. I'll let the world know once I do.

• There is no need to bold names within the article itself.

• I've seen bio articles where a key person in the character's life are put in bold. I did this with Betances' brothers and sisters, as well as his parents, his wife Simplicia and his fiancée, Lita. Tempted to remove them, but will think of it a bit.

• The "Studies in France" section jumps around a bit - try to make it flow more and try to avoid one-sentence paragraphs. It also contains information not related to Betances studies in France - try placing that information in a more relevant section.

• That's probably because the section's name is a layover from previous versions. In theory it should be split in three, and the "Studies" title be reserved to his M.D. studies, but his earlier grade school work would qualify in theory. Let me think this a bit.

• La viérge de Boriquen - what do you think about translating the heading title or putting the translation in paranthesis?

• You're the third person suggesting this. Done.

• I would suggest a thorough copyedit for this article. There are a lot of little mistakes (parallelism, verb tense matching, prepositions, etc.) that can easily be fixed. You might list it at the League of Copyeditors.

• I want to give quick closure to this, and am tempted to have a friend (native English speaker) proofread it first. By no means this means that I won't, but let me give it a pre-edit, so to speak.

• I wonder if the information in the section "Contributions to Mayagüez and environs" could be integrated into other sections.

• Maybe I added it because I already had in mind adding the pic I later added, and an extra section would suit that. However, you're right... the info there probably can be merged elsewhere.

• For FA status, the article will need a few more citations; I have added some tags (they seem to have a rule of thumb of at least one per paragraph).

• 38 to go... maybe this and the proofreading will prevent the article from passing GA status soon. We'll see if it can be done ASAP.

• When you eventually submit the article for FAC, you will probably want to fix the red links - either delink them or add pages.

• Probably will add stubs to the ones I can't delink, but a Velez Alvarado article alone would take quite some time to edit. Ouch.

When adding new pages, you don't have to provide a full description of the person. You can just add a sentence or two. You can create a "stub" article and then go back and write the full article at your convenience or wait for someone else to do it. I myself do not like creating stubs, but it is a way around the redlink problem. Awadewit 16:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• Could you quote some of Betances' actual writings in "Betances in New York"?

• Point taken. Will a quote block be a good idea in this case?

Yes, or quote boxes, maybe? See Elizabeth Cady Stanton amd William Monahan for examples of how the quote box is used. Awadewit 16:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• Because of his exposure to the liberal thinking prevalent in France through the second half of the 19th. century, Betances adopted ideas that were innovative to some, subversive to others, but radical nonetheless in the Puerto Rico of that era. His ideas on race relations alone had a major impact on economics and the social makeup of the island. - This is vague, could you explain?

• I guess I tried to imply he had a definite influence on Puerto Rican politics and economics, just because of his actions. No judgment call on them, of course, I'm trying to maintain a NPOV, which is difficult in my case because I admire the guy so much. But he had a definite influence in: public health, the social stratification of Puerto Rican society, politics and nationality. That is the truth... We'll see how I rewrite this.

• Could you list some further reading in English for the curious who do not read Spanish (and since this is the English wikipedia)?

• Commented on it below, thanks for your suggestions. I think I'll even try to meet Félix Ojeda personally or some other Betances expert and ask for a few. I can imagine the National Archives in Washington will probably have something online, but my best bet would be articles by Caribbean history buffs in a stateside (U.S.) university. Those are usually not Googable without some contrived search parameters.

• This is a rather long article. I wonder if some condensing could be done so that readers are encouraged to read the entire article (apparently they stop somewhere between 30 and 50 kb). One suggestion I would make is to bring together and condense the information on the Cuban revolution. Awadewit 17:29, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

• The Voz del Centro podcast service added another file, this time with an interview with Paul Estrade. Of course, the podcast is in Spanish (well, with a thick French accent, in Estrade's case), but the subject is precisely this. I'll listen to it and rework the section.

Thanks for your comments and thorough review. Almost everything here is fixable, but I do have one question:

"Could you list some further reading in English for the curious who do not read Spanish (and since this is the English wikipedia)?" Ouch, double ouch, triple ouch. Betances' main biographers outside Puerto Rico are French and Cuban. I, of course, don't claim my English to be stellar, but at least I did as good a job at translating and writing as I could. I did my research and couldn't find much in English, and that brings me to a Catch-22: there are hundreds of people of Puerto Rican ancestry (in New York, where there is at least a school named after him) who speak poor or no Spanish and would most likely welcome an article such as this one, precisely because there's so little written about the guy in English. Yet since I can't get many references in English, the article might not get as good a rating as it would get if they were available. Hmmm... how do I address this? Demf 21:02, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

I did a quick search on WorldCat and Google scholar - I could find nothing in English. I wonder if you might list some books that talk about him in relation to the revolutions, then, if even that is possible. It's great that you are writing this article since the scholarship hasn't been translated yet. I think that the reviewers will have to make allowances since, as far as I can tell, you are correct that there is very little scholarship in English. Pages should not be rated according to the language of the scholarship. The only problem I can foresee (and it is one that I thought about myself) is that it is difficult for people who do not speak Spanish to review the reliability of your sources. I myself only read a tiny bit of French and German, so I am of no help, I'm afraid. Perhaps it would be good to try and find an editor who has not contributed to your page who speaks Spanish and ask them to post a review of your sources or something like that. Just trying to be helpful - I think that this article is important and I'm trying to think of ways to overcome obstacles that I can see arising at FAC. Awadewit 21:30, 7 April 2007 (UTC)

Emmett Watson

I am hoping to get meaningful feedback on this article. It's the first biographical article I've written for wikipedia.

Yannismarou

• The article needs better citing. Try to have at least one citation for each paragraph.
• For your citations based on online sources, use Template:cite web or Template:cite news.
• Do not wikilink single years. Only date-month-year.
• Inline citations go straight after the punctuation mark; not before.
• "Personal life" is stubby. If you cannot expand it, merge it with "Early life".
• "Within days he was offered a job back at the Seattle Times." Avoid stubby paragraphs like this one. Merge or expand.
• "At the Seattle Times Watson continued to write his column in the style that had made him Seattle's best known newspaper columnist." This should definitely be cited.
• "Accomplishments" and "Death" are also stubby. I think the last one should be merged. Could you enrich "Accomplisments"? You could also possibly merge it with "Awards".
• "See also" goes before "Notes". You could try to incorporate its links within the text and get rid of it.
• Are your "References" used in citations? If not, they are "further reading".--Yannismarou 14:56, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Eugenio Espejo

Hi. I hope this article can become a Good Article. I am aware that there are some grammar mistakes in it, but I want to know if it is well done overall. Thank you.Dalobuca 15:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Zleitzen

Hello Dalobuca. The lead should be expanded to 2-3 paragraphs, and contain a summary of all the main points in the article. That would be a good area to begin focusing on.-- Zleitzen^(talk) 05:23, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Hi, thank you for your advice. I will try to do that. Dalobuca 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "he stands out as a precursor...". When I hear the word "precursor" I want to know of what this person was a precursor?
• "Even though Espejo did not have original ideas". What does this mean? How do we define original ideas and in connection with what? And if he did not have original ideas how come and he was important?
• "he learned "by experience, which cannot be known without studying with pen in hand."". I think that per WP:MoS italics are not recommended in quotes.
• "(in order to practice as a lawyer, he studied under the direction of Dr. Ramón Yépez from 1780 to 1793). On November 28, 1772. Per WP:MoS 1780 and 1793 should not be wikilinked. The full date is well-linked. Check all your dates in the article, and fix them.
• "He became a prominent scientific investigator, philosopher, journalist, and writer." Why is this repetition necessary in "Early years"?
• "Although no surviving posters have been found, there is evidence that he wrote them, including the remarks Espejo made about them in his works." "The remarks etc." refers to "evidence"?
• "by the name of El nuevo Luciano de Quito o Despertador de los ingenios quiteños en nueve conversaciones eruditas para el estímulo de la literatura" "Marco Porcio Catón o Memorias para la impugnación del nuevo Luciano de Quito" "Reflexiones acerca de un método para preservar a los pueblos de las viruelas", "Defensa de los curas de Riobamba". In English?
• "Due to this behaviour, by 1783 he was labelled as "restive and subversive",[6] and was later designated head physician for the scientific expedition that Francisco de Requena was about to begin headed for the Pará and Marañon rivers to set the limits of the Royal Audience." It is recommended to avoid one-sentence paragraphs.
• "Espejo made use of this chance and created his most complete and better written work". According to whom?
• Try to have at least one citation in all your paragraphs.
• "Instead of recognition, Espejo gained more enemies". Why?
• "In 1790 Espejo returned to Quito to promote the "Sociedad Patriótica"". What is that? Tell us just two-three more words about it.
• "Because of his ideas,[12] he was imprisoned". Blur. Who accused him? On what grounds? How was his imprisonment decided?
• "By the interpretation of his manuscripts, it can be inferred that Eugenio Espejo considered education as the main way for popular development." Sources? Otherwise, it is original research.
• "Amazing is in fact his understanding of science." WP:POV
• "When he was arrested, people rumored that his detention was caused because of his support of the "impieties" of the French Revolution." Cite.
• "Eugenio Espejo could be regarded as a polymath, as he was a notable scientist, journalist, satirist and theologian." How many times have I read that already?!
• "Views on Education" is completely uncited.
• The whole "Thoughts" section is tagged for copy-editing etc. You can find copy-editors here.
• "Clearly written and well conceived". Especially well conceived could again be regarded as POV.
• "Once again, this work proved its author's deep knowledge of this religious subject and its situation in the 18th century, as well as his capability to deal with such a complicated matter." Unsourced.
• "Nevertheless, Espejo can be considered a deeply religious man." Any scholarly research supporting that. Where is this assertion based? You announce it as a conclusion in text without supporting it.
• "Views on Economics" and "Legacy" are also uncited.
• "Espejo’s defense, well prepared and documented". I am afraid that "well-prepared and documented" is again POV.
• For your online sources in "References" use Template:cite web or Template:cite news.--Yannismarou 14:43, 4 April 2007 (UTC)

Hello Yannismarou, thank you for your comments. It seems I have a lot of work to do!. Dalobuca 18:47, 29 March 2007 (UTC)

• Check all your inline citations and notes. They should be after punctuation mark always.
• "Overcoming racial discrimination, he graduated from medical school on July 10, 1767, and shortly after in jurisprudence and canon law (in order to practice as a lawyer, he studied under the direction of Dr. Ramón Yépez from 1780 to 1793). On November 28, 1772, he was authorized to practice medicine in Quito." Personally, I try not to have uncited paragraphs; so, IMO, you should also cite even short paragraphs like this one.
• "However, his desire to read everything without discrimination and criteria sometimes led him to irreflexive and precipitate judgments." Such as? Maybe a bit vague.
• "Thought" is still tagged for copy-editing. Don't you go in GAC or FAC with such tags in your article. Fix the relevant issues first!
• In "Legacy" I read mostly about his ideas. I think the goal in such a section is to learn (if and) how these ideas influenced his next generations. In a few words: Why was Espejo important for the generations after him? Did he have any impact?

The article is, in general, much improved. I think that GAC should be the next step, after you have the article assessed and after you get rid of the tags.--Yannismarou 13:11, 9 April 2007 (UTC)

I have followed almost every recommendation to improve the article, except for two: I have cited almost every paragraph, but there are some paragraphs (seven, to be precise) that I think can be let alone without citations, as most of them come from the same source: Philip Astuto's book. I am also aware that the article is still tagged for copy-editing, but the League of Copyeditors seems to be quite busy at the moment, so I will have to be patient for a while. Please let me know what do you think about my corrections. Dalobuca 01:28, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Mary Astor

After seeing a few more of her movies recently and looking at her page on wikipedia, I noticed there weren't many citations, not too many pictures, and not much discussion about Mary Astor's article. I was hoping with this peer review some of the experts on this site could help improve the article Mary Astor and hopefully it could become a featured article some day, maybe even going on the Main Page, bringing some well-deserved attention to this great actress. Ilampsurvivor5 23:40, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Kaisershatner

Put the objective before the subjective, ie move the director's opinion of her downward in the intro, and the reasons for her fame up. She is objectively famous for Maltese Falcon; readers may or may not agree with some guy's view of her acting ability (with all due respect). Kaisershatner 19:25, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• You have no inline citations, and, maybe even more importantly, no references! Read carefully WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTES.
• "She was born Lucile Vasconcellos Langhanke" I think this info should go to the lead.
• The only citation you have needs formatting. Make use of Template:cite web or Template:cite news.
• Per WP:MoS you shouldn't wikilink single years (1920); only full dates (date-month-year).
• "She was named one of the WAMPAS Baby Stars in 1926, along with Mary Brian, Dolores Costello, Joan Crawford, Dolores Del Rio, Janet Gaynor, and Fay Wray." You have many stubby sentences like this one. You should avoid them, because they make the prose listy. Merge or expand.
• "Astor had four husbands, director Kenneth Hawks (married February 26, 1928-his death 1930); physician and surgeon Franklyn Thorpe (married June 29, 1931-divorced 1936); insurance salesman Manuel del Campo (married February 1936-divorced 1941); and stockbroker Thomas Wheelock (married December 25, 1945-divorced 1955)." I don't know if this information is placed in the right plave. You are in mid 30s and you speak about 1955. Put the info in the right section or another alternative is to create a seperate "Personal life" section.
• "Her daughter was born in June in Honolulu, her name being a combination of the names of her parents. Her middle name, Hauoli, means "To sing with joy." IMO the repetitive prose here is not nice. In general, the prose could be better improved and get more encyclopedis. Many choppy phrasings; many "she did this" "she did that". You could combine sentences together, making the syntax nicer and the flow of the prose better.
• "He said that if she would let him take their daughter, Marylyn, she could have her back after six months to keep for six months. She believed that later on she could get custody of Marylyn and avoid bad publicity." Again the prose could be better here and elsewhere. After what he said, we go to what she believed, without telling us is she finally gave the child?! We imagine she did but ... Wouldn't be nicer if the last sentence was like that: "Astor agreed with his proposal, because she believed that ..."
• "Fortunately, the scandal caused no harm". "Fortunately" is POV.
• External links go after References.--Yannismarou 08:20, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Amir-Abbas Fakhravar

I have worked on this article and I hope I have improved it from a pretty bad version when I first found it to right now where it is more informative. I am not sure whether it has the potential to ever become a featured article, but I just want to know in which areas it can be improved. Thanks in advance --Rayis 19:27, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Still needs work. Right now it is not higher than start class ( though a good start article). Some remarks:

• Citation 1 is not properly formatted (use Template:cite web or Template:cite news). And maybe the citation should be at the end of the sentence.
• "He has been described as "one of Iran’s student leaders".[2][3][4] He is currently based in Washington, DC." Personally, I try to avoid that short sentences in the lead; they make the prose choppy. Try to find a way to better combine sentences, so as the prose to flow better.
• "Before his arrival in U.S in 2005, he had been imprisoned in Iran 19 times, with his first experience at the age of 17.[2]" Per MoS you should avoid one-sentence paragraphs like this one. They are not good for the flow of the prose.
• Anything about his family background? You go straight away to the improsonement, but the reader of an encyclopedic article wants to have a complete biography. Tis is not just a news report.
• ""About military efforts: No one wants war, neither we nor you. Our greatest efforts have been focusing on own people and forces within our boundaries, without war, to uproot the zealot Mullahs governing our country and replace them with a secular, democratic government which respects human rights and freedom". Why you bold here? This is not recommended.
• "he was one of the first of the democratic opposition in Iran to call for a constitutional referendum." You repeat the exact wording from the lead.
• In "See also" section you repeat articles already linked within the text.
• It is not clear in the article how he makes his living in US right now. His whereabouts? He works as a journalist? If yes, where?

After improving and expanding the article, I think tha a new review would be helpful.--Yannismarou 07:54, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thank you. I shall edit the article according to these ideas --Rayis 15:59, 31 March 2007 (UTC)

• I think the article is now up to B-Class status. Consequently the demands and the challenges are now bigger. Within this spirit, these are my remarks:

• If I was the writer of the article, I would definitely go for an external copy-editing by a native English speaker (unfortunately for this case, I am not). Maybe the League of the copy-editors could be helpful. There are obvious prose deficiences. See for instance, the lead: "He is known for his political activism and has been described as one of Iran’s student leaders.[4][5][6] He is currently based in Washington, DC. He was one of the first of the democratic opposition in Iran to call for a constitutional referendum to rescind the powers of the Supreme Leader and Council of Guardians.[7] Fakhravar is the founder of the Iranian Freedom Movement (In Persian: Jonbeshe Azadye Iranian).[2] He is also the ..." Prose which: 1) is repetitive (repeats the same forms of expression; no variety), and 2) choppy (meaning too short sentences).
• It is not nice to have more than one citation in a row. You can combine them. Check for instance Tourette syndrome or Actions along the Matanikau for ways to combine citations.
• Nice you added a "Background and student life" section. Whatever more you can add is welcome, so that the section does not look stubby.
• "Later he started his higher". Personally, I never start new section with "he". I would say: "Later Fakhravar started his higher", but again this may be a personal preference.
• "Later he started his higher education at the University of Medical Sciences in Urmia, where he was elected as the chairman to the student government body of the university in 1994." This could maybe go to the previous section as well I think.
• Per WP:MoS don't have a gap between the inline citation and the punctuation mark. I fixed that in the lead, but I think it is all over the place.
• "He claims to have had a prominent role ..." Why you say he claims? Are there other sources rejecting his "prominent role"? Aren't there any "objective" reports?
• "After an argument with the judge, he was beaten in front of the court by the judge Seyyed Madjid Hosseinian, [16] which resulted in him sustaining heavy knee injuries [17] and a broken leg [16] before being transferred to the Qasr prison. [3]" Try not to interrupt the phrases with citations. Do it only if you feel it is necessary; otherwise, put them at the end of the sentence combining them. Some reviewers (in FA especially) do not like sentences to be frequently interrupted with inline citations.
• I would turn "Awards and honors" into prose.
• Try to get rid of "Trivia". If the info there is important, incorporate it somewhere else in the main text.--Yannismarou 12:45, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Thanks ever so much! Very good points that I shall use to improve this article, cheers. --Rayis 13:08, 17 April 2007 (UTC)

Robert Spano

I've completed a radical expansion of this article from a stub. It was rated "Start" by an admin; since then I've added the infobox w/ photo, plus subsection headings & a bit of miscellaneous formatting & cleanup, but I'm stuck on how to further improve it. I left out some addtional material -- such as a section of musico-philosophical quotes from Spano -- as possibly unencyclopedic overkill. It's pretty exhaustively sourced, I think -- maybe overly so? the multiple footnotes do kind of break up the text, but I wanted to be careful. GA or FA status would certainly be cool. Any comments or suggestions would be hugely appreciated. Thx --Turangalila (talk) 11:37, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

Rayis

I fixed a few spelling mistakes, also I am not sure about the "--"s, is that standard? overall an informative article and good job. The lead could probably be worded a little bit better --Rayis 12:35, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Sorry -- I'm not sure what bit you mean when you mention: "--"s. Are you referring to orphaned letters "s", as in "[[Wagner]]'s Ring Cycle"? Or do you mean the double-hyphens themselves? On the latter I'm not sure if there's a standard; I'm in the habit of using them as a sub for the long dash, but maybe I should replace them w/ Unicode dashes? --Turangalila (talk) 19:43, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Mahanga

[copied over from article talk page ---Turangalila ]

One thing I noticed off the bat is the four quotes in the lead section. The quotes should be moved to a new section, possibly in a recognition section. See also Lead section. Your concern about over-referencing is understandable. I noticed a sentence with five references and many that are double referenced, which does seem a bit excessive. That only happens for controversial statements, but now that the citations are in, I see no reason to remove them. The Recording and Affiliation sections are lists that take up almost as much space as the other content. I'm not quite sure what to do there...

Lastly, I think it would be great if you could put up 30 sec samples of his work like in Bradley Joseph. I think this could easily be a Good Article and maybe a Featured Article in the future.

You may want to check out some of the musicians that are Good_articles and Featured articles to get an idea of what GAs and FAs look like. Mahanga^{Talk to me} 15:55, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

This is a concise, informative article. Nice work. Here are my suggestions.

• The quotations in the lead should be included in the article and the reader should be told in the text of the article who is saying them. The lead is supposed to be a summary of the article. WP:LEAD
• He is regarded as an advocate of new music - you link to "contemporary classical music" so why not say that Spano is an advocate of emerging classical composers or contemporary classical music? I found "new music" vague.
• lead any of the most prominent (and richest) orchestras - I would delete "richest" - it seems oddly placed and prominence requires wealth in the classical music world.
• The younger Spano began making music early - The tone here is rather cheesy.
• After high school he went to Ohio to study at the Oberlin Conservatory - how about emphasizing the conservatory? "After high school, he went to study at the Oberlin Conservatory in [town], Ohio"
• After high school he went to Ohio to study at the Oberlin Conservatory, where he would earn a degree in piano performance, while also pursuing the violin and composition and studying conducting with Robert Baustian. - run-on sentence
• From 1993 until 1996 he travelled the world nonstop - tone is colloquial
• while also exploring the use of visual elements to augment (or fundamentally alter) the standard orchestra-concert experience - could you provide an example?
• In 2002, Spano announced his intention to step down from the Music Director position in Brooklyn at the end of the 2003-04 season, remaining as an advisor, and then principal guest conductor, until 2007. - a bit awkwardly worded
• By then, Spano was ensconced in his new position, as Music Director of the Atlanta Symphony Orchestra. - I love the word "ensconced," but I am not entirely sure it is the best choice here.
• After some troubled years for the orchestra in the 1990's,[18][8] and despite his would-be gala debut as Music Director being marred by the tragedies of 9/11 just four days earlier,[18] Spano's tenure has been judged by most to be a lift to the orchestra's spirits, as well as its artistic standards, which are generally seen as having improved. - awkwardly worded
• I wonder if you could separate the "Awards" from the "Recordings" or if you could somehow make the "Recordings" section easier to read. Right now, the awards are buried amongst the publication information.
• I noticed that most of your sources are from major newspaper like the New York Times; that is good, but what about the publications that are for the classical music world? Certainly they have talked about Spano? What about Gramophone, for example?
• You say in your comments above that you have left out Spano's philosophy of music, but I would definitely include that. Wikipedia is more expansive than most encyclopedias and since Spano is a conductor, his philosophy of music is certainly relevant to his "notability."
• You might also think about including more pictures. Are there free or fair use images of him conducting, for example?
• If you want to go for FA, you should probably fix the red links either by de-linking or creating stub pages for them.
• This article needs a very brief copyedit. There are tiny problems with commas and other minor writing problems. Awadewit 16:28, 28 March 2007 (UTC)

Feeder (band)

I have recieved a peer review for the article, and cleaned up the points made. I then sent the article for a Good Article review which was unsucsessful.

I am looking for a series of peer reviews from at least ten wikipedians (more if possible), so I can get a good idea of what would be universially considered as a Good Article across the Wikipedia community :-).

Marcus Bowen 20:37, 25 March 2007 (UTC)

JHMM13

Based on the backlog, I think you'll be lucky to get 3 reviews. Here are my suggestions for your article:

• The lead doesn't need to have so many notes. It should be a summary of the rest of the article where are these claims are made in full at which time you should probably reference the information.
• Try to consolidate some of the paragraphs in the lead.
• "The band are..." vs. "The band is..." Is the first form a typically British English usage? I've only ever heard it in use for things like "Arsenal are running up and down the pitch" whereas in American English we'd often say "Arsenal is running..." I'm just double-checking to see if it's a grammar error or just a variation in dialects. In the second case, leave it as is, of course.
• You should be able to obtain fair use images of the album covers. Check album articles for the fair use rational.
• Is there any literature on the band yet? If not, don't worry about it as long as your web refs are legit.
• In the last section, there seems to be a lot of listing going on caused by sudden news of the band and a fan attaching it to the end of the article. Try to smooth this out into prose and figure out if some of it isn't useful. If you can, also try to flesh out the sections on the other articles.
• Check out other band articles for ideas on more sections and more information. Here's a good link for you.

That's all I have at the moment. I hope this is useful to you, JHMM13 08:48, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Maybe an overall copyediting of the article could make the prose flow better. These are some problematic sentences IMO:

• "Displaying a vein of Pixies and Smashing Pumpkins influenced rock in their earlier sound, they have further incorporated elements of piano driven rock ..." Who influenced rock? Feeder? Is the subject the same all the way in thi sentence?
• "They both then moved to London, to become sound engineers, and recruited a bass player for their new band called 'Reel' and was later fired, and became 'Rain Dancer', in which that band didn't work out either." And recruited ... and was fired ... and became? I lost the subjects here.
• "The Singles (2006) Feeder returned to the studio with this time Stephen Street working as the bands producer, to record three new tracks to appear on their then forthcoming singles collection The Singles." Is this sentence OK? Why "The Singles" are both in the beginning, and at the end of the sentence.
• "The year ended with a small tour of London playing The Roundhouse and The Coronet. Two of these gigs seen guest appearances from The Sugababes and Jamelia. The gigs were in aid of War Child." Maybe a bit choppy?

• When we quote, we do not quote; we just "quote".
• I saw a criticism for wikilinking single years in the GA review. Well, it was not accurate. You can link per MoS single years if they are e.g. "2004 in music" or "2006 in British music" as you do.

In general, I still believe the article is entitled to be GA.--Yannismarou 07:39, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Miriam Rivera

I have been attempting to source a lot of unsourced statements and information in the Miriam Rivera article, including:

• birthdate
• place of birth
• aliases
• work in pornography
• claims about a recent hospitalization

I have also been trying to limit the citations to reliable published sources. Many exist from 2004, when the subject was in the public eye. However, other sources, including a message board and blog for sex workers and people attracted to them keeps getting inserted as a reliable source. I'm seeking outside opinions regarding the quality of sources after a lot of back and forth with an editor who insists WP:IAR trumps all policy regarding sourcing and reliability. Jokestress 16:31, 22 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

I have expressed my opinion in the article's talk page, and my reservations towards blogs. I am happy to see that the situation is calmer now there. Now, I understand the difficulty to source the information the article needs, but I don't think I can offer any original ideas. The article, as it stands now, is a start-class article; with some work and expansion it could get B.--Yannismarou 07:24, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

hfarmer

I personally have not inserted anything into that article in quite a while. Look at the history of the article. I give Jokestress credit for writing a good article and urger her not to remove anything more. I also understand that their are some valid WP policy reasons for being cautious about the sources.. To be honest it seems as if Jokestress has problems with using hungangels as a source. As she said "However, other sources, including a message board and blog for sex workers and people attracted to them keeps getting inserted as a reliable source.(Jokestress)" So if it were a newspaper ran by and for transsexuals who are in adult entertainment would she still mention the fact that they are in adult entertainment? Why does that matter to her? Certainly people in adult entertainment would know who was who in those video's and pictures, Right?

I would rate the current article highly thanks mostly to Jokestress. However, I mean If it does not mention the following well known facts.

• aliases -- a common practice among the population of which she is a part.
• work in pornography -- A well known and undisputed fact, reportedly admitted to by her on There's Something About Miriam
• Facts about a recent violent attack and hospitalization -- will have to be added eventually.

Without those this will be a very incomplete biography. --Hfarmer 16:09, 1 April 2007 (UTC)

The Bus Uncle

As it stands, the article about the Bus Uncle, Roger Chan Yuet Tung is a Good Article. Last year, it was nominated for FA status, but failed. The major reason was the lack of citations. Anyway, I started improving the article over the last month.

I have improved the grammar, rearranged the layout, separated important points into different subsections, added fair use rationales to all 4 pictures and added citations to many paragraphs made in the article (through newspapar articles, magazine articles, radio programs, news reports and even a TV drama episode).

I would like the article be reviewed again, to see if there is any more room for improvement so as to reach FA level. Thanks--Kylohk 09:59, 22 April 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

I liked the article very much! I think it could go for FA status, but A-Class review in our project and GA review give you room for more feedback before the final FA nomination. Some (minor mostly) remarks:

• All you photos are fair-use ones. In the past, some FA reviewers did not like that, but I am not sure if this is still a problem.
• "Nevertheless, he was not charged with any of these offences." It looks like an orphan stubby paragraph. Maybe you could merge it and connect it better with the previous analysis.
• Maybe you could enrich the sociological aspects of the incident, by enriching with more scholar analysis "A closer look at life in Hong Kong".
• "Effects on popular culture in Hong Kong" could be also enriched. How is it explained the popularity of this incident among the society? They actually became stars those involved in the incident!! Is there any scholar or media analysis about that?
• I think that in "References" you should put all the sources you mention in "Notes".
• "Although the session was widely reported, many believed it was artificially created news and unworthy of front-page attention." Uncited. When you use expressions like "many believed" etc. citing is appropriate to avoid WP:WEASEL. The same with "Nonetheless, others denied any social insights could be gleamed from the video clip, arguing that the frenzy was artificially created by sensationalist newspapers in order to boost circulation and profits."--Yannismarou 11:40, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

Reply 1

Thank you for your review. I was getting worried that no one would ever bother to read it! Anyway, I made some changes based on your comments:

• The Aftermath session is merged with the Legal Issues one. After the nevertheless sentence, you will come to the part where he was assaulted in the restaurant. After all, if he were charged by the police, he could not possibly be hired.
• In the effects on popular culture in Hong Kong section, I've added an incident involving a student and teacher in school and their usage of the catch phrases. Detail has been added about the TV sitcom episode.
• I have added another viewpoint in the "Close look at life" session, it is to do with people's inconsideration in public.
• A reference has been added to the Media ethics session. It is an editorial criticizing a newspaper company's fabrication of news.

If there is anything else that I should pay attention to, please let me know.--Kylohk 15:39, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch 02:29, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

Reply 2

Let me reply to your comments 1 by 1.

• I agree with the point made about British spelling, and I have adjusted the spellings accordingly to make use of British spellings.
• Some redundant words have been removed, some retained, if I consider them to disrupt the continuity if the article.
• The heading comment is irrelevant because the name of the Video is called "The Bus Uncle", hence it begins with a The.
• The comment about the measurements is incorrect. The . Ng mentioned is taken from the phrase "Dr. Ng", where it stands for Doctor Ng, with Ng being the surname.

Cheers.--Kylohk 13:05, 6 May 2007 (UTC)

• The peer review is script generated so it sometimes makes mistakes (like the header or Dr. Ng). Keep up the good work, Ruhrfisch 11:56, 7 May 2007 (UTC)

Michael Schumacher

Current GA on the controversial and recently retired German racing driver. We're making a final push to get this article to FA standard and found previous reviews from this group on Tom Pryce and Clay Regazzoni particularly useful. Particular points of interest are: has a neutral point of view been achieved? Does the article cover the topic in the right level of detail for a general Wikipedia audience? Thanks in advance for your comments. 4u1e 15:06, 18 April 2007 (UTC)

Comments

This article is really nice, good job! The detail level seems quite reasonable. As for the POV concerns, other than a few very minor wording issues, I didn’t really see anything that would concern me.

A couple concerns I had: some unlinked (potential) jargon you might want to check out: “canteen” "the season finale", "wet races" "Silverstone test", "first podium" vs. "first victory" how are they different?, “black flag”, “downforce”, “pole position”. Also, in the "career section" I kind of felt cheated, like the ending was given away at the very beginning, I would start with his debut (this could even be the section "intro") and work chronologically.

• Pole position, black flag linked. Downforce already linked at the first appearance. Canteen's not jargon, it's just another word for cafeteria. Silverstone test seems to have disappeared, so I guess Buc's covered that. Buc's also covered wet races, although I did think that was very clear from the context! Podium = finishing in first three, Win = win: I'll try and clarify that, if it's not done already. Thanks for taking the trouble to comment! 4u1e 16:38, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

My pleasure, good luck during FAC.

A few other nit-picks:

• For continuity, perhaps repeat his vitals in the first paragraph of the "early years" section, (Michael Schumacher was born January 3, 1969, in Hürth Hermülheim, Germany to parents....), also you might want to mention his brother Ralf here since he is discussed later in the article. Change: "Schumacher was served as the president…”
• "Jordan challenged Benetton in the UK courts, but lost the case." - Why did he challenge them, I must have missed something what was his beef? "the more advanced and powerful Williams of Hill and Prost," please include first names here. "Electronic trickery" - edges on POV, could an example be provided? A mention of the deaths of Senna and Ratzenberger should probably be first, before the cheating allegations, plus no citations?

• Jordan challenged Benetton because he already had an agreement in principle (a form of legal agreement) with Schumacher for the rest of the season, which he felt was broken by Schumacher signing with Benetton. That was all in the article, but I've rearranged a bit: Does it read clearer now?

Yes much better, Thanks! --DO11.10 19:21, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

• Hill and Prost in full at first appearance - Done.
• change order of cheating and deaths. Done.
• 'Electronic trickery' (the term is taken from McLaren's own site by the way, so isn't really intended to be derogatory or imply cheating!) and citations I will cover as I go through doing hardcopy references. 4u1e 16:13, 23 April 2007 (UTC)

Done4u1e 17:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• “Leading by a single point going into the final race in Australia, Schumacher and Hill collided, both drivers taken out of the race. Schumacher thus became the first German to win the Formula One world championship.” - Who was leading? How exactly did the collision affect the outcome, there is a bit of a disconnect here?

I think this has been dealt with. 4u1e 17:41, 25 April 2007 (UTC)

• “…Finnish driver Mika Häkkinen joined the list of Schumacher's rivals” - “rivals” sounds a tiny bit POV, serious contenders? Change: “The championship fight came would come down to the race in Japan. “In December 2006, BusinessF1 magazine claimed Scuderia Ferrari President Luca di Montezemolo pushed for Schumacher's ousting.” - citation?
• “The helmet keeps the driver breathing and cool by funneling directed airflow through fifty holes to cool” - reword, this sounds odd
• “Family and off-track life” feels a bit listy could it be better worked into prose?

All in all, this is a great article. Good job and good luck! Please feel free to contact me if you need clarification of any of these points.--DO11.10 03:56, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Hanne Blank

This article needs a thorough general review.

The subject is a contemporary historian and author with a new book coming out within a week (by March 20, 2007) for U.S. nationwide distribution. Subject of book is the history of virginity in the Western World.

Because her previous books/publications have been via relatively smaller publishers, and because she's had a varied and interesting career (not always just a historian or just an author), it's been very difficult to find and use secondary sources. Many sources are primary, currently, and could probably use work (it may be possible to find secondary sources now that the primary sources are provided).

It would be grand to get this article in tip-top shape, but I don't know what the interpreted rules are and where the wiggle room is. Good article would also be great, but a B would be fine too.

Finally, because the picture I submitted still hasn't been processed through m:OTRS, I didn't feel comfortable submitting this for Did You Know... consideration, but please let me know if that should also be done at this stage.

Thank you in advance for your time, whoever gets to this. --MalcolmGin 17:33, 16 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

I think this article is between stub and start-class. In order a peer-review to be useful, I think former improvement is needed. Some initial remarks and suggestions:

• Read and implement WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article, in order to bring this article to at least B-Class status.
  • I did read and implement, what I thought was comprehensively, the recommendations in WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. Can you please clarify what parts you feel I missed?
    • You may have done it all fine, but in order to get it to B-Class status, you do need more material and a better structure. Right now, the prose is limited, and with no appropriate structure (lead, sections, maybe sub-sections). As it is now, it is a fine start article, but I am afraid it cannot go higher.--Yannismarou 09:56, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Okay, I will leave the fleshing out to others, beyond what I can find in published book reviews (which are beginning to come out now). Reviews tend to be short on biographical data, but what's published is certainly fair game. I can't really flesh out the article with private info I know anyway, since it's not published via a reliable source, but I will also be crippled by the boundaries she and I draw between public and private (e.g. I won't use my special knowledge to unfairly bias my search techniques to dig up stuff I think I might be able to find in reliable sources about her - I'll leave that to other folks who are more inclined to search that stuff out and put it here). So I'm OK with the article not achieving the B rating due to my in-built limitations. --MalcolmGin 14:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
• Use Template:cite news and Template:cite web for your online sources and references.
  • Thank you for the pointer to Template:cite news and Template:cite web. I'll implement those in the article as soon as I have time to devote to thatDone. I reviewed several authors' bios to see whether you intended your recc here for the Works/Bibliography section as well, and concluded that you probably didn't, but if you did, please let me know and I'll convert those entries too. MalcolmGin
• You article has no proper structure: lead, sections etc. Read WP:LEAD, WP:EDIT, Help:Section, and expand your article.
  • I'll also review the article for the proper structure and implement when I can. I will note here that the article was recently converted to the same format as {{subst:Biography}} by me very recently, so the mechanical parts of structure that are missing from the template are essentially because there was no material I had to put in them. Thank you anyhow for the links and pointers. MalcolmGin
• Maybe you could find some secondary sources through Google book or Google scholar, but I can't be sure.
  • I'm pretty familiar with the extant primary and secondary sources about Hanne Blank. I have been her life partner for 10 years or so. I'll give the sources/scrapbooks another pass for public information I can use, but I don't think there's (yet) a lot of hope there. Do reviews of books count as "news"? I do know that book reviews for her latest have come out/are starting to come out now. MalcolmGin
    • • Book reviews are reliable printed sources, and could be used.--Yannismarou 09:52, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
        • Cool, I'll add bio new information as it comes out via the reviews. --MalcolmGin 14:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)
• Expand your paragraphs or merge them. It is not nice to have stubby paragraphs.
  • I'll do what I can to merge the paragraphs sensibly. I personally cannot expand them without breach of privacy, but others are of course welcome to. MalcolmGin
• Place inline citations straight after the punctuation mark and not before.
  • Done, thank you. MalcolmGin
• Try not to have so many external jumps (links to online sources within the text) in your prose, and prefer to cite these online external sources through Template:cite news and Template:cite web as proper citations.
  • Done. I left in 3 external jumps to issues/articles not in Wikipedia. All others link internally to extant Wikipedia articles. MalcolmGin
• About the "See also" section read here, and format it accordingly. You could also get rid of it by incorporating the links there in your main text. And, of course, we do not link the WP:Biography in the See also section!
  • For the "See also" section, I'll definitely do the reading done. On the other hand, regarding your And, of course, we do not link the WP:Biography in the See also section!, I think this must have been an artifact of my misunderstanding of the {{subst:Biography}} template, in that those links were in the template, and I thought they were standard for Biography articles. I'll know better next time. MalcolmGin
• I see confirmation of release under GFDL has been received at OTRS.--Yannismarou 13:49, 20 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Yes, the OTRS has confirmed GFDL of the headshot, which is good, but I think I'll wait to implement your suggestions before trying to submit the article for Did You Know consideration. Thanks again! --MalcolmGin 03:20, 21 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks again, Yannismarou --MalcolmGin 14:39, 23 March 2007 (UTC)

Benjamin "Pap" Singleton

I wrote this article last fall and would like to have it peer reviewed for quality, readability, etc. I want it to be a Good Article. Please be aware that this article has been the target of sporadic vandalism over the past few months, although nothing recently. Also, there was a controversy over the article title and naming protocols. There are no photographs available for this article. There are two extant pictures of Singleton, but both are owned and copyrighted by the Kansas State Historical Society. One user tried to illegally insert one of them and it was deleted. StudierMalMarburg 14:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Same issues as noted below, particularly the lack of precise footnotes. Your list of references is good, but you need to let your reader know exactly where (reference & page) your various pieces of information came from. One other thought -- when I taught history, I had a copy of the transcript of the hearings Singleton went through in, I believe, the US Congress. (Clearly people who lost a significant number of sharecroppers through the Exoduster movement were not happy about and tried to have it stopped.) If I can locate these transcripts, which I found on line, I'll post the link here. Jancarhart 16:16, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Just found the testimony I spoke of: Benjamin Singleton Congressional testimony; April 17, 1880 (PBS)Jancarhart 16:27, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

MarkBuckles

• Only one in-line citation. References are good, but we need to know what information comes from where specifically (most people use footnotes). Not sure if this is an absolute requirement for GA status, but most have that and certainly all FA's require it.
• There's a lot of bolded text. I've hardly ever seen this in articles I've read. If it's important enough, wikilink it and make a short stub about it.
• Why are the first subject headings subsections? (=== ===) vs. (== ==) ?
• ISBN numbers are helpful for books.
• Watch out for statements that sound subjective like "Such misconceptions are based upon inadequate research." Anything like this needs to be cited specifically for sure or cut.

Hope this helps! Best wishes, MarkBuckles (talk) 13:54, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• • Thank you. It does help. I appreciate your taking the time to read through it. StudierMalMarburg 16:26, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• The lead is short. Check WP:LEAD.
• No picture of him?
• "Although it is known that Benjamin Singleton was born in 1809 ..." Known by whom?
• Add inline citations. Try to have at least one in each sentence, and read WP:CITE.
• Why so many "bolds"? Only the name of Singleton in the lead should be bolded. Nothing else!
• "Singleton remained in Detroit until the end of the Civil War.". Which civil war?! Probably the American, but you don't say that; you only wikilink it!
• "Unfortunately, white landowners were unwilling to bargain with Singleton and would not sell land to blacks at anything other than outrageous prices." Avoid POV expressions like unforunately. Maybe (not sure though) this sentence could also be regarded as POV: "Disgusted by the posturing of political leaders who failed to deliver on their promises of freedom and equality for former slaves".
• "Many histories of Benjamin Singleton incorrectly state ..." Weasel; which historians?
• "Such misconceptions are based upon inadequate research." Avoid such expressions; they are ofter considered POV and one-sided. In general, "Misconceptions" should be rewritten to reflect a more objective approach to the subject. You may have to change even the heading.--Yannismarou 13:57, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

W. H. R. Rivers

We are wanting to improve this article to be a good article. Idea's for structural improvement or how to expand the article would be most beneficial. John Vandenberg 22:27, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

*Exeunt* Ganymead

Having briefly glanced at the article, there are some structural things that pop out to me:

• • Not all quotes should use the Cquote format. Only long quotes (a paragraph or more) should utilize this format. The remainder of the quotes can be incorporated in the text with "regular" quotation marks. Additionally, the sources for all quotes should be footnoted.
  • In the first paragraph under the first heading, you shouldn't have an external link in the text, especially when the work is on Wikicommons with a link provided. Fixed John Vandenberg 09:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • The references should link to the title of the source, etc. AND include the page numbers for where the specific information being cited is found. This will vastly expand the number of references you have.
  • The text of the entire poem, Anthropological Thoughts, is unncessary. Select a few quotes from it, but the entire poem is not encyclopedic. Fixed John Vandenberg 21:31, 15 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Try summing up some of the quotes, there really are too many quotes about him. They are interested, but they break up the text.

Overall, this is a good start to the article and there is a good deal of good information. Really, I think the quotes are the biggest problem and it is easy to remedy. Cheers! *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:43, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for the review. I have tackle one of them now; the hold up was that I wanted to put all of the book on wikisource before removing the link. I have struck that review point so everyone can see what is left to do; I hope that isn't inappropriate. Next, I'm going to tackle Anthropological Thoughts. John Vandenberg 09:48, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• The lead is short. Per WP:LEAD it needs expansion.
• Per WP:MoS inline citations go straight after the pm; not before.
• The article is full of stubby pars like this one:"Rivers suffered from a stammer that never truly left him, he also had no visual memory. He dedicated Chapter II of his book Instinct and the Unconscious to describe his lack of visual memory." Read here, and think about reworking some parts of your article.
• "He later concluded that something must have happened to him on the top floor of his house so terrible- at least to a child- that he had blocked not just the memory of the place and event but the ability to remember visually in general; in the words of Barker's character Billy Prior, Rivers "put his mind's eye out"." Uncited.
• "Pat Barker, in the third novel in her Regeneration Trilogy, The Ghost Road suggests a reason for these problems but Rivers himself, although he may have had some idea of the causes, does not appear to cite them fully in his writings." Too vague. What reason? What idea? I'm lost!
• "However, these things did not seem to affect his academic performance." Not the most encyclopedic expression.
• I see a series of uncited quotes.
• "He was made a fellow of the Royal Society in 1908 and won the Society's gold medal in 1914 (information obtained from Rivers fonds)" Why in parenthesis and not a proper inline citation, also using Template:cite web or Template:cite news?
• "(Head 1923)" Mixed citing systems.
• Are you sure about all these quotes and the way you put them? IMO they interrupt to often the prose. Maybe you could incorporate them more in the prose, in order to make the article flow better.
• "Rivers' methods are often, somewhat unfairly, said to have stemmed from Sigmund Freud". WP:POV.
• "however, this is not truly the case as you can read both in Pat Barker's novels and in the words of friends such as Myers." POV and uncyclopedic prose ("as you can see").
• "Although he was aware of Freud's theories and methods, he did not necessarily prescribe to them (See Pat Barker's Regeneration pg 28- 32- Penguin Books- for his interpretation on dreams. For this, see also Rivers' Conflict and Dream for his methods of dream analysis and his thoughts on Freud)." Again mixed citing system.
• "As such, he really is a pioneer in his field- both for his new methods and for the fact that he went against the grain of the beliefs of the time'. Uncited and possibly POV.
• "Sassoon came to him in 1917". Per MoS we don wikilink single years or partial dates; only full dates.
• "In Pat Barker's novels and in Rivers' works (particularly Conflict and Dream) we get a sense of the turmoil the doctor went through." "We"? Again, have in mind that you are writing an encyclopedic article; not an essaie.
• What a loooooong citation by Jean Moorcroft Wilson!
• No reason to have books and papers in bold as you do at the end of World War One. Per MoS, it is just italics.
• "Rivers signed the papers as he lay dying in the Evelyn Nursing Home [2] following an unsuccessful emergency operation. He had an extravagant funeral at St. John's[2] in accordance with his wishes as he was an expert on funeral rites and was put to rest in the chuchyard of St Giles Church, Cambridge[2]." You cite the same source three times in just one sentence. Why?!
• I don't see a reason for a "Quotes" section. It looks like trivia. If these quotes are useful for your story incorporate them in the main biography. And the second one of these quotes s again tooooo long. Turn it into your own prose and incorporate it in your text.

A good start definitely, but it needs much more work, in order to get a proper encyclopedic article. Right now with the quotes, the short paragraphs, the POV assessments etc. it looks like a very nice report of Rivers' life, but it is not a proper encyclopedic article. Have a look at some of the recently promoted FA biographies. It could be helpful in terms of structure and prose.--Yannismarou 13:34, 18 March 2007 (UTC)

Lily Parr

She's currently a Start and I'd like her to have something better... Fluffball70 19:17, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Citations go after the pun mark; not before (per MoS).
• You start with a phrase maybe not adequate for starting a biography: "Although she was sometimes referred to as being 6ft tall, she was actually 5ft 10in. Unlike women's teams today, Lily played". And I see this phrase in the opening of a section towards the end of the article: "Lily was born in in a rented house in Union St, Gerrards Bridge, which at the time was the most deprived and poverty striken part of St. Helens. She was the 4th child of 7 to George and Sarah(Sal) Parr." Most often "Early years" go before "Career". Maybe you should read carefully some FA biographies, and then reconsider your structure.
• "Personal Life" is undercited.
• Format properly your citations, making use of Template:cite web, Template:cite news, Template:cite journal and Template:cite book.--Yannismarou 20:46, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Valerio Ricetti

This article has the makings of a featured article and that would be a good goal for it. Please review the article to help it advance to the next level. -- Jreferee 23:00, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

It needs work. This is my review:

• The lead is not properly written. It is short and IMO does not consistute a proper summary of the page.
• Most sections atre uncited or undercited. See for instance "Early life in Australia".
• "Unfortunately he left the brothel somewhat absentmindedly leaving his wallet and its contents behind." Avoid adverbs like "unfortunately" that could be regarded as POV.
• Many one-sentence paragraphs that make the prose listy. Merge or expand.
• For quotes we use qms (""); not italics as you often do in "World War II internment".
• For web sources, you can use Template:cite web or Template:cite news.--Yannismarou 19:03, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

Peripitus

In addition to the above comments:

• There are 3 sources that should be incorporated into the inline references rather than being noted as sources alone.
• Should read and add material from From Broken Hill to Scenic Hill - the true story and part of Griffith's history, the Scenic Hill hermit Valerio Ricetti, 1898-1952 - Ceccato, Peter (2001). This seems available a Griffith library and possibly others
• unlink partial dates like 1952
• add non-breaking spaces per the style manual so 16 [[hectares]] -> 16&nbsp ;[[hectares]]

- Peripitus (Talk) 00:30, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Johann Pachelbel

This is a top quality classical music biography, and was sadly recently rated B by a non-musician (as far as I can tell). My relative inexperience on Wikipedia has discouraged me from changing this rating, but I think that other biography reviewers will see what I mean. A musicologist should preferably make the decision! Matt.kaner 11:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

I've taken a glace at the article and the main issue to strike me is the lack of citations. For this article to move up to GA class it would have to be fully cited. Additionally, the article lacks a comprehensive critical analysis of Pachelbel's work. There is some information on his reputation by other composers in the section "Posthumous influence and the rise of popularity of the Canon in D", but how do musicologists regard him? Otherwise, the article is well written and nicely organized. Is there not an image of Pachelbel? That should be included as well. *Exeunt* Ganymead | Dialogue? 16:49, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

I thought this was an excellent article. I have played classical piano for over 20 years now, so I come to the article with some musical knowledge. Here are my suggestions:

• A lot of the prepositions and prepositional phrases in the article are not quite right. There are also missing articles and a few awkwardly placed clauses. You might think about having the League of Copyeditors look at this or having a trusted wikipedia editor review it for you. These problems seemed isolated to the Biography section.
• The article cites a lot of people in the biography section as if the reader knows who they are; they should be identified with a phrase so that we understand why we care about Pachelbel's relationship to them. I noticed this problem in particular in the 1673-1690 section.
• The Works section, while an excellent analysis of Pachelbel's music, may be a little too technical at times for the general reader. The editors might consider defining some of the terms to make it more accessible.
• I assume the reason this article was given as "B" rating is because of its lack of citations. See WP:CITE. If you want to submit it for GA or FA, you will need to add quite a few citations. Most of the musical analysis has no citation at all.
• Some small writing issues that FA reviewers tend to latch onto and that you will want to fix before submitting it to FAC: 1) first-person (I saw some "we" constructions); 2) redundancies ("early youth"); and 3) red-links (create the page or de-link).

Overall, a very good page. Awadewit 05:22, 9 March 2007 (UTC)

Comments by MarkBuckles

Wow, what a nice article!! Just needs more inline citations, especially when the reader might have a question about the source of a somewhat subjective statement. Here are two examples from the lede:

• "However, he did not have much influence on the most important composers of the late Baroque such as Johann Sebastian Bach." Later on this is qualified with the statement "He did influence Johann Sebastian Bach (indirectly: the young Johann Sebastian was tutored by Johann Christoph Bach, who studied with Pachelbel)". This is a bit confusing.
• "[Canon in D] is somewhat unrepresentative of the rest of his oeuvre." How so? Who says?

Best wishes, MarkBuckles (talk) 04:12, 12 March 2007 (UTC)

David Koechner

I've taken the time to expand the requested research. My goal is get the page to at least a B rating or higher.

I'm looking for any suggestions on what else needs to be done. I've expanded the page considerably since it was rated a Start, but am looking for advice on what else needs to be done.See me let go 13:45, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Awadewit

I'm not as familiar with the living-person biography as I am with the dead-person biography, but I would start by saying that your sources seem a little sketchy. Are there not more reliable places to obtain this information from? Certainly USA Today would not be the best place to start. Also, the "Personal Life" section seems a little abbreviated; most historical biographies begin with where and when the person was born and then move into their career. Perhaps contemporary biographies are different? Finally, some of the language of the lead is repeated in the article; perhaps you could reword so that it is not identical? Awadewit 12:02, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice start, but it still needs some work. This is my review:

• "Koechner befriend Dave 'Gruber' Allen, forming The Naked Trucker & T-Bones Show." You mean "befriended"?
• "In January 2007, Koechner's Naked Trucker & T-Bones Show". Per MoS, it is recommended to link only full dates (e.g. January 1, 2007). Years in music or television etc. (e.g. [[2006 in mussic|2006]]) are, of course, fine.
• IMO the chronological order is fine, and there is no problem with the "personal life" section being where it is. A "flaw" I can find is that there is very few information about his early life; his parents, details about schools, studying etc.
• "improv guru". What is that? And I can find no article in wikipedia.
• "improv act". Huh?! What are all these abbreviations?!
• "a character he'd been playing on comedy stages for a few years." "He'd"? Maybe a bit uncyclopedic. Try to be formal.
• "The stage act, a mix of stand-up comedy and off-color country songs, became a hit on the Hollywood improv circuit, ultimately landing television performances on Late Night with Conan O'Brien and Real Time with Bill Maher." Any source, verifying that it was indeed a hit?
• "MTV's initial press release accidentally listed Fred Armisen instead of David Koechner[6], but eventually corrected the error on their website [7],..." Per MoS, inline citations go after the punctuation mark, and not before. ALso, try to have them at the end of the sentence. Cite in the middle, only if it absolutely necessary for emphasis reason.
• "As of February 1, 2007, Koechner has guest-starred, both in person and by phone, on five episodes of the series. David Koechner's frequent work with actors Ferrell, Carell & Jack Black, have lead some critics and journalists to point out his association with the media-dubbed "Frat Pack".[10][11][12]" Not nice to have three citations in a row. Try to combine them: see Tourette syndrome or Battle of Edson's Ridge for ideas.
• "David Koechner, who majored in Political Science at the University of Missouri ..." I think I read that earlier.
• Your philmography is tagged.
• "External links" go after references.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 21:37, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

David Koechner page rating?

Is it ok to have two citations in a row? That's what the tourette's page has. See me let go 18:31, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

The suggested changes have been made, and someone added extended information on Koechner's period at Saturday Night Live. What else needs to be done? It's not still a "Start" article, is it? See me let go 07:34, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

• You are still not properly wikilinking some years-dates. I repeat: full dates are only wikilinkedl; not single years - check WP:MoS.
• Some reviewers could regard the "Filmography" as long. You could create a seperate article per WP:SS, and in this article just keep a "Selected filmography", as it happens in other FAs.
• IMO Personal life is written like trivia, although it is one compact paragraph. The sentences are seamlessly connected; only the first sentence is about personal life (is then the section's title accurate?), and the rest of it is artistic activities, political and personal preferences etc.--Yannismarou 20:57, 15 March 2007 (UTC)

Clay Regazzoni

January's collaborative effort from WikiProject Formula One. Currently rated at 'B', and I suspect we could get it through a GA review, but would like to have a view from outside the project on how it reads to a non-expert and how it could be made more engaging for a non specialist audience. Thanks. 4u1e 23:24, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Oldelpaso

Generally good. I'd probably pass it if reviewing it for GA. A few comments:

• Having a subheading for each year makes the prose a little stop-start. Removing these and simply having the sections for each constructor would improve flow.

Done. 4u1e 18:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• Regazzoni was killed when the Chrysler Voyager he was driving collided head-on into the rear of a lorry If was into the rear then the two vehicles were not head-on.

Done. Although I'd like a better reference - newspaper writers are too prone to use of clichés like 'head on'. 4u1e 18:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• It is obvious that the 1980 accident ended his F1 career, but this should be stated explicitly instead of being inferred.

Done. 4u1e 18:05, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

• A couple of statements are a little too gushing e.g. his rehabilitation became an inspirational story. A couple of things need referencing: Regazzoni won back his racing license despite the prejudices of the authorities and Tecno offered Regazzoni the use of one of their F3 chassis for 1967, where his reliable, fast performances earnt him the offer of a works Tecno drive in Formula Two for the following year.
• What were the reasons for his changes of team?
• I don't know whether the material will be available, but the Personal life section could do with being fleshed out a little. For example, where did he live in adult life?

Hope this helps. Oldelpaso 13:49, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks - good comments. I'll have a stab at implementing them. Cheers. 4u1e 16:38, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "A single season with BRM then lead Regazzoni back to Ferrari for a further three years." Maybe past tense ("led") is better here?

Done. Thanks for the catch. 4u1e 22:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• "Personal and early life". IMO this chapter is very stubby. Can't you enrich it with more infos about his early years and family?

Ideally yes, but I'm not sure I've got the material to do it. Noted and will keep an eye out. 4u1e 22:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

• Some sections such as "Sports car racing" have no citations, and others such as "1970-1972: Ferrari" or "After Formula One" are undercited. Try to have at least one citation for each paragraph.

Comment: With some of the F1 paras it's because there is no more information there than can be gleaned from the championship results. I don't believe in using inline refs for race results, because the articles would be full to overflowing with them, so that's the one thing I use a 'blanket' reference for (see 'Footnotes'). I think the real problem you've identified is that those sections could use beefing up in terms of content. I'll see what can be done. 4u1e 09:19, 11 March 2007 (UTC)

• "1978: Shadow" is also stubby. Maybe you could merge it with the following years, but again this may be just my personal preference!--Yannismarou 13:22, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

For some reason that season is always covered very briefly. If anything it would be merged with the preceding season (also with a small team, also not much to say). 4u1e 22:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Comment Can I just say thanks to Yannismarou and Oldelpaso for the useful comments. This has been (sadly) far more helpful than a standard Peer Review, I really appreciate the time you've taken to comment. 4u1e 22:18, 14 March 2007 (UTC)

Paolo Uccello

I have recently given this article an assessment of class B, but I believe that with a peer review and appropriate follow-up, that it is a likely candidate for Good Article status. Thanks, Lini 02:20, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

This is a nice start. The article is particularly well-illustrated which is so important for an artist. Here are my suggestions.

• General comment 1: I might consider dividing his life into subsections: Early life and apprenticeship, Florence, etc.
• General comment 2: I might also consider including a separate section on Paolo Uccello's aesthetic so that you can delve into an analysis of his paintings. You might have a subsection here on his artistic legacy or even make that a separate section altogether.
• General comment 3: You have several one-sentence paragraphs. Can you work them into the narrative or expand them?
• He had some influence on twentieth century art and literary criticism. - what kind of influence? Can you give us a hint in the lead?
• His nickname Uccello came from his fondness for painting birds. - could you simply add "Uccello, which means "bird" in Latin,.."
• His father, Dono di Paolo, was a barber-surgeon from Pratovecchio near Arezzo, his mother’s name was Antonia. - awkwardly worded
• Tell us why it is significant that Paolo was friends with Donatello (alas, not everyone knows who Donatello was).
• Actual quotes from Vasari would add to the article. Ex:

Vasari writes that people thought this was a great and beautiful achievement.

His depiction of a fierce lion fighting with a venom-spouting snake was espeically appreciated by Vasari.

• Paolo was asked to paint a number of distempered scenes of animals for the house of the Medici. - I am not sure what you mean by "distempered".
• Should he be referred to as Paolo or Uccello? It seems odd to refer to him as the bird. What do scholarly sources do?
• Uccello was married to Tomassa Malifici by 1453, because in that year Donato (named after Donatello) was born, and in 1456 his wife gave birth to Antonia. - oddly worded
• He painted a predella with the Miracle of the Profaned Host part of a monumental altarpiece. - briefly tell us what a predella is
• With his precise, analytical mind he tried to apply a scientific method to depict objects in three-dimensional space. In particular, some of his studies of the perspective foreshortening of the torus are preserved, and he realised the thus acquired insights in his paintings in form of the mazzocchio. - awkwardly worded
• If you want to go for GA and eventually FA, you will need to have inline citations. WP:CITE I noticed that you used Pope-Hennessy for the list of works (obviously a classic in the field) and have a good list of references. All you need to do is add footnotes in the text to these references.
• I assume that there is no picture of Paolo Uccello to put in the infobox? Awadewit 14:41, 5 March 2007 (UTC)

Aki Jones

I'm aiming to get some advice on how to improve this article to B-Class. Also, I'd hope to get more information, since as an Australian, I know little about NFL. Scalene^{•UserPage•Talk•Contributions•Biography•Є•} 23:36, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

As a Greek I know even less! What I can offer are some general comments: the article is a stub right now, and I do not know if a peer-review can offer much right now. In order to bring this article to B-Class status, first read carefully the WikiProject Biography 11 easy steps to producing at least a B article. Then, you could implement the following suggestions:

• Cite properly your article per WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTES. Proper citing is now a prerequisite for B-Class as well; not just for GA and FA.
• Expand the article with more details, so as to make it a proper biography (personal life, early years, family, more info about his career). Especially, you should expand stubby sections, such as "NFL Career" (and, by the way, avoid to wikilink headings as you did here).
• When the article gets a bit bigger, make a proper lead which will summarize it per WP:LEAD.
• Then, come back for a new peer-review!--Yannismarou 12:59, 10 March 2007 (UTC)

Tom Pryce

Currently a GA, but hoping to get it to an FA. I'm hoping this Peer Review will outline a few possibilties of POV, Weasel Words, etc and a few lines that don't link technical words. Being a person who is interested in Motor Racing, I guess I don't know what is technical and what isn't. Anyway, have fun reviewing the article ;-).--Skully Collins ^Edits 14:25, 28 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Very nice. I think it can easily pass FAC, if it has a better variety of sources. This is my review:

• "Pryce's mother recalled that he was very upset when Clark died at the Hockenheimring in the Spring of 1968." Do not wikilink single years as you did here; only full dates (check WP:MoS).

Done--Skully Collins ^Edits 10:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• Some subsections like "1974" have no citations. Try to have at least one inline citation in each paragraph.
• I'm not sure if "Helmet design" is well-placed there. It interrrupts the story of 1977 - while we follow the story of his career, this section interrupts it, and then, we go back again to 1977 and his death. I you can't incorporate it somewhere else, maybe you could put it after "Death". Again this may be just a personal preference!

Done--Skully Collins ^Edits 10:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• You rely a lot on a single source: Tremayne, David. More than 90% of your citations are from there. This could be a problem in FAC. Can't you vary a bit more your sources.

I guess, but the problem is that Tremayne's source is the only book that actually goes into detail about his career. Other books and websites prefer to go give a brief summary of his career, many of which prefer to talk more about the Race at Kyalami rather then his career as a whole.--Skully Collins ^Edits 10:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

• You don't have to repeat all the details of Tremayne's book (ISBN etc.) in each citations. And another thing you can think about is to seperate "Footnotes" from "References" (the current "References" section is not exactly a "References" section!).--Yannismarou 10:41, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

4u1e has re-formatted the reference section and I've removed the footnote section and merged it with the reference section.--Skully Collins ^Edits 10:09, 7 March 2007 (UTC)

George Bernard Shaw

I have provided new information, supplied citations, deleted errors and organized the structure. Next, I will make the style uniform; it is now patchy because it is composed of contributions by a lot of editors. Before I request a better rating I would like suggestions for improving the content of the article.

Wugo 01:38, 27 February 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

I think that this has the potential to be an excellent article, but it still needs some work. I'm glad someone has taken up this page - Shaw is an important literary figure. Here are my suggestions.

• For such an important figure, I think that you can expand the lead. Right now it seems dominated by small details (such as tree-pruning and vegetarianism) rather than focused on explaining the significance of Shaw and his work to the reader. WP:LEAD
• Infobox: Social realism seems like an ideology to me rather than a genre. Wouldn't play and novel be more appropriate in the genre category?
• There seems to be an excess of dates in the opening of the biography. I'm not sure all of those are necessary.
• Many of your statements simply need more explanation for the reader unfamiliar with Shaw and his work.

He gave this attitude flesh and blood in the prologue of Cashel Byron's Profession, and underscored it in his Treatise on Parents and Children. - what did he say in these works exactly? (we don't necessarily want people to have read entire works to understand the article)

The Perfect Wagnerite, printed in 1898, typifies Shaw’s views on Wagner. - examples?

He made it a forum for considering moral, political and economic issues. - much more needs to be said here - which issues in particular?

His overriding motivation for writing was to further humanitarian and political agendas. - vague - which agendas? (Also when beginning a section, always start again with Shaw, so the reader knows who "he" is.)

• Rather than linking to your source, please cite it in a footnote. Also, if you eventually want to submit this for GA or FA (and I hope you eventually will), this will need many more citations from reputable, scholarly biographies. WP:CITE
• The biography section is quite short given Shaw's importance as a literary figure. Could you flesh that out?
• The "Novels" section should say something about the themes of his novels and how they were received. Also, please change the list into prose.
• Might you also consider including a section on Shaw's style?
• Rather than discussing the publication of Shaw's letters, might you discuss Shaw as a letter-writer? What made him distinctive?
• Perhaps the bit on vegentarianism could be integrated into the biography section?
• Might you also include some information on Shaw's literary legacy? What other playwrights and authors did he influence, for example?
• Also, it would be nice to have a complete list of Shaw's works, not just the ones available online. Awadewit 05:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Judy Garland

I feel the article on Judy Garland is one of the better biographical articles we have on Wikipedia, and I would like to see it progress towards Featured Article Status. Any comments, suggestions, critiques to help us move this article in that direction are greatly appreciated. --Ozgod 15:08, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Hi, Ozgod. I have watched this article for some time now, so I can probably give you some idea of improvements that need to be made before you could consider submitting it to FAC.

• Get rid of the external jumps in the article. The should be turned into footnotes or external links at the bottom of the article. They are not permitted for FAs.
• Further to footnotes and references, you need to have a lot more. The rule of thumb is at least one per paragraph, and more for any assertion that is likely to be challenged.
• The "See Also" section should be expanded.
• The External links section should be pruned. There are far too many for a FA.
• Biographies should be a sub section of further reading. Also, if you used any of the books in the Further Reading or Bio section as refs, they should be noted and removed from the Further reading section. They can be used in one place or the other, but not both (Same goes for web links--if you use them as refs, you can't use them as external links).
• Assuming marriages were discussed in the article (and they should be), then the marriage section at the end should be removed.
• Check the Filmography. Make the red links wikilinks. Some already have articles attached (I have changed a few, but didn't go through the whole list).
• Article becomes very listy in the second half. See what really needs to be included, and what is redundant.

I am sure there are lots more suggestions I can make. These are just what I could think of off the top of my head. It is an excellent idea, doing a Peer Review for this. I suggest after the improvements from the review are implemented, it is submitted for GA before FA. As things stand at the moment, there is far too much work to be done to even consider it as a FAC. By the way, you might want to check out Bette Davis to see what a FA actress bio looks like. Jeffpw 19:04, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Review by Awadewit

• Massively undercited if you want to go for FA. All major claims needs a citation, especially quotations and rumors. I think the previous reviewer mentioned this.
• I think that you should expand the lead so that it reflects the article as a whole. As I understand it, the lead is a summary of the article. It should also probably be longer for an article of this size. WP:LEAD
• I feel that there is far too much attention paid to Garland's appearance in the "Movie Star" section. The "girl next door" bit becomes repetitive and there is no equally in-depth discussion of her acting or singing. In fact, there is no real analysis of her acting or singing in the article at all.
• The "Ancestry", "Unfinished films" and "State" sections seemed superfluous to me. Much in the "Continuing Legacy" and the "Song Tributes" sections also seemed superfluous to me. Like the previous reviewer, I thought that the article had a lot of lists. It was interesting up until that point. What can be cut?
• Interesting. This is the first article I've seen where a woman's marriages are tacked on at the end (usually that happens in biographies of dead, white men). Since you mention them in the narrative, why not include this information there?
• Please don't use television specials or PBS series as references - they are hard to obtain if someone wants to check your facts.
• Why all of the red links? Do you really think that all of those things should have their own page? You might think about de-linking some of them.
• Prune the external links if you want to go for FA. Awadewit 11:20, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Anna Wintour

I was pleasantly surprised when this article, which I'd greatly improved as part of my work on The Devil Wears Prada (currently undergoing a peer review of its own) was given an assessment of A-class this morning despite three statements flagged as needing citations. So I took care of them. Any suggestions before I take it to GAC? Daniel Case 03:56, 4 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Thank you for reading this! I was beginning to worry that no one cared enough.

Much of your very good criticism will probably be taken care of by a forthcoming expansion. Daniel Case 02:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

• I'm afraid the second and the third paragraph repeat the same things. Maybe they should be merged or re-phrased.

• • It's likely that they will be ... I have been doing more research (i.e., reading Jerry Oppenheimer's biography). I had written that because I couldn't see where to put the bit about the sunglasses

• "Her salary is reported to be $2 million a year.[1]" Avoid stubby one-sentence paragraph like this one. Merge or expand.

• • That's because I took something out that wasn't sourced. I have a source for it now, and it can go back in.

• "Politics" is too stubby. If you cannot expand the section merge it with another one.

• • Same thing.

• "There have also been accusations that she has imposed an elitist aesthetic on the magazine, promoting celebrities over fashion personalities and making demands that even prominent subjects change their image before being featured in its pages." Assertions like this one need citing.
  • They are cited further down in the body of the article, but I'll put them in the intro.
• I think you overanalyze The Devil Wears Prada. Most of this material should be moved to the film's or book's article through WP:SS.
  • The film article is long enough as it is, and the book article needs a lot of reworking. Some of it could probably go there, though. I'll see what I can do to trim it down and keep it relevant.

    But it is important.

• "She has often been the target". Personally I do not like a new section to start with "she". Who's she? "Wintour ... " looks to me better. But maybe it is just a personal preference.
• "In Paris in October 2005 ..." The trend is to wikilink full dates (date-month-year) not year alone or month-year. Check WP:MoS about dates.
  • I didn't do that; someone else did.
• "She has often been the target of various animal rights organizations such as PETA who are angered by her use of fur in Vogue, her pro-fur editorials and her refusal to run paid advertisements from animal rights organizations. Undeterred, she continues to use fur in photo spreads. She is routinely assaulted by activists over this matter." Uncited. Try to have at least one citation for each paragraph of your article.
  • Again, cited further on down.
• "Wintour has been accused of exercising ... have also been criticized as being motivated ... despite its heavy reliance on advertising dollars". Mixing styles?
  • Not quite sure what you mean here ...
    • That you mix American with English spelling. Am I wrong? If yes, diregard this comment.--Yannismarou 13:59, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
      • Yes. All three of those are the generally accepted and widely-used American spellings. Daniel Case 17:26, 18 March 2007 (UTC)
• "Popular culture" is a trivia listy section. Especially in FA such sections are not esteemed at all. If you could make it proper prose or incorporate its material in other sections ...--Yannismarou 17:46, 12 March 2007 (UTC)
  • Will do. I can probably use the DWP stuff to springboard that. Daniel Case 02:22, 13 March 2007 (UTC)

Hernando Arias de Saavedra

Looking for a general class assessment and maybe some suggestions for rewording. This was translated from the Spanish version which itself was mostly written by one person, so it could use some more eyes to find flaws. —Dgies^t c 22:38, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

'Ozgod'

The article has a good start, although it seems a little choppy with his lifeline. If more of his early years could be fleshed out, if that information exists out there, as well as the socio-politcal environment that existed during his time as Governor of Buenos Aires.

What political connections did he have?

What effects did his actions have on his city, country even South America, if any?

What effect did his policies have? Are they still enacted today or were they revised later on into a whole new set of policies and ideas?

Was he ever married and did he have children?

What were his years after governor like?

I understand we are talking about someone who has been deceased for almost four hundred years now but those are just some topics you could try researching to expand his article and raise it a B class. If you can find any portraits of him that would help greatly as well. --Ozgod 14:57, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for your input, here is some background:

His wife and children were not in the source es:Hernandarias but I found them in another reference and added them to the infobox. All my source says is "De su matrimonio con doña Jerónima de Contreras, había tenido tres hijas: Gerónima, Isabel y María." or translated "From his marriage to Madame Jerónima de Contreras, he had three daughters: Gerónima, Isabel and María."

I found one drawing of him. While I presume is is very old and therefore PD, I don't actually know how/when it was created.

There is more info in the off-wiki sources I have found which should probably be translated and added... —Dgies^t c 16:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

—Dgies^t c 16:12, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article is almost a stub. If it gets expanded a review can be more useful. For the time being these are a few suggestions:

• It would be nice if you had a picture of him or some other picture relevant to the article.
• Some paragraph have no inline citations. Try to cite properly your articles, so as not to have unsourced material.
• Do not wikilink single years; only full dates. Check WP:MoS.
• "Legacy" is stubby. Can you expand it?--Yannismarou 17:14, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

George Reeves

This seems like could be a Featured article.The topic seems interesting enough to me to be a featured article in the future. Right now to me it seems overly speculative and too lengthy in some parts and not lengthy in others. I'm looking for other editors to comment and suggest directions for the article to bring it to FA status. TheRingess (talk) 09:30, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Angmering

I'm afraid it's certainly not near to FA status at the moment. A few points:

• Right now it appears to be very under-cited, and certainly nowhere near FAC status on that criteria. The entire "Early life and career" and "Military service" sections, for example, have no inline citations at all, which really needs dealing with. "Death" and "Controversy" especially would need very careful citing of who holds these views, from reliable sources.
• "Trivia" sections are generally frowned upon — if it's important enough to be in the article it should be incorporated somewhere into one of the other sections, and if it is truly trivial then it should be removed.
• The "Urban legends" section seems dodgy to me, too. Either cite it or remove it, I suspect much of it will prove uncite-able.
• Finally, if the article is eventually fully-cited and the troubleseome sections dealt with, the lead is a bit on the short side for an FA.

Basically, this article could conceivably become an FA in the future, but it will need a great deal of work, especially with citations, before that point. Angmering 13:03, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

I'm going to start implementing some of the above suggestions. TheRingess (talk) 17:04, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

It needs work for FA status. This is my review:

• The lead is too short, and does not constitute a proper summary of the article. Check WP:LEAD.
• The article is definitely undercited. Try to have at least one inline citation in each paragraph.
• Many prose problems. Here is a choppy half-paragraph: "Reeves' father remarried in 1925 to Helen Schultz and had children with her. He never saw his son again. George's mother moved to California to stay with her sister. There Helen Lescher married Frank Bessolo, who adopted her infant son George. The marriage lasted fifteen years." Confusing prose: "The couple then moved from Galesburg to Woolstock, where Brewer had obtained a job as a druggist in the tiny town not far from his own hometown." And even more problematic prose: "were in the film's opening scene. Contracted to Warner Bros. at the time, the actor's name became "George Reeves" and his GWTW screen credit reflects the name change. "When is then, and which is the tiny town. Maybe an overall copyediting would help.
• "Military service" is stubby. I suggest you expand it or you merge it with another section.
• Per WP:MoS we do not wikilink single years (1952); only full dates (January 1, 1952).
• The inline citation go straight (without a gap) after (not before) the punctuation mark. You are not consistent.
• "His good friend Bill Walsh, a producer at Disney Studios, gave Reeves a role in Westward Ho the Wagons (1956), in which Reeves wore a beard and mustache." Try to avoid one-sentence, stubby paragraphs like this one.
• I suggest you get rid of the "See also" section. The only link there can be incorporated in the main text, if it is important.--Yannismarou 17:07, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Robert Gray (sea-captain)

Looking for an intital rating, ideas to make better/improve to push towards at least GA. Aboutmovies 22:17, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:38, 26 February 2007 (UTC)

Kaisershatner

Intro and TOC are a mess...but help is on the way! Kaisershatner 15:01, 2 March 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Per WP:MoS single years like "in 1790" should not be linked. Only full dates: "in January 1 1790 ..."
• "He died at sea in 1806, near Charleston, South Carolina,[1] possibly due to yellow fever.[2]" IMO it is not nice to have a stubby paragraph like this in the lead.
• "Early life" is stubby. Merge or expand.
• "He is known, however, to have served in the Triangular trade of South Carolina, aboard the Pacific." Known by whom? Citation needed.
• "On September 30, 1787", "On September 17, 1788". Per above, the dates here should be linked.
• "Additional ships to explore the coast under the command of Captain George Vancouver.[citation needed] ...". These s should be fixed.
• "And in 1788 Gray had attempted to enter a large river..." Why do you start the sentence here with "and"?
• "Circumnavigation" is stubby and uncited.
• "Gray then finished filling his cargo hold with pelts and set sail for China. In Canton, Gray again traded his cargo for tea. He then returned to Boston.[1] Gray returned to Boston in 1793, after again circumnavigating the globe." Repetitive and choppy prose.
• "Legacy" is uncited.
• In some of your printed sources used as "Notes", you have no pages.
• The websites you have in "References" are not used as inline citations if I'm not wrong. If I'm right, then they are "External links" not "References".
• Categories at the end of the article should be alphabetized.--Yannismarou 16:52, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Mimi Smith

I would like a peer review to see if this article can be put forward for FA. andreasegde 16:13, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Seegoon

This looks to be a very sound article, and anything I highlight is likely to be more of a niggle than a full-on complaint.

• Is there not an appropriate picture of her available?
• "Parents George & Annie (née Millward) Stanley" - change the ampersand (&) to an "and". This also needs doing in the caption of the picture in the section "Yoko". Changed.
• I find the first paragraph in "The Stanley Family" a little broken-up and confusing. Done
• I think "Career" could be better written - the tone isn't quite hitting the nail on the head.
• "—and running "as fast as my legs could carry me"." - for one, I'm not sure the punctuation is perfect here. Secondly, it might make more sense if you changed the quote to "as fast as [her] legs could carry [her].", but that's purely a matter of personal preference. Done
• "...in the smallest bedroom above the front door.[13][12]" - I'd change it so the references were in numerical order. Same goes for "...which was around the corner from Mendips.[26][15]".Done
• "Mimi (in typical fashion) said..." - I'm not sure if the tone's quite right here. It doesn't bother me too much, but folks at FAC might pick up on it. Done
• I advise assimilating the song sample into the bulk of the text somewhere. It looks anachronistic and out of place at the end. Done

The main things to consider are these: give it a quick copy-edit. It's in good shape but could probably do with a shakedown; try printing it out and reading it through with red pen in hand. Some of the sentences don't flow onto each other quite right, and this might help rectify that. The other thing I think might need some help is the chronological flow. Simply illustrating when things happened might be the easiest way to do this - for instance, putting years in brackets after paragraph headers. For instance, "John (1940-1956)" or whatever. Again, this is a matter of personal preference and not a must. I hope some of these pointers have helped; good luck! Seegoon 20:56, 18 February 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 20:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice effort. This is my review:

• I don't like the lead. You article is a biography of Mimi Smith; not of her husband or Lennon. In the lead you speak more about them than for Mimi Smith. And why is her husband's name bolded? Done
• Seegon is right about the photo. The infobox would be nicer, if you could add one.
• Again in the lead, you do not mentio dates of birth and death. Done
• Sometimes the prose gets choppy. See, for instance, the first (and the last one as well) paragraph in "The Stanley Family".
• The two last stubby paragraphs of "Marriage and 'Mendips'" look to me seamlessly connected with the rest of it.
• "George owned half of the Smiths' family farm house, called 'The Cottage', which was around the corner from Mendips.[26][15]" Wouldn't be better like that: "George owned half of the Smiths' family farm house, called 'The Cottage', which was around the corner from Mendips.[15][26]" Done. There are also other similar cases throughout the article.
• IMO "Song Sample" section is irrelevant to the biography. I agree with Seegoon: incorporate the sample itself somewhere in the rest of the article. Done
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article. Done--Yannismarou 12:36, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Kingboyk

Congrats on the GA and I agree that aiming for FA on this article is eminently sensible. It's a relatively short article and is a nice one to tackle before trying again with the longer articles like Paul McCartney.

• I too think it needs a copyedit from a really top notch editor. I'm not one of those but I'll certainly have a look and tweak what I can.
• The lead is particularly weak. It doesn't appear to be very well structured at all. Try and group related information into paragraphs, keep the message on target, and summarise the article. Again, I'll have a play with this but I can't promise I'll improve it much :) --kingboyk 13:07, 1 March 2007 (UTC)

ThE bEaTLeS aka andreasegde

I thank all three of you lovely people for spending time going through Mimi's underwear :)) As you all wrote, it needs a good look-through for dodgy passages/sentences, and a good scrub with a soft brush. I thank you again. (Mimi Smith an FA? That would certainly put the icing on a very big cake... :) ThE bEaTLeS aka andreasegde 16:16, 3 March 2007 (UTC)

Dave Lombardo

Previous review

This article is on a metal drummer, would appreciate any feedback to get it read for FA. M3tal H3ad 13:54, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings)#Linking recommends against linking words in headings. DrKiernan 14:15, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

J Milburn

• Second paragraph of 'Early years'- is that meant to say 'disc jokey'? Presumably it is meant to say 'disc jockey'?

Typo has been corrected. LuciferMorgan 21:56, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• The list of Hendrix songs played should have speech marks- MoS says it should be formatted- "Song", Album and Artist.

The list of three Hendrix songs now have speech marks. LuciferMorgan 21:59, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• I know it's a direct quote, but we'll see who makes it to the top, lets place a bet is missing an apostrophe in 'let's'. Is this deliberate?
• Do we know his child's name?
• First line of second paragraph of 'Grip Inc.', album name Nemesis is not in italics.

The album name is now in italics. LuciferMorgan 22:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

• Second line, Solidify is also not in italics.

The album name is now in italics. LuciferMorgan 22:02, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

That's all for now, I will take another look later. J Milburn 19:43, 21 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I know both his kids names but don't know which one was first. I'll look into it. M3tal H3ad 13:14, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

Ok, some more points- J Milburn 16:35, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

• Ref 24 is a little lacking in detail. Is that a book? Or just something he said at the festival? Can we even reference that?

It's something he said at the modern drummer festival. The video is on Youtube and since it would breach copyright i don't know how to add more detail.

Breach of what copyright? If the video was taken by the uploader, then we can cite it as a source (as long as we are certain it is genuine, I think it is reasonable to believe it is) if it was ripped from a documentary, live stream or DVD or something, we can cite that. Alternatively, have you taken a look on the Internet archives for the relevant concert? J Milburn 12:47, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

It got deleted of Youtube, but i found the source - http://www.drummerworld.com/Videos/DaveLombardo.html a documentary, thanks for the help. M3tal H3ad 13:44, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

• The article seems to slip between calling the drum set TAMA and Tama- I'm no drummer, so I am not sure how correct that is.
• The last paragraph of 'Return to Slayer', the second set of quotation marks are not closed.
• The line "Apocalyptica Lombardo enjoyed playing a duo – and asked if Lombardo would like to record a song for their next album." doesn't seem to make much sense, and that paragraph repeats 'Lombardo' a lot, too.

Thanks again for the comments. M3tal H3ad 07:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

CloudNine

• The first paragraph is, in my opinion, slightly confusing and doesn't flow well. It should state why Lombardo is notable; I recommend moving the contents of the second para up to the first, and perhaps removing the show-and-tell sentence. Your call though.
• I thought Origin was meant for bands only? Noting his origin and birthplace is a little ambiguious. Also, the flags aren't really required.
• General question: is his birth name just Dave?
• "moved to California"; should this be Downey, California?
• Grade school is a little inspecific (I note that the grade in which he brought in his drums in mentioned above though). You may want to replace it with an age or something; grades are usually country-specific.
• "100,000 years" -> "100,000 Years". "Talk of the town" is quite colliqual as well. "Word of Lombardo's ability spread" sounds a little more formal.
• "This inspired his musical interest in drums, which resulted in him joining the school band playing the marching drum, although he thought the marching drum was "not for him"." Seems like a run-on sentence to me. "Musical" in this context seems redundant.
• ... by listening to the record repeatedly and word of Lombardo's ability spread for being able to perform the drum solo. Due to his new found popularity, he was asked if he could play the song "Moby Dick" by Led Zeppelin." To me, this sounds awkward. Could be better phrased as "... by listening to the record repeatedly. Word soon spread of Lombardo's ability to perform the song's drum solo, and he was asked to perform Led Zeppelin's "Moby Dick". (Also, who asked him? School friend perhaps?)
• "Due to him arriving home at 4:00AM, his parents threatened to put him in a military school." This is unclear; was it every night, or just the once? CloudNine 13:56, 1 September 2007 (UTC)

I'll add more comments soon. CloudNine 18:20, 22 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I just noticed the origin in the infobox as you mentioned it - so i removed it. M3tal H3ad 10:46, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

VisitorTalk

The research and references are fine, but the writing style needs significant editing to bring it up to encyclopedic standard.

The article often bumps together parts A and C without mention of part B of the story.

"With the drumkit, Lombardo purchased his first record..." implies that he got a really bad deal trading in the kit at a pawn shop for one LP! This sentence should be rewritten. Did his father include the record along with the kit?

Moby Dick reference jumps from "was not familiar with the material" to "after doing so" (playing the song with mastery, I assume you meant). Need a transitional sentence.

"...parents threatened to put him in a military school." Did they withdraw the threat? Did he have to give up late night events until leaving home?

"As Slayer's line-up was complete..." Did the band already have everyone but a drummer? The article jumps from King's own guitar collection, presumably at his home, to a full band taking the show on the road.

Hoglan appears and promptly disappears from the article. Is he really relevant?

Lombardo's wife appears without a mention of when they were married.

"Grip" section jumps from appropriate past tense into present tense discussion of events in the past.

He had to miss the 2005 Fantomas tour. Did he ever tour with them?

Should change to "Ten years after departing from Slayer..." and include the name of the manager.

The Christy quote should either cite the exact words for "blown away," or the summary should be rewritten to a less cliche term. Finnish should be capitalized.

VisitorTalk http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:WikiProject_Biography/Peer_review/Dave_Lombardo&action=edit&section=4 Editing Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Dave Lombardo (section) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia15:31, 23 August 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the comments. I agree with you on the poorly written part in some places and alot of sentences start with Lombardo did...He then.. I'll see how i can fix this up and the other things that still remain. Appreciate the comments. M3tal H3ad 11:04, 24 August 2007 (UTC)

You're very responsive to constructive criticism, and I see a lot of improvements in the article. Good job! One more minor point: when describing a purchase made in Los Angeles, you don't need to include "USD" - just "$1,100" is enough. Are you working on other articles? VisitorTalk 16:39, 26 August 2007 (UTC)

The whole Lombardo *insert verb here* has been a problem from the start and I'm slowly cutting them down. I recently re-wrote two articles, Silent Civilian and The Blackening (still needs a recording section and do-away with the "history") M3tal H3ad 07:53, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

I'm working on the "Recording" section - I'll try speeding things up a little. LuciferMorgan 11:03, 27 August 2007 (UTC)

WesleyDodds

I've done a copyedit of the entire article. However, the prose still needs attention and is the weakest component of the article as it stand. I recommend having another editor read and copyedit the page. The article in general seems ok, but I'm not too sure about the exensive use of reviews. Certainly there neds to be critical recognition of Lombardo's work, but since he's only a component of a complete group, single out sentences in reviews that mention him often seems like stretching the point. I'll try and offer more comments soon. WesleyDodds 08:02, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

I don't agree with the point as regards the review, since it gives readers a perspective of Lombardo's work as a whole. I do agree the prose needs work though, but I can't think of anyone else who will copyedit the article further. LuciferMorgan 09:18, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Here's a thought: could the reviews be better utilized in the "musical characteristics" section? As part of the biography they seem somewhat out-of-place. WesleyDodds 09:23, 13 September 2007 (UTC)

Hmm, I'm not sure. In the biography section, it's meant to show the critical reception he has had over the years. LuciferMorgan 11:56, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 02:36, 15 September 2007 (UTC)

Joseph Francis Shea

Another in my series of NASA engineers and managers. This article is up for GA status at the moment, but given the backlog over there it may take some time to be dealt with; I hope that it's not a problem to have it going through both processes at once. I'm hoping to nominate it as a FAC in the not-too-distant future, so any comments or suggestions for improvement would be very welcome. MLilburne 10:32, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

It's GA now. MLilburne 15:36, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

You put the notice about the GA promotion, in order to reprimand me for delaying to review the article, hmmm?! (joke) But it seems I knew what I was (not) doing; the article is very nice as usual. Congratulations for GA promotion, and some minor remarks, which I hope could help:

• "Shea found the time to teach at the university and to hold down a job at Bell Labs.[1][2]" You could avoid to have citations in a row like here, by combining them in one citation. There are articles you could check for this (Tourette syndrome, Battle of Edson's Ridge).

Fixed.

• "His contribution to the Titan I project was significant; as George Mueller writes, "he contributed a considerable amount of engineering innovation and project management skill and was directly responsible for the successful development of this pioneering guidance system."" Maybe you could avoid the slight repetition in the prose here.

Oh dear, I can't believe I didn't notice that! Fixed.

• "In 1961 Shea was hired by Space Technology Laboratories, a division of TRW Inc., where he continued to work on ballistic missile systems." One of the one-sentence, stubby sentences I do not like! But, again, it is not something grave.

I don't like it either, but unfortunately the bare fact is all the information that I have available. I'll continue to think about my options.

• Not much info about his personal life. Wasn't he married?

Yes, he was, but again, all I have is the bare fact. I don't, for example, know when he was married, so that makes it hard to work it into the body of the article. I have mentioned his family in the context of who survived him after his death.

• "In film and fiction" is stubby, but I'm not sure what should be done with it.

I'm not sure either. I've searched for reviews mentioning Shea's role, but have found nothing, so just stated that it existed. I own both the book and the miniseries, and could put more details in from them, but am hesitant for fear of an OR tone. I have also considered just removing the section entirely, since there are not many options for improvement. Which of the three options do you think is best?

--Yannismarou 20:14, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

I remain in awe that you manage to peer review all the article listed here! Your help, whether late or not (also a joke!), is greatly appreciated. I've left my responses above. Thanks again. MLilburne 10:39, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

Plek's comments

Another excellent article in the making! It still needs some work, though, but it's shaping up nicely indeed. Here are my comments (in pseudo-random order).

• I am making my way through Chariots for Apollo at the moment, having started with Chapter 5 (1963 and beyond). Obviously, I am taking note of Shea's role in particular. What strikes me is that, time and again, Shea is credited with successfully resolving differences between feuding partners and bringing them together: the NASA centers amongst themselves, the centers versus NASA HQ, NASA versus the many contractors, etc. While his engineering background is a significant influence, it seems to me that Shea's greatest asset during this period is his ability to cajole, convince and unite the many different and differing groups involved in Apollo.
• Having said all that, I find the insight above somewhat missing from the article. In particular, the "Program manager" section seems to focus more on the pain in the ass he (undoubtedly) was, but leaves his accomplishments rather underdeveloped. Look at the opening sentences of the four main paragraphs: "Shea's relationship with the engineers at North American was a difficult one.", "Shea was a controversial figure...", "The friction between Shea and Marshall..." and "While many engineers considered Shea to be abrasive". Not really flattering, is it? Granted, it does end with "he was taking an effort that had been foundering and driving it forward", but you might want to balance things a bit, and explore the management side of his role somewhat further.
  • Note: after reading the article again, it did seem more balanced than I thought it was first time around. I'm retaining the comment, though, to illustrate what my first impressions were after just reading the "Program manager" section. It might be useful somehow.

Other comments:

• rather, he hoped to become a track star — It might be due to cultural differences, but it wasn't immediately clear to me what a "track star" is. I'm assuming something like "professional athlete" is intended here.

Fixed.

• In 1946, he was commissioned as an ensign in the Navy, and received a Bachelor of Science degree in Mathematics in the same year. — Isn't "in the same year" redundant?

Fixed.

• In the part beginning with Shea's speciality was systems engineering ... , there's some repetition: "contribution/contributions/contributed".

Fixed.

• In December 1961, NASA invited Shea to interview... — How did NASA find Shea and why did they invite him for an interview?

Added information.

• When Shea first began to consider the issue in 1962, most NASA engineers—including Wernher von Braun— — At that time, von Braun was Director of Marshall Center, right? I'm not sure if designating him as one of the "NASA engineers", as the sentence seems to do, is therefore entirely accurate or appropriate.

Fixed.

• Holmes put the letter on my desk and said, "Figure it out." — Great quote!

Thanks! I always enjoy using oral histories.

• Only now I discover that you already described Shea's role in uniting the NASA centers. Hmmm... this alters my initial comment about the "Program manager" slightly, but I think the argument is still valid. Somewhat. ish. Just see what you make of it.

It is still a valid point, I think, and I'll discuss it once I've worked my way through the smaller issues.

• Despite the best efforts of Shea and of North American — Smells a teeny weeny POV-ish to me.

Removed this phrase altogether... on reflection it doesn't seem necessary.

• During pad testing, the spacecraft suffered a number of technical problems, including a glitchy communications system. — Reads a bit strange: I don't think a glitchy comms system is a technical problem; it's causing it. It's the glitches in communication that is the technical problem. Maybe I'm just nitpicking here (or just plain wrong).

Either way sounds fine to me, but I will change the phrasing.

• Backup commander Wally Schirra — Not explained what Shirra was a backup commander of, exactly.

Fixed.

• I know the article isn't about them, but considering how the Apollo 1 fire affected Shea, shouldn't the astronauts be identified by name?

Yes, good point, I've done this.

• By contrast, North American executives blamed NASA management for its decision to pressurize the command module with pure oxygen, in which almost any material—including Velcro, with which the cabin was filled—would instantly burst into flames. — Well, we'd still need a spark for that to happen, right? Currently the sentence implies spontaneous combustion.

Indeed it does! Fixed.

• ...Joseph Shea remained haunted by the feeling that he, personally, was responsible for the deaths of three astronauts. For years after the fire, he displayed the portrait given to him by the Apollo 1 crew in the front hallway of his own home. — I think the article currently gives insufficient evidence of Shea remaining haunted by feelings of guilt. Only the portrait is given as evidence of that (at least, in this section). Isn't it possible that he just liked the picture?

You're right, it does need more evidence. (The guilt that he felt is not really in question, and I think I sort of took it for granted.) I'll think about what to add.

• On 7 April it was announced... — By whom? To whom?

Not specified in the sources I have. It may have been a press release but I wouldn't want to speculate.

• (He was not called to testify before the congressional inquiry.) — I find the parenthetical thought slightly out of place here. Is there a way to elegantly integrate it into the prose somewhere (and to lose the brackets)?

Fixed, I think.

• Is it known what those "health reasons" were, exactly, and what he died of? After setting up signs of dementia praecox earlier in the article, I think the conclusion should be more specific. The article now sort-of implies that he became demented, but isn't really explicit about it.

Unfortunately I don't have any further details about his health problems or his death. It's my personal opinion that the symptoms reported in 1967 and 1993 sound rather similar, but to say anything along those lines would almost certainly be OR, and I'm certainly not speculating on what they were symptoms of. I quoted Kraft because it was a very vivid description of Shea's behavior, not because I was endorsing his amateur diagnosis of dementia praecox (in other words, schizophrenia).

Shea was certainly healthy enough to give two very coherent, if not particularly informative, oral histories in 1998. But he did say, in the context of the ISS inquiry, "That's when I got sick." So this is all I know. If you have any more suggestions as to how I could best deal with the limited amount of information available to me, I would be most grateful.

And that's all I can think of for now! Thank you for listening, and good luck! Feel free to call again if you need any help. --Plek 22:35, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Thank you for your very detailed comments. It is very helpful to have feedback from someone with the backround knowledge to call me on issues of balance and bias as well as of presentation. Unfortunately I have some academic commitments today, so won't be able to respond to your more substantive points immediately, but rest assured that I'll be working my way through the list when and as I'm able. I'm thinking that maybe I ought to re-read "Chariots for Apollo" too! Thanks again. MLilburne 10:43, 21 February 2007 (UTC)

I've worked my way through the small points now. (There's one point above on which I'd welcome further feedback.) It's my opinion, after considering your comments, that the article may be a little unbalanced and that I need to spend a bit more time discussing Shea's successes as a manager, and how he got his reputation as a brilliant engineer and manager. It may take another couple of days before I get it all pulled together... MLilburne 18:43, 22 February 2007 (UTC)

Mary Higgins Clark

I've rewritten the Mary Higgins Clark article to include substantial biographical information. I don't feel knowledgeable enough yet to set a quality scale for this (or any other) article. I would like to know where others feel this ranks on quality scale, and what might need to be improved to move it up the ladder.

Thanks! Karanacs 22:34, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

MLilburne

In my opinion the article is B-class at the moment. With some hard work on the prose style and with the improvements listed below, I think it would have a good chance of achieving GA status.

• Including a fair use picture of Clark to illustrate the article would make it look a lot better.

• At the moment the article doesn't have anything on critical reactions to her books. I'm sure that there must be reviews out there that you could quote from. The lead discusses the themes in her writing, but the body of the article doesn't really back that up. In order to achieve breadth of coverage, therefore, I think you really need a new section.

• It's understandable that you're having difficulty finding sources, but at the moment the article really relies too much on her memoir as a source. This may well be a problem at the GA level; it will certainly be a problem if you try to improve it any more.

• It's difficult to specify exactly, but the major problem with the article is the prose style. The sentence structure is a bit simplistic, and the prose fails to flow from one sentence to another. There are places in the article, such as the last paragraph in "Writing career," where I wonder what relationship the sentences have to one another and why they've been put in the order that they have. The "Widowhood" section has three paragraphs in a row starting with "In [year]", and this should really be fixed.

• There are quite a few facts in the article that seemed like trivia to me, and I question whether they really belong in an encyclopedia article. For example, the fact that Clark's mother-in-law encouraged her to buy high-quality furniture. What does this really tell us about the woman?

Good luck with the article. Let me know if you have any questions about my comments. MLilburne 11:20, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article needs work. Some general remarks:

• The lead is short, and does not constitute a proper summary of the article. Check WP:LEAD.
• "The story of Mary Higgins Clark begins at Ellis Island in 1905, when a twenty-one year old Irishman". This is no encyclopedic prose. This is the literary prose a biographer of hers would use in a book about her.
• "Widowhood" is a sub-section of "Early years"? Something is wrong with the structure there. In general, there are too much details about her early life in comparaison with the rest of the article. Keep a better balance, and if you want to keep all this material follow WP:SS, and create a sub-article (Early life of Mary Higgins Clark).
• "Personal Life" is a stubby section. It is also problematic: Why is her first marriage, and the life with her children described in "Early years" and "Widowhood", and her second marriage here? Again, something is going wrong with the structure.
• Some reviewers prefer "Awards" or "Titles" to be prose and not lists. And I am also afraid that "Recognition" and "Awards" are overlapping.
• I agree with MLiburne that the dominance of one source in "References" could be problematic. And, by the way where is the ISBN of "Clark, Mary Higgins (2002). Kitchen Privileges: A Memoir. Simon and Schuster".--Yannismarou 19:48, 20 February 2007 (UTC)
• Minor: Alphabetize the categories at the end of the article.

Butthole Surfers

After comparing my revamp of this article to other "A" or "FA" music biography articles (including the "FA"-rated AC/DC article), I feel the Butthole Surfers bio is deserving of an "A" rating, if not "FA" status. If it isn't, I'd like any advice as to what needs to be done to get it there.

I am the primary author of this page, though I had some assistance from another user, Gruntmaster flush. Thanks for your time. Thehaikumaster 19:24, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

MLilburne

I haven't had a chance to read the whole article yet, but for what it's worth, here are a few comments on FA style:

• The lead is very long for what would be (without the lists of bad members and discography) a fairly short FA. You might want to aim for three paragraphs instead of five.

• The trivia section is likely to be problematic. You should either remove it or integrate the facts into the main body of the article.

• It would be helpful to have a references section that lists all the sources that are cited in the footnotes. It makes it easier to look up a source when you come to the tenth example of (say) "Azzerad" in the footnotes and can't necessarily track down the first citation.

Best of luck with the article. MLilburne 11:31, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks; have trimmed the intro per your suggestion, and will work on cleaning up the "References" section later today. As for Trivia, will work the key facts into the article and delete the rest. Thehaikumaster 12:47, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Just to clarify, I mean a references section that is separate from the citations section. There's nothing wrong with abbreviating your citations as long as there's an easy place to look for the whole source. As an example, I hope you'll forgive me for pointing you to one of my own FAs... say, Chris Kraft. MLilburne 13:05, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for clarifying (I was indeed thinking you meant expanding the reference notes). I'll check out your article, and should have separate sections by tonight at the latest (as well as doing away with "Trivia". As to the intro, it has been trimmed considerably. Thehaikumaster 14:45, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Per MLilburne's suggestions, have: turned old "References" into "Notes" section, and added new "References" section; removed "Trivia," adding the two most interesting points into the main body; and shortened the intro considerably. Any additional suggestions/ratings/recommendations/etc. are appreciated. And thanks again, MLilburne, the suggestions were definite improvements. Thehaikumaster 23:50, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Glad to be of help; it's definitely shaping up! MLilburne 23:57, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Very nice. Some minor remarks:

• Some reviewers do not like the red links in the lead, but this is not something very important. In general, the article has many red links; maybe you could vreate some stubs.
• Try not to cite in the middle of the sentences. Do it only if it is absolutely necessary for emphasis reasons.
• Second paragraph in "Legend grows (1984-1987)" has no citations.
• Try to avoid to have completely uncited paragraphs.
• You may face a problem with many of your images: the album covers are fair use images for the articles about the albums themselves; I am not sure the use of these images is fair in this particular article. I have some doubts, but I am not specialist in this domain. You could ask Robth.
• "Perhaps fittingly, it is one of the band's most schizophrenic releases, with half the material being as extreme as their previous work and other songs sounding far more conventional." IMO this assertion needs citing.
• "Pinkus, reportedly unhappy with the band's direction, left in 1994". Who reports that?--Yannismarou 12:21, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Awesome, thanks for the input. Some responses:

• Understood, and in all honesty the insane amount of red links in the article weren't my idea, but another user's; will weed out all but the most noteworthy ones, and work up some stubs for them. [This is done. Thehaikumaster 01:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)]
• Will weed them down. [This is done. Thehaikumaster 01:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)]
• Actually, the 2nd paragraph's citation can be found after the first sentence of the third paragraph. Is there a certain protocol for such situations? I'll see if I can figure that one out. [This is done. Thehaikumaster 01:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)]
• Thanks, I'll see if Robth has any advice. The Surfers are extremely difficult to find free pictures of, so I may have to see if I can dig up some old promotional photos from previous record labels; not sure what the legality of that is either, but I'll look into it. As it turns out, this does appear to be allowed, as seen in other FA music bios. A picture of the three remaining "original" members has also been added, and deemed by a Wiki administrator as within the boundaries of fair use. The Haiku Master 23:50, 11 April 2007 (UTC)
• For the last two, it looks like a source was left out or unintentionally deleted. Should have them added back in before too much longer. [This is done, and as it turned out the info about Pinkus' unhappiness wasn't in the listed source, so I removed that. Thehaikumaster 01:48, 21 February 2007 (UTC)]

Thanks again for the help! Thehaikumaster 21:36, 20 February 2007 (UTC)

Hrant Dink

Although I started this article, it used to be a simple bio of 2-3 paragraphs. After his assassination, a huge number of editors, Turkish and Armenian, collaborated on the article. Therefore, I am not submitting this as the author of the article, I am one of the contributors.

The article looks fairly good. I would like to have feedback on steps necessary to take it further, to make it GA and FA. Best regards, --Free smyrnan 08:50, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Article passed GA. --Free smyrnan 05:40, 15 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Congratulations for GA status. These are my suggestions for FA status:

• "(Armenian: Հրանդ Տինք, IPA: [həɹɑnt diːnk][1])". Why do you find it necessary to cite here? And when I trygo to the NY article you cite and link, I go to a NY membership page, asking me username. Done
• "1915-17 massacres of Armenians". Hmmmm ... The article's title is Armenian genocide. I understand your sensitivity on this issue, but you may also face criticism for the particular terminology you chose here instead of "genocide".  Done

changed sentence. It now mentions Armenian genocide and is linked as such.

• "Regarding these statements Dink was prosecuted three times for insulting Turkishness[2][4][5]". Two remarks:

• Try not to cite in the middle of a sentence. Do it only if it is absolutely necessary for emphasis reasons.  Done
• Try to combine your citations, so as not to have them in a row (two in a row, three in a row etc.). You can use as models Tourette syndrome, El Greco or Battle of Edson's Ridge.

• "Hrant Dink was assassinated in Istanbul on January 19, 2007, allegedly by Ogün Samast, an ultra-nationalist Turk. While Samast has since been taken into custody, pictures of Dink's alleged killer holding up a Turkish flag." Maybe a bit repetitive. You could just say "pictures of Samast".
• "He was born". Personally I don't like to start a new section with "He ..."; "Dink was ..." looks better to me. Done
• Reading "Early life" I see some choppy prose: "He was born in Malatya on 15 September 1954 to Serkis Dink (known as Haşim Kalfa), a tailor from Gürün, and Gülvart Dink, from Kangal. He had two brothers. His early childhood was spent in the care of his grandfather, whose picture Hrant kept close to his heart. His parents split because of his father's gambling problem, and this led Dink and his brothers to move to Istanbul at the age of seven, where he would spend the rest of his life." "In 1972, Dink changed his legal name to Fırat Dink to disassociate his Maoist political activities from the Armenian community.[11] He later graduated from the Zoology department of Istanbul University. He then studied for a second Bachelor's Degree at the Philosophy Department at the same university, which he did not complete." You see: Very short sentences, seamlessly connected, and with no variety in your forms of expression. Personally, I would recommend a copy-editing by a native English speaker, and a careful reading from your part of User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a. Done - will ask for copyedit when all else is finished.
• An example of repetitive prose: "Church's ownership of the site of camp, demanding that the land be returned to its previous owner. Following a four-year legal process the court ruled that the land should be returned to its previous owner"  Done
• "The decision was in line with the 1974 decision of The Court of Appeals which declared that all real estate acquired by minorities after 1936 should be either returned back to their previous owners or in case of their bereavment, should be handed over to the National Real-estate Foundation." I would cite here.  Done
• "During this period, Hrant Dink was taken into custody three times because of his political views.[citation needed] Between 1980 and 1990, Dink operated a bookstore along with his brothers and stayed away from political activism.[citation needed]." You can't go to WP:FAC without having fixed the tags.  Done
• "Editorial policy" is stubby, and the quotes there are longer than the prose.
• "In his public speeches, which were often intensely emotional, he never refrained from using the word genocide when talking about the Armenian Genocide". Oups! Now you speak for a genocide. In the lead, we were told about massacres. Maybe you should be more consistent. And "used the word "genocide" for the "Armenian genocide"" is not the best prose.
• I'm not sure that the use of Dink's photo from Screamers is fair use for this article. It is for "Screamers", but I have some reservations for Dink's article.
• "He was acquitted the first time, convicted and received a postponed 6 months jail sentence the second time, which he had appealed at the European Court of Human Rights and at the time of his death, the prosecutor's office was getting ready to press charges for a third alleged offense". "Having exhausted internal appeal mechanisms, Dink appealed to the European Court of Human Rights for an overturn of the ruling on January 15th. The appeal is on grounds that Article 301 is against freedom of expression and Dink has been discriminated against because of his Armenian ethnicity." "In September 2006, another case was opened against Dink on charges of 'denigrating Turkishness' under Article 301 of the Turkish Penal Code" Why are telling us the same things twice in the same section?
• "after he reportedly referred to the 1915 massacre of Armenians in the Ottoman Empire as a "genocide"" Again this mixture of terms about the Armenian genocide ... And a line below: "Dink had a long history of personal threats by Turkish nationalists for his statements on Armenian identity and the Armenian Genocide." And you don't have to wikilink again something you already linked in the lead.
• "Dink complained of the Turkish state propaganda ..." Does the Turkish state accepts that it committed propaganda against him. Maybe this could be criticized as POV (I don't believe I said that!).
• "According to eye witnesses, Dink was shot by a man of 25–30 years of age, who fired three shots at Dink's head from the back at point blank range before fleeing the scene on foot." This claim definitely needs citing, because it contradicts the police.
• "All leave for police in Istanbul had been cancelled." I did not understand that, but maybe this is because a native English speaker.
• "Yasin Hayal confessed to telling Samast to kill Dink and supplying the murder weapon[60], while Erhan Tuncel has been charged as a main instigator of the killing, and allegedly directed both Samast and Hayal. The BBP has denied any involvement in the assassination.[57][58][61][62]." Per MoS, inline citations go after the punmark without a gap; not before.
• IMO the wole "Reactions" should be turned into proper prose. As I see it now, it is too listy. And FAC reviewers do not like listy sections.
• "Awards" could also be turned into proper prose, but this is not a very important issue.
• In "See also" you repeated links already linked within the main article. This is wrong. I'd suggest that you get rid of this section, incorporating the links (that are not already linked in the main article and are sufficiently important) within the main prose.
• In notes 74 and 82 there are missing data. Cite properly using Template:cite web or Template:cite news. Done
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 09:42, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

 Done

Many thanks for the excellent feedback. I have added links to these on the to-do list for the article and we will address them. --Free smyrnan 13:55, 16 February 2007 (UTC)

I agree with Yannismarou that it's currently too listy. LuciferMorgan 08:21, 25 February 2007 (UTC)

Hazel Miner

I'd like to improve upon this article and hopefully bring it up to Good Article or Featured Article status at some point. I've added references and links to other Web sites and fleshed out the story since I initially wrote the article. Photos of her are hard to find, but I'm hoping to get one from one of the historical societies. --Bookworm857158367 03:43, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Awadewit

I thought that this was a good piece on Hazel. I don't know if FAs can be so short, but I wouldn't see why not. My major suggestion would be to vary your sentence structure in order to make the blizzard narrative more interesting. You have a lot of SVO (SUBJECT-VERB-OBJECT) constructions. I agree that a picture would be a nice addition. If you can't find a picture of Hazel herself, perhaps a picture from one of the ballads? Or even a picture of a blizzard? I was also wondering if this story was connected with Laura Ingalls Wilder's _The Long Winter_ in any way. I have a vague recollection of a similar tale within that book. Awadewit 10:36, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for looking at it. I've added some images, citations and quite a bit to the text. What do you think? I read the Wilder book years ago, but it would have been about 40 years before this blizzard and in South Dakota, not North Dakota. --Bookworm857158367 04:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I definitely think it's better. There are still some awkwardly worded sentences in the blizzard narrative, particularly those that employ the "and then" construction, but I would definitely say it's an improvement. By the way, the Wilder books were written in the 1930s and 1940s and were far from chronologically or geographically accurate, so I think that connection might still be possible. Wilder and her daughter used incidents from their own lives and from the lives of others to create the narratives. Awadewit 06:17, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "Hazel spread two blankets, told Emmet and Myrdith to lie down, and then spread a third blanket atop them. She told the younger children to keep moving to stay warm." Maybe the prose is a bit repetitive here.
• "They sang all four verses of "America the Beautiful," a song they had sung during opening exercises at the country school that morning. They prayed the Lord's Prayer. Hazel ..." The bolded sentence looks to me a bit choppy as it is there.
• "Other blizzard deaths". I don't know if this section is relevant to the article. This is Miner's biography; not an article about the blizzard.
• One citation ("Gullickson, Lucille, "Hazel Miner, Angel of the Prairies," Center (N.D.) Republican, May 30, 2002") is repeated without reason. Check Multiple insertion of the same reference.--Yannismarou 12:34, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I rewrote the portions of the article you mentioned, removed the "other blizzard deaths" section and gave those victims their own articles, and fixed the citations. An improvement? --Bookworm857158367 22:06, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Edwin Taylor Pollock

I'm really looking for feedback on this article, before finishing it up and submitting it for WP:GA. The subject is an interesting figure, but it's difficult to have a narrative for his life because he did many things which weren't related to each other much. (This is perhaps typical of military biographies.) I am looking for comments on whether I should remove information on his early life or what other areas are missing or need expanded. Of course, any other comments on my grammar or structure (or anything else) are also appreciated.(I am still working on the final section, about his time in the USNO, but that will be done shortly.) JRP 21:09, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:04, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

I've fixed the issues that it raises, except the questionable use of the word "alledged". Because I am rephrasing a well-cited allegation of the Mau movement against the Naval government, I believe this should be okay. JRP 04:24, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Kirill Lokshin

Quite nice; some general suggestions, in no particular order:

• The lead should eventually be lengthened a bit, to at least two full paragraphs; as it stands, it doesn't provide a very useful summary.
• The prose structure is quite choppy; there are many one-sentence paragraphs that should be pulled into the surrounding blocks of text. I'd also consider merging everything up to the Virgin Islands material into a single section on his early life and career.
• The double footnote numbers are somewhat annoying. Given that you're not really reusing citations very often, I would suggest tolerating a few repeated ones and going for a single combined note at each place in the text (as here, for example) instead.
• The succesion box should be at the very bottom, just above the navigational templates.

Other than that, this looks good. Kirill Lokshin 04:34, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

• I've improved the lead a bit, I think. Can you help me to understand better how I should make this?
• I've moved around things as you suggest. I'll try and rework some more of the writing to make it less choppy, also.
• I've eliminated double footnotes, as you suggest.
• Succession box is moved.

How does this look to you now? JRP 02:12, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Much better; I think you've dealt with all of the issues now. Kirill Lokshin 02:33, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nicely done. Some suggestions for further improvement:

• You start straight away with "Early career". You have almost nothing for his early life, and family background. I would like to know something more about the "man"; not just about the "officer". This is what (or something like that!) Cla68 has called the "human element"!
• "On his return home, the Spanish-American War was heating up and he was transferred back to the USS New York, to see service in Cuba and Puerto Rico, eventually taking part in the Battle of Santiago de Cuba.[6] In January 1900, he was promoted to lieutenant and assigned to the USS Alliance.[7] Over the following year, he was transferred to the USS Dolphin and the USS Buffalo.[8] On board the Buffalo, he returned to the Asiatic Squadron near China and was finally transferred to the USS Brooklyn, the squadron's flagship.[9]" A bit repetitve maybe.
• I see you have the tendency to use a lot in your writing the passive voice. Especially in the first paragraph of "U.S. Virgin Islands" I think you overdo it a bit.
• "This movement, which entailed a nearly three-month work stoppage in the first year, was started over grievances over the quality of the roads in the territory." Maybe you could rephrase.
• "and that the United States Navy prohibited the assembly of Samoan chiefs, who the movement considered the real government of the territory." With which verb is this "that" connected? "Started over"? Can we say "this movement started over ... that ..."? I'm not a native English speaker, so my question is sincere!
• "The movement quickly grew to include several prominent officers of Governor Warren Jay Terhune's staff and culminated in the proclamation by Samuel S. Ripley, an American Samoan born of an American father and a Samoan mother and a large property-holder in the territory, that he was the leader of the legitimate successor government to the pre-1899 Samoa." Maybe "who was" is better than "that he was"? Or maybe split the sentence?--Yannismarou 21:51, 10 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I'm starting to work on this, I might not get enough edit-time until Wednesday though. Thanks! JRP 03:49, 12 February 2007 (UTC)
  • I've made some more changes. I have difficulty with the passive voice and would appreciate any help you can direct me to on the subject. I believe I have reworded things, especially in the American Samoa section, to be more clear. Does it look better to you?
  • As for his personal life, I've had some difficulty finding information. The best info for Pollock comes from the histories of the USVI and AS... and sadly his "personal life" remained behind in Washington. I'll look around for more.
  • I'm considering submitting this to WP:FAC, can you recommend any changes I should look to apply for that? JRP 00:00, 13 February 2007 (UTC)
    • The article couls stand in FAC, even as it is now. A more comprehensive approach of his life (e.g. personal life I said) would just be more careful.--Yannismarou 11:55, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Petercorless

• Caught an "a a" instance and fixed it.
• Put the ships he commanded in the infobox:
  • USS Virginia
  • USS Kearsarge
  • USS Salem
  • USS Alabama
  • USS Hancock
  • USS George Washington
  • USS Oklahoma
• Not sure if we should list "American Samoa" or "United States Naval Observatory" under "commands." --Petercorless 04:15, 14 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Thank you! Did you pull the commands list from the article or do you have a fantastic list someplace? I don't know how to list American Samoa or the USNO either in this infobox. JRP 04:19, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

I just pulled the list from the article. I wasn't sure from your phrasing whether he was given command of the USS Massachusetts when he was promoted to commander, or whether he served under a captain (which seems likely for a BB) so I did not cite that ship in the list of his commands. Consider adding a reciprocal link to this article to the related ship articles that exist. Many of the ships are lacking lists of commanding officers, so you might need to add it as an inline reference. As for listing the Governor and USNO posts, ask on the main Military History project "talk" page to get feedback as to how or whether to list them beside his shipboard commands. --Petercorless 04:27, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, if they're actual military commands (rather than essentially civilian posts that happen to be filled by an officer), then there's no reason why they can't go in the "Commands" field; otherwise, I'd say the "Other jobs" field is probably the most suitable place. Kirill Lokshin 04:30, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

FYI, the news report I cited about the Massachusetts was ambiguous, if I recall correctly. I had the same scratching of the head that you did and then I wrote it the way I did. Not perfect. I was hoping that if you did have a list, it might help me be sure about that one and completeness in general. I don't claim that the list is complete because the civilian press, especially at the entrance to WWI, didn't have as good of reporting. For example, I couldn't find the date he was promoted to captain because I couldn't find the announcement, but at some point he just starts getting referred to as captain. Imperfect, but I believe I have done the best job I can with the resources I have. :/ JRP 04:42, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

According to this article, he was still only a Commander when he took the USS Hancock to the Virgin Islands. Hope that helps a bit. --Petercorless 05:02, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Also, in post military service, apparently he went on to become "an instructor at Cranbrook Institute in Bloomfield Hills, Mich". Thought that might be a nice end note, if you can find something other than an ABE books search reference. --Petercorless 05:07, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Yes. The stuff around his three main accomplishments are fairly unambiguous: USVI, USS George Washington, and American Samoa. He's in the history books, as it were, and there's plenty of data about those things. The rest is primarily from newspapers. I don't believe there are gaps, but it means that I don't have things like promotion dates and the like and "early years" history is somewhat difficult to come by. My comment was that the military provided less data about ship assignments and stuff to the press during the war, so the data I have for that comes from the reports after the war of what he did. And BTW, I've purchased that book about the USNO to flesh out that section. I'll keep researching. JRP 05:22, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Awesome! --Petercorless 06:03, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

As requested by two reviewers, I've researched a bit of material for after his retirement. I wasn't able to find anything on what he did before he went into the Navy, unfortunately. Perhaps nothing was notable. How does this look now? JRP 02:47, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Well, he went into the Navy straight out of the Academy, so there wouldn't really be anything to note unless he did something significant while in school (which is very rare). I think it's fine now. Kirill Lokshin 02:56, 23 February 2007 (UTC)

Nigel Kneale

I've been doing a lot of work on this article over the past couple of weeks, and would very much like to put it up as a FAC. Any feedback on how I could try and improve it to featured standard would be very gratefully received. Angmering 21:34, 17 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 20:38, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

• In reply:

• I very much doubt there are any available free use images of Kneale. Certainly nobody can take one any more, anyway, given that he's dead, and even pictures of him as a young man would still be in copyright. So I don't see that there's any other option other than the fair use screengrab.
• I have added the persondata information, as requested.
• I couldn't find any examples of full dates which weren't properly linked?
• I don't think summary style would be appropriate here. The size of the readable prose is only 34kb, which I would have thought was perfectly acceptable, and it is very unlikely to ever get much bigger than that.
• The single weasel word example you mention is used in context of a cited example of an opinion held by the writer and critic Kim Newman.
• I have requested copyedits from several users, one of whom, User:Josiah Rowe, had already been through the article. I am hoping that others will have done so by the time the peer review period comes to an end.

• I hope that satisfies the automated concerns, anyway. Angmering 21:09, 19 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "was best known" is twice used in the first two pars of the lead. Maybe you could vary a bit the prose there.
• "Kneale was born Thomas Nigel Kneale". Maybe a repetition. His birth name has already been mentioned and bolded in the lead.
• "His family came from the Isle of Man,[5] and returned to live there in 1928, when Kneale was six years old.[6]" An advice: Try not to overcite your sentences. Place inline citations at the end of the sentences, and cite in the middle of them only if it is absolutely necessary for emphasis. You can also combine together citations instead of having them in a row ([1][2]). See ways of nicely combing citations in Tourette syndrome, and Battle of Edson's Ridge. Here, for instance, you cite twice in the same sentence the same citation without an obvious reason: "Written in 1965 while Kneale was suffering from a mystery illness and forced to stay in bed for a long period,[17] the concept started life as a drama serial for the BBC, before the corporation had second thoughts about the nature of the storyline and the possibility of copycat suicides;[17]"
• "Doctor Who was heavily influenced by Kneale's Quatermass serials at several points throughout its history,[5][34][81][82][83]" What's that?! Ugly! Five in a row!
• Maybe "Influence" could have a better structuring. For instance, you start with a too short prose sentence and a long quote. Does this give to the reader a first general idea about Kneale's importance and influence? Then the paragraph starting "Kneale never saw himself as a ... " is not about Kneale's influence, but about what Kneale believed for himself. Does this fit to the section? Doesn't interrupt its flow?

In general, the article is comprehensive and well-written. My only worry is that the reader might get tired with all these works, films etc. (accompanied with dates, details etc.) exhaustively analysed in the article's sections. But I don't think this can be a strong argument against FA status.--Yannismarou 12:59, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your thoughts. Some replies:

• Are you sure? I can find only one instance: "he was best known for the creation of the character Professor Bernard Quatermass."
• I have taken out the first instance, and left the mention of his first name until what was the second, where it's properly cited.
• Good point about those citations. I have dealt with the examples you mentioned, and some others.
• I agree about the titling of the "Influence" section — I wasn't sure about the title of it, but couldn't think of quite what else to call it. It was originally called "Legacy", but I wasn't sure that was encyclopedic enough. I have switched the first two sections of it, so that it no longer begins with such a short prose section. I disagree the entire Doctor Who paragraph is out of place there though, as it does state that Kneale's work was a major influence on that show.

Thanks again for your thoughts. I hope I have managed to address some of your concerns. Angmering 14:27, 24 February 2007 (UTC)

Thomas Dixon, Jr.

Over the past few weeks I have worked pretty hard to expand this stub. Though I doubt it has yet reached GA status, I think that it's time for a peer review HammerHeadHuman 09:28, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Awadewit

• "Although his life has been tainted by his racism..." - a bit awkward - perhaps you could reword last sentence of introduction?
• "not a huge fan of slavery" - colloquial language; this kind of language recurs throughout - "make it as an actor" is another example
• make it clear what "one of history's greatest tragedies" is
• check small things (do a copyedit); e.g. "attempt disband" should be "attempt to disband" and "scandle" should be "scandal" and "veterans rights" should be "veterans' rights"
• often the connections between events aren't clear because your connecting words aren't clear; e.g. "an experience that he hated, and that he later would say" should read "an experience that he hated, but that he later would say helped him to relate to the plight of the working man"
• what was Dixon's MA in at Wake Forest?
• be sure there are spaces between paragraphs
• perhaps you could add more material on the lectures and the writings since that is what Dixon is most known for? I would also suggest combining these two sections since you outline his major themes in the "writings" section - do those themes cover the lectures as well? If they do, I would begin the entire section with those.
• the "family life" information should be integrated into the story you narrate about his life

• I appreciate the input, looks like I've got some work to do, hopefully in the next few days I'll get to it. HammerHeadHuman 05:50, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

User:Yannismarou

Nice start! This is my review:

• Do not wikilink single years, as you do with 1915; only full dates January 1, 1915.
• Do not use <br><br> for paragraph spaces. The gap button in your keyboard will do the job!
• "Here he met and befriended future President Woodrow Wilson.[3][1][2]". It would be better like that: "Here he met and befriended future President Woodrow Wilson.[1][2][3]",a dn it would be even better, if you could combine these three citations in just one. See ways to do that in Tourette syndrome, El Greco or Battle of Edson's Ridge. The same problem here: "While he claimed to oppose slavery, he believed in racial segregation.[4][1][2]"
• "But, sometime in the next five years Dixon began to become disillusioned with the church, and he began to feel that he could no longer belong to any particular denomination." A bit repetitive the prose here.
• IMO, you don't have to merge "family" with "Early years" or any other biographical section; it can stand as it is.
• Your printed sources have no pages. This could be a problem, if you go for FAC.
• Online source in reference 7 is not properly cited. Accessdate? Author? Check Template:cite web and Template:cite news.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the articles.--Yannismarou 21:20, 10 February 2007 (UTC)

Jeff Hanneman

I wish to bring this up to GA status, second peer review. I have implemented all suggestions on the last peer review and have since added two new sections and more references. Thanks M3tal H3ad 08:45, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Automated

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:05, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Minor things! The article seems set for GA status. These are my remarks:

• "The two live in Los Angeles with no children, and live forty minutes away from King, and often have BBQ's". It sounds a bit repetitive to me.
• "Hanneman will come up with riffs at his house, using a 24-track and drum machine. Hanneman will show ..." Again, this could maybe be rephrased.
• Is he regarded by music critics as a good guirast, a good writer of lyrics?
• You could maybe have a caption in Hanneman's photo (I saw that it is "Jeff Hanneman performing at The Unholy Alliance tour in 2006").
• Any expansion of the "Biography" section with further info would be welcome.--Yannismarou 14:19, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

Hayden Panettiere

This article has not been rated for quality yet. I think it qualifies for B-status, and I'd like to know what can be done to improve it to GA status. - fmmarianicolon | Talk 16:16, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

IMO the article is at a start stage, and it needs much more work. A new peer-review will probably be needed. This is my review:

• The lead is too short. Have a look at WP:LEAD.
• "Background" and "Personal life" are stubby. Expand.
• Avoid one-sentence paragraphs. Merge or expand.
• Why don't you put the photo in the infobox.
• The prose is often choppy ("Panettiere was born in Palisades, New York to Lesley Vogel and Skip Panettiere. She has Italian ancestry.[1] (Panettiere means baker in Italian). Her mother also used to be an actress.") and repetitive ("She also recently appeared on an episode of Punk'd, as an accomplice in punking her boyfriend, Stephen Colletti. She also has guest starred in Law & Order: SVU.")
• Some paragraphs and sub-sections have no citations or are under-citated. Try to have at least one citation for each paragraph.
• Further info treating her biography, music, career etc. would be welcome.--Yannismarou 20:57, 7 February 2007 (UTC)

Princess Irina of Russia

I'd like to bring this article up to Good Article status. Please suggest improvements. --Bookworm857158367 14:35, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Minor remarks:

• I suggest you expand a bit the lead.
• Again inconsistency with the citations. No gap between the citation and the punctuation mark.
• "The Romanovs, heavily influenced by the French and the English, spoke French better than Russian and often used the foreign versions of their first names when referring to one another." Uncited.
• First paragraph in "World War I" is uncited.
• The article seems a bit unbalanced, because we have many details till 1919, and almost nothing afterwards. But, again, I recognize there may be a lack of sources, and this imbalance may be difficult to be cured.--Yannismarou 11:16, 6 February 2007 (UTC)

Jeannette Piccard

Greetings. This failed FAC and is still a GA. I would like for the person who reviewed it at FAC to work out her problems with it here so that I can resubmit it. I will leave a note on her talk page. Thanks. -SusanLesch (talk) 15:41, 6 April 2010 (UTC)

Princess Victoria Melita of Edinburgh and Saxe-Coburg-Gotha

I'd like to bring this article up to Good Article status. Please offer suggestions for improving it. --Bookworm857158367 00:43, 2 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice job as usual. This is my review:

• I think you should expand a bit more the lead. IMO it is short.
• Stylistic: "the ref tag should be directly after the punctuation mark without an intervening space".
• "Kirill led his naval unit to the Duma on March 14, 1917 and swore his loyalty to the Duma, hoping to restore order and preserve the monarchy." The prose here looks to me a bit repetitive. I have also the impression that the prose gets sometimes choppy, as on the third paragraph of "Exile".
• "Dark-haired [67] Kira, high-spirited and straightforward [68], had a somewhat more even temperament than her older sister." Citation after puncuation mark. And I think it would be nice to try to have the citations at the end of the sentences.
• As a conclusion, I believe that the article will easily pass GAC.--Yannismarou 11:32, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

Calvin Coolidge

I've done a bit of work on this article, expanding it and citing sources. I'd like to get it to GA status (or even FA) if possible. Right now, I think it looks pretty good and I'd appreciate any advice on how to make it better. Coemgenus 15:21, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

It is clear that you have done a lot of work on this article. These are my suggestions (mostly minor and possibly personal preferences):

• In the lead why you have such a huuuge paragraph? You could divide it in two smaller ones; IMO this is better layout and in accord with WP:LEAD.
  • Good point, I'll break it up. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Done. Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• "He restored public confidence in the White House after the scandals of his predecessor's administration". Are these scandals genrally accepted as factss? Otherwise, this assertion could possibly attract POV criticisms.
  • They are, as far as I know. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• "The Republican Party was dominant in New England in Coolidge's time, and he followed". IMO it is not nice to use "he" in the first sentence of a new section. I would thus recommend: "The Republican Party was dominant in New England in Coolidge's time, and Coolidge followed".
• In "City Offices" the prose looks to me a bit choppy, with many short sentences in a row.
  • I'll have another go at it. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• I see these blue quote-boxes I also use have become a trend in Wikipedia! Happy for that!
  • Glad you like it - I copied the idea from your Pericles article. I think it gives it a polished look. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• "To pay for these tax cuts, Coolidge proposed reciprocal reductions in federal expenditures and retiring some of the federal debt.[103][104]" You know, you can combine citations so as not to have two or three etc. in a row. You can get some ideas from articles like W.S. Gilbert, Tourette syndrome and El Greco.
  • Done. Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• "The treaty did not actually achieve its result - the outlawry of war - but did provide the founding principle for international law after the Second World War." I think you should cite that.
  • That's kind of hard to cite. I'll see what I can do. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Done. Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• Second paragraph of "The 1928 Election" is also uncited. I think that assertions like "Coolidge had been lukewarm on the choice of Hoover as his successor, but he realized that unless he publicly blocked the popular Commerce Secretary at the convention, the nomination was his, and Coolidge had no desire to split the party by openly opposing Hoover" need referencing.
  • This just got added recently by someone else - I'll try to locate a cite. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Done. Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• "Faced with looming defeat in 1932, some Republicans spoke of rejecting Herbert Hoover as their party's nominee, and instead drafting Coolidge to run, but the former President made it clear that he was not interested in running again, and that he would publicly repudiate any effort to draft him, should it come about." Also uncited.
  • This just got added recently by someone else - I'll try to locate a cite. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Done. Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• I see criticism and evaluation of his work as President in the lead, but not in the main text. I think this is a problem. The lead should offer hints for what follows, and not to exhaust important topics, such as the "criticism of laissez-faire government". Maybe a section elaborating on these assessments, criticisms, praises etc. would be useful.
• Your online source in note 124 is not properly cited. Why don't you use Template:cite web?
  • OK. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Done.Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
• Alphabetize categories at the and of the article.--Yannismarou 20:30, 4 February 2007 (UTC)
  • Will do. Coemgenus 21:19, 4 February 2007 (UTC) Done. Coemgenus 21:51, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Peter Cetera

This article has received a major overhaul to include all aspects of a musical artist's career, from an overview to background information, as well as documenting chart positions of all his releases. As such, it appears to be rather comprehensive and written from a neutral point of view. Now that it appears to be complete without any superfluous information, I am requesting a peer review for a Quality Scale grading, with a goal of either FA or A Class. RPrinter 20:49, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

A start-article IMO. It still needs a lot of work, before a peer-review can actually be helpful; I would suggest a second peer-review, after the suggestions of this one are implemented. These are some initial remarks:

• The lead is too short. It should be expanded per WP:LEAD, so as to be a comprehensive summary of the article.
• Any picture? At least fair-used tagged.
• "Early Life" is stubby. Can you expand it?
• The next three sections are listy, almost trivia, with stubby paragraphs. This is not a nice prose. Maybe this could also be helpful to you.
• Per MoS do not wikilink single years; only full dates (January 1 2000).
• "Actor" is stubby. Merge or expand.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• And you have no inline citations; not even references!
• Maybe you would like to check in WP:FA for recently promoted articles about singers and musicians in general, so as to take some ideas.--Yannismarou 19:58, 4 February 2007 (UTC)

Tenacious D

I hope this article to obtain GA status. I would appreciate any advice in improving this article further. Thanks. Tenacious D Fans (talk) 17:39, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Congratulations for GA status. At a first glance, it looks like a great article, but, reading it, you understand that there are some important flaws. It still needs work, if you want to get it FA. This is my review:

• "described as "mock rock".[2][3][4]". 3 citations in a row are not nice. Try to combine them. You can get some ideas from Tourette syndrome or W.S. Gilbert.
• Do not wikilink single years (like 1999); only full dates per WP:MoS.
• "Tenacious D are also known by their nickname, "The D"." I don't like this stubby, "orphan" sentence in the lead.
• "Black, then 16, first met 24-year-old Kyle Gass in Edinburgh, Scotland[5][6] during ..." "In the audience was David Cross,[1] who was later to cast the D in Mr Show.[10]". Try to place citations at the end of the sentence. Cite in the middle, only if it is absolutely necessary.
• "Although Black and Gass did not initially get along ... " Why? Vague assessment.
• "Although Black and Gass did not initially get along, they eventually worked out their differences.[7] Later, Gass taught Black to play the guitar in exchange for Black helping him with his acting. They eventually formed the band and played their first live show in the now". You see the prose problem?
• "While they can both sing and play the guitar, Black is billed as lead singer and Gass as lead guitarist. The band's name is derived from a term used by sportscaster Marv Albert about the tenacious defense of the NBA's New York Knicks.[11][6] The name was decided ... " IMO, there is an inconsistence of tenses here: Previous paragraph past tense, first sentence of this paragraph present tense, then again past tense.
• First paragraphs at "First album (2001 – 2003)" are uncited.
• In "Film and their second album (2004 – 2006)" I see a main article link in the middle of the section. Why there?! I think it would be better to have it as a see also link just after the heading.
• Prose problems in "Future". Stubby paragraphs and a listy-trivia style.
• "They have staged two international concert tours". I think more info about these two international tours would be welcome.
• "Also in Trainwreck is the actor who plays "Lee", Jason "JR" Reed, who performs lead vocals under the pseudonym "Darryl Donald". Not what FAC regards as brilliant prose!
• I would like "Influences" a bit more expanded with infos about their style. This is IMO necessary for one more reason: in this section you repeat, and cite some of the things mentioned in the 2nd paragraph of the lead. But you do not further analyze. But that is what the main article is supposed to do: build on the lead; not just repeat it.
• IMO you should ger rid of this stubby "See also" section. Link what is there in the main prose, if you think these articles are useful.--Yannismarou 14:25, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

• Jack's son's name is Samuel Wyatt, not Samuel Jason

--ae86guy 1227 EST, 8 March 2008

All points taken care of. Jack's son is Samuel Jason, and this is cited. Tenacious D Fan (talk) 09:15, 16 April 2008 (UTC)

Leonard Orban

I would like your opinion on this article on the current European Commissioner for Multilingualism. I believe it has been researched and edited enough for a peer review to be conducted. Peer reviewers' opinion is especially needed because most of the edits have been done by one person (that's me) and the rest of the articles on the European Commissioners are shorter and less edited (with the possible exception of the article on José Manuel Durão Barroso) and cannot really be taken as a model. As to the content of the article, maybe more things could be told about his career before he was nomitated as a Commissioner, but, for the time being, I have no more English language sources that I could consult. Some Romanian language sources may help for his earlier carrier. I have asked some Romanian wikipedians for possible Romanian sources, but nothing came out of it. So fill free to comment on the content, the structure and the Wikipedia compatibility of this article. Maybe it can even become, in time, a GA or FA article and serve as model for articles on other European Commissioners. --Michkalas 17:53, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:45, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

Aytomated review

Many useful remarks from the semi-bot APR operated by User:AndyZ. Thank you very much!

• Lead expanded (but I will see if some words could be added -please, make suggestions)
• A free use photo is not available for this article, only fair use photos officially provided by the European Union. It is difficult to obtain a photo for such a high-rank person not taken by an authorised by the EU photographer, i.e. a photographer whose photos are copyrighted.
• Template {{persondata}} added.
• Years with full dates all linked.
• All footnotes now follow WP:FOOTNOTE.
• Article checked upon WP:WIAFA, but maybe specific comments by an other user should be made as it is difficult a contributor to distance himself from his text and find -even otherwise obvious- weaknesses.

Many thanks again! --Michkalas 18:19, 31 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice effort. It needs some more work, especially in terms of prose. This is my review:

• I rephrased a bit the first sentence of the lead. If you don't like it, revert.
• "He supports Romania's closer European integration and stands for a strong European Union and relaunching ..." I would rephrase as "He supports Romania's closer European integration and stands for a strong European Union and for relaunching". But again this may be a personal preference.
• "Personal life" is stubby. Expand or merge. Maybe you could create a bigger section renamed "Early years and personal life".
• "Leonard Orban has studied engineering and, then, economics". OK, but why don't you tell us where and how straight away. You have another phrase, and then you return to his studies, and you analyse them in the next paragraph. Why? Like that, it looks to me like a repetition or an incoherence.
• Your first 3 paragraphs in "Career" have no citations. Try to have, at least, one citation for each paragraph.
• The prose obviously needs work. It is more than clear that this article is not written by a native-English speaker. These phrases is just one example of the many and various prose problems: :*"In December 2004, he became also Secretary of State of the Ministry of European Integration of Romania coordinating Romania's preparation for accession to the EU, until he became European Commissioner." This is repetitive prose.

• "At the same time, he has held various other posts related to Romania's preparation for EU membership, and he has written numerous newspaper articles and analyses and has given numerous speeches on European affairs." He has held?! He still holds them. And when is "at the same time"? If he does not hold these posts right now, then you should say "he held".
• "Orban is in charge of the Directorate-General for Translation, the DG for Interpretation and the Office for Official Publications of the European Communities, as well as for the Multilingualism policy unit". Why "of" suddenly becomes "for"?

• "The assignment of this portfolio to the Romanian Commissioner by Barroso was criticized as not being substantial enough for a Commissioner, as being a more administrative than political post, and the reasons proposed are that a technocrat rather than a politician was appointed by Romania[14] or the country's deficits in interior and justice policies, especially corruption." Long, prolix phrase, which confused me.
  I would suggest an external copy-editing by a native-English speaker. Maybe Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors could be careful.
• Do not over-wikilink. For instance European Commissioner for Multilingualism is linked at least 3 times. One is enough!
• "Leonard Orban is the European Commissioner for Multilingualism in the current European Commission, the Barroso Commission, the executive body of the European Union." You repeat the exact wording of a phrase in the lead. This looks like a repetition and a sketchy prose.
• "His salary is €18,233.38 (£12,202) a month plus housing allowance." Try to avoid one-sentence paragraphs like this one. Merge or expand.
• "Views on multilingualism" is almost only quotes. Some recasting into alternative language wouldn't go amiss. Now, have in mind that there are alternative ways to present quotes. <blockquote> is the most usual one. You can see such alternative ways and boxes for quotes in El Greco.
• Does he have any opinions about the role of US, the EU-US relations, the role of NATO etc.?--Yannismarou 13:42, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Very detailed, helpful and stimulating review. Thanks for your time. I will follow -I think- all your suggestions as soon as possible. Some of the repetitions you mention came from my effort to comply with WP:SS. The balance is of course difficult. Personal life and earlier carrier, as well as his wider political views (on EU-US relations etc), are really difficult to expand. Before he became a Commissioner he wasn't really prominent even in his own country and, as I do not speak Romanian, I have to rely only on English language sources. I asked for help from Romanian wikipedians but with no result. On "Your first 3 paragraphs in "Career" have no citations. Try to have, at least, one citation for each paragraph.", well, the citation is in the end of the 4th paragraph and I put it there because it the source for all the 4 paragraphs. I don't know what is best: to put it in the beginning of the section or to use the multiple citation template to put it at the end of its paragraph? Thanks again! --Michkalas 14:41, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

I have made most of the changes you suggested: fixing grammar, shortening some long sentences, avoiding repetitions, merging paragraphs, creating section "Early years and personal life", reducing direct quotes, and avoiding too many wikilinks (I am not sure I did that enough). In fact, I have rewritten some parts of the article. As to the quotes, I preferred not to use <blockquote> or boxes like in El Greco, as these, I believe, give too much emphasis on a single sentence, but in the case of Orban a quote that important doesn't seem to exist. On his general political views I haven't found anything important besides that I have already included. Maybe when his official site is launched, there will be more information. I have asked SandyGeorgia for a review. So, thanks again for the review and for your valuable advice on how to proceed with the article. --Michkalas 16:07, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

SG

Sorry for the delay, Michkalas; I lost track of your message on my busy talk page.

Since the article is currently undergoing a copyedit, I didn't look at the prose; I'd rather wait til ce is done.

Pls indicate PDFs as a courtesy to readers with dialup or old broswers—I did one for you as a sample.

Please use language icons on references that are not in English. I don't know all of them—or even where to find all of them—but the ones I know are (in Spanish) (in Italian) (in German) and (in French). You can find the ones you need by guessing, looking at other articles, or you may need to get someone to make one. For examples of how to use them, look at El Hatillo Municipality, Miranda

ah, found them here: Category:Language icons SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:23, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

There is an external jump to an external website in the caption for the image on Orban's oath. That jump should be removed, via either referencing the statement to the website given, or wikilinking to an article about the subject of the jump.

The use of/link to one individual on the Politics of Romania template seems out of place and clutters the article. I can understand linking, for example, the President of a country, but not every politician. IMO, Orban should be removed the template, and the template shouldn't be used in a bio article.

Nice start ! SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:21, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

One more thing: wikilink full dates in refs. SandyGeorgia (Talk) 17:51, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Many thanks for your review and your help.

Indicating PDFs, using language icons on references that are not in English, wikilinking full dates in refs, all done. I didn't wikilink the dates which are used as part of the title of the official government papers as they are given in a fixed way: Monitorul Oficial al României no. 1031/27 decembrie 2006 and Official Journal C 321E of 29 December 2006. Tell me if it would be better to wikilink these too.

There is no external jump in the in the caption for the image on Orban's oath. I suppose you don't mean the description under Image:Leonard Orban oath.jpg where there is an external jump for the source of the photo.

On the "Politics of Romania" template. I had the same thoughts, though it was me who added Orban in the template (I did the same for the Bulgarian Commissioner). Well, nobody, including Romanian Wikipedians, has tried to remove him, though it has been a long time since I have put him there. The fact is that it is not exactly like linking "every politician" as he is the country's European Commissioner and because, though in other EU member states equivalent templates Commissioners are not included, Romania (and Bulgaria) are new members and the European issues are more present in the template and is interesting to know aspects of their accession· for instance, in the other EU countries no article "EU accession" is included in their politics template. There is not much attention for most articles on the Commissioners and there is no well established practice. OK, I am not saying no. I am not really sure what to do. Just some thoughts.

Thanks again -and for the encouraging words too! --Michkalas 22:25, 12 February 2007 (UTC)

Gordon Park

Gordon Park is as undeniably notable person, but, sadly, not a subject that many people feel willing to write about. I recently rewrote this, and I am looking for advice on what I need to improve before nominating for good article. My primary concerns are-

• Not covering important areas. I worry that I may have missed information that is important to the article.
• Bias. Some people hate him, some people are massive supporters of him. Although I do not feel one way or the other, I feel the article may have a slight bias one way or the other.
• Fair use images. I am loath to use fair use images after a huge batch I used got deleted. I have done my best to provide justification, but please let me know if I need more reasoning for why they are fair use.
• Any other issues. Another editor had a read through it, and made some reccomendations as to grammatical changes I could make. I am not going to pretend to be the best writer in the world, any other reccomendations, relating to grammar or otherwise, are very welcome. J Milburn 11:36, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article obviously needs work. I must point out that the whole case reminded me another famous crime case in US known as "Death in the Staircase" (again a man (famous writer) was sentenced of brutally killing his wife, although his children supported him, and the evidence was not watertight), which was the subject of the best documentary I ever saw. I actually wanted during this period to write a book about this case! Let's now return to the article. Some remarks (although I'm not sure I can cover all your concerncs with these remarks!):

• Inconsistent linking of years. You link sometimes single years, though this is not recommended by MoS. And, sometimes, you do not linke full dates.
• Don't we know his exact date and place of birth?
• The prose in the last paragraph of the lead looks to me a bit choppy.
• You go straight to the case. Shouldn't we have some biographical info about his life before the case? After all this is a biography, an article about a person, and not just an article about a case.
• "with Carol having left their home in Leece[5] twice before.[6]". Over-cited sentence IMO. Couldn't both citations been at the end of the sentence.
• "Also, Carol was said to time her periods away from home with the school term, and so it wasn't until she didn't return in time to take up her job as a primary school teacher in September that Gordon reported her missing." This sentence confused me!
• "It was later reported that the body had landed on an underwater ledge, and had it been thrown into the water a metre farther from the land, it would probably never have been found." Hmmm ... This is almost the same wording with a sentence in the lead ("It was said that the body had landed on an underwater ledge, and if it had been dumped a few metres further away from the shore, it would probably have never been found."). This is not nice. It looks like the prose has not been worked in detail and repetitions have been allowed.
• "However, the fact that the charges were dropped angered Carol's brother, Ivor Price, who said that he was disgusted by the way that Carol was portrayed in the trial, and talked of how Carol was not 'someone who is cheap or had a string of lovers.'[11]" Again, clumsy prose: Carol was not someone who is ?! And for the quote a few lines above not italics but blockquote or Cquote.
• "The police then revisited site where the body was found, and found a piece of Westmorland green slate". Again the prose! A careful copy-editing is needed.
• "The case was brought to trial at Manchester Crown Court, and lasted ten weeks. There was no single piece of evidence that pointed to Gordon indisputedly, but the prosecution argued that when the evidence was placed together, it could only point at Park, and not a 'mysterious stranger or secret lover'. Primarily, the case for the prosecution rested on circumstantial evidence ... " Maybe it is just the perversion of a jurist, but I would like some more details about this second trial. What were these circumstantial evidence? Some more things about the testimonies. You could even create a sub-article. You know: In US you probably have the most vivid and exciting procedural crime law system in the world. Take advantage of that, and reflect the atmosphere of the trial in the article! That would be great!
• The only POV problem I can fing is that you have a section "Support", but no section "Opposition" or something like that.
• No! I see more POV: In "Claims of false evidence" I see what claimed those regarding evidence as POV. But there must be some answers to all these claims (which are by the way listy - is it possible to have proper prose there?). What argued the altera pars? I'm afraid the "Controversy" section is getting pro-Park.
• I think the reasoning for these three fair-use images is fine.--Yannismarou 13:06, 3 February 2007 (UTC)

Tom Araya

I plan on getting this to GA in the future, i would appreciate some comments on how to improve the size, if any information is missing, basic stuff, aside from the lead, Cheers. M3tal H3ad 10:38, 27 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 15:49, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "Araya contributed to the lyrics of Slayers material as of 1988's South of Heaven. Tracks include Seasons in the Abyss, Dead Skin Mask, South of Heaven, War Ensemble, and Jihad. His lyrics tend to be about death, murder, and serial killers, a subject Araya finds interesting." Souldn't the names of albums or tracks be in italics or brackets per WP:MoS?
• I see typos throughout the article. Check it carefully.
• Maybe another thorough look of the article for prose issues. For instance, this sentence "Araya's father stated he take the course or find a job, Araya chose to enroll in a two year technical course" may not be a problem for GA, but if you later go for FA, I don't tink that such prose will be regarded as "brilliant".
• Is he a talented bassist? has he been praised for his work as vocalist or bassist?

As a conclusion, I would say that the article will pass GAC. But for a higher ranking I would also like to have a more detailed biography section.--Yannismarou 17:31, 28 January 2007 (UTC)

Bassists aren't really called talented as you can't really hear them. Also on their first records the bass volume is low as he wasn't that great back then. I couldn't find any spelling errors,(i use Firefox 2, inbuilt spell-checker) I'll add another paragraph to Biography although is there any specific things you would like me put in? and is it enough for B-class? thanks M3tal H3ad 01:48, 29 January 2007 (UTC)

I see what you meant by spelling errors, I'm sure i cleaned them up now. M3tal H3ad 03:29, 30 January 2007 (UTC)

As per Hanneman, a section discussing the influences Tom Araya has, his bass and vocal style, and his actual influence on upcoming musicians at large. He has been influential. One interview, here, is where Soilwork frontman Bjorn Strid says Araya's vocal style influenced him as an early musician (without trying to be egotistical, I was the interviewer, LOL!). LuciferMorgan 05:39, 9 February 2007 (UTC)

John Donne

This is an article that I've been working on recently, with the goal of achieving a GA aticle, or maybe even an FA. I admit that there is a lot of work that needs to be done. More information and more citations are obviously necessary. I'd like some feedback on how to proceed with developing the article (id est, how to structure the sections, whether some of the images are really appropriate, what to do with the trivia section, etc.). Galanskov 19:43, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 02:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Trebor

My general impression of the first section:

• Eventually he would become - be more specific, say at which age or in which year.
• Don't wikilink years on their own; they very rarely add anything.
• who avoided unwelcome government attention - what of it? Seems a bit of an odd thing to say, so needs a bit of expansion.
• leaving the responsibility of raising his son to his wife, Elizabeth Jones. His mother, also from a noted Catholic family, was the - was Jones John Donne Junior's mother? It's not explicit. "His" could also refer to either the father or the son. Rephrase it to make it clearer.
• One of Donne's maternal great-grandmothers was a sister of Thomas More, the Catholic martyr and author of Utopia, whom Henry VIII had beheaded for his refusal to accept Henry as the leader of his faith - a bit of an obscure link, which may be best removed. The background information on More is particularly out-of-place.
• Actually, the whole section on his family could do with tying more clearly to Donne. At the moment, it seems like background info is a bit of an aside.
• he was accepted as a member of Thavies Inn -as Thavies Inn is redlinked, it'd be useful to know a little more about what it is, and what being a member means.
• in the legal area of London - again, some expansion on what this means would be preferable.
• we know that he fought - using "we" shouold be avoided; see here.

The prose could do with some work, and the references decrease later on in the article which may be a problem. The images look good, but the caption for Pyford could be better - I don't like the way it's instructing the reader to note something. The structure is quite tricky as it'd be fairly hard to separate personal and profession life (as is often done). The trivia section is always quite a hard one to deal with; if it's relevant or noteworthy then try to merge somewhere else in the article, or else just remove (I'll leave the judging to you). It's coming along nicely so far; good work. Trebor 21:38, 25 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nicely done, but in some sections under-cited and IMO with a POV tone throughout the article. This is my review:

• "Donne came from a Roman Catholic family, and so would experience persecution until his conversion to the Anglican Church. Despite his great education and poetic talents, he would live in poverty for several years, relying heavily on wealthy friends. Eventually he would become an Anglican priest and Dean of St Paul's. His literary works would reflect these trends, with love poetry and satires from his youth, and religious sermons during his later years." The over-use of "would" have been criticized in the past in FAC.
• "Despite the obvious dangers, Donne’s mother ensured he was educated by the Jesuits,[1] from whom he acquired a profound understanding of his faith that equipped him for the ideological religious conflicts of his time." Why do you put the citation here in the middle of the sentence? The rest of it is unsourced?
• The third paragraph of "Early life" is undercited. it needs at least one more citation.
• "By the age of 25 he was well prepared for the glittering diplomatic career". "Glittering" could be regarded as POV I am afraid.
• "Career and Later Life" has no citations.
• "he remains one of the most vibrant, exciting and intellectually challenging of all English poets." Uncited and possibly POV.
• "In a life largely devoted to state affairs, religion, and other matters considered more respectable in the culture of the day, he seems to have regarded writing as a tawdry habit he could never quite shake off, but his wide ranging output includes sonnets, love poetry, religious poems, Latin translations, epigrams, elegies, songs, satirical verses and sermons". Who says all these things? Any sources?
• Get rid of "Trivia". Incorporate its material, if it is useful, in the main article.
• "Critical Works" are no part of the references. They are "Further reading" or a separate "Critical Works" section.--Yannismarou 19:03, 26 January 2007 (UTC)

Awadewit

I think that this article has a lot of promise but some sentences are awkwardly worded (a copyedit would fix that) and it needs more scholarly citations. Overall, though, I think that the article needs a few sentences here and there to explain its ideas more fully, particularly to a reader unfamiliar with seventeenth century poetry.

• Perhaps you could mention one or two of Donne's most famous works in the opening? The poems that one must have in a survey of a seventeenth-century poetry? What is the essence of Donne? (By the way, I disagree that you need a source for the list of genres that Donne wrote in. That is silly. That is not the kind of statement that requires a source. No historian or literary scholar would ask anyone for a source on such a statement.)
• In the second paragraph: Was he poor because he was Catholic? Perhaps you could make that connection, if it exists, more explicit.
• Why born sometime between January 23 and June 19? Why not born early in 1572? If those dates are significant, why not explain them?
• Perhaps simply "Welsh father"?
• As one of the other reviewers stated, the details on Donne's family are a little confusing. But I think that they are important. Clearly religion was an essential element of Donne's life. Perhaps that section could be reworded? Think of it like a story and less like a relation of a series of facts, perhaps.
• Briefly explain Oath of Supremacy - at least mention that it is connected to his being Catholic.
• Condense legal education sentences.
• Explain "coterie poetry." Alas, it is not a commonly known term.
• You mention the "17th Holy Sonnet" - explain it more or delete it. If it is important enough to mention, it is important enough to give a few sentences to.
• Again, please explain why the "Death's Duel" sermon is infamous. Have some fun!
• One cannot die "on Lent," only "during Lent." The church season lasts meany, many days.
• Perhaps you should give even more detailed examples of the metaphysical conceit? It is a difficult concept to understand.
• Could you list the works published in his lifetime with their original dates and then the standard Donne edition used by scholars in the Poetry and Prose sections? I found the dates jarring.
• The footnotes look oddly referenced to me. I was confused by all of the letters. I'm also confused why you don't reference the biographies you've listed instead of the encyclopedia articles. In general, biographies are more complete and reliable than encyclopedias.
• I would suggest removing "Sparknotes" from the external links as well. It is not a reliable source for literary criticism. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Awadewit (talk • contribs) 19:12, February 5, 2007(UTC) (UTC)

User:BirgitteSB

• I find the tone to be sometimes inappropriate and not upheld by the references. Tone should less dramtic. If the source reads Donne's first teachers were Jesuits. At the age of 11, Donne and his younger brother Henry were entered at Hart Hall, University of Oxford, where Donne studied for three years; don't talk of his mother ensuring hs education by Jesuits or his profound understanding.
  • Despite the obvious dangers, Donne’s mother ensured he was educated by the Jesuits, from whom he acquired a profound understanding of his faith that equipped him for the ideological religious conflicts of his time.
  • Donne was forced to accept a retired country life in Pyrford, Surrey
  • It is not known how Donne grew to abandon the faith he had been educated to defend
• There is sometimes an inappropriate context as if you are stuck writing about what happened from within his lifetime instead of a general enyclopedia article.
  • These poems were never published although they circulated widely in manuscript form Never?
  • he would become vicar of St. Dunstan's-in-the-West would become?
• The text is needs overall tightening; it is repeats events in different sections and is sometimes even contradictory. It would probably benefit from a complete overhaul in organization where his life and works are dealt with at the same time in chronologically based sections.
  • including the infamous Death’s Duel sermon delivered at the Palace of Whitehall before King Charles I in February 1631
  • Even as he lay dying on Lent in 1631, he rose from his sickbed and delivered what was later described as his own funeral sermon. In case you do not know: Death’s Duel sermon = what was later described as his own funeral sermon'
  • It is not known how Donne grew to abandon the faith he had been educated to defend, but he certainly was in communication with the King, James I of England, and in 1610 and 1611 he wrote two anti-Catholic polemics, Pseudo-Martyr and Ignatius his Conclave.[3] Although James was pleased with Donne's work, he refused to reinstate him at court and instead urged him to take holy orders.[2] After a long period of financial uncertainty and difficulty, spent seeking profitable employment, during which he was twice a member of Parliament (1601 and 1614), Donne finally acceded to the King's wishes and was ordained into the Church of England in 1615.[5]
  • Earlier he had valued a skeptical approach to religion, but this now gave way to a firm faith in the traditional teachings of the Bible. Having converted to the Anglican Church, Donne pursued a position as a preacher.

—The preceding unsigned comment was added by BirgitteSB (talk • contribs) 01:22, February 11, 2007(UTC) (UTC)

Isiah Leggett

I'm pretty new at this, so I started with a low-priority article. Need general assessment, including whether it follows general WP and project guidelines for style. Are there enough citations? What parts need to be expanded? Should there be more about family and personal life or should the emphasis remain on his political career? Mocko13 02:30, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Galanskov

A good article so far. The style looks good to me. The article needs some more citations and interwiki links. I think the emphasis of this article should remain on his political career. Information on his personal life should be kept to the basics, such as whether or not he's married or has kids. The infobox could do with some more information. It might help if specific dates are given for some of the events described in the early life section. I'll help out. (Note: I'm a relative newbie around here too, so my recommendations may not be as good as those given by a veteran editor.) Galanskov 19:59, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Trebor

It's looking good so far, and I've upgraded the rating to B-class. I'll add my thoughts:

• You should add the birth date in brackets after the name. See the style guidelines for biographies for more information on standard formatting.
• During the 1970's - there is no need for an apostrophe in "1970's".
• He would return - keeping it simple, just leave it as "he returned" (at the moment, there's a mismatch of tense with the rest of the sentence).
• Be consistent in your wikilinking of dates (see here for the guideline). There are two basic rules to follow: if you have a month and a day, wikilink them together to allow user date preferences to set in (you can set in your preferences if you prefer August 10, or 10 August, for instance); and don't link years on their own unless it adds context. If there's a day, month and year, wikilink them all for date preferences. Hope you could follow that.
• The whole article is a low on references. Ideally, every fact you include can be cited to a source, but at least aim for one cite per paragraph.
• In the references, enter the accessdate as yyyy-mm-dd so it will be wikilinked and not come up as a redlink.
• The image may not fall under fair use - as it is a living person, it is replaceable. If you can't get hold of a freely licensed image, don't worry, but I'm warning you that the image may be deleted. If you can get hold of or create a freely licensed image then that's great and add it to the article.

Those are my suggestions on how to improve it; keep up the good work. Trebor 21:51, 22 January 2007 (UTC)

Mocko13

Thanks for edit suggestions, made edits based on them. Going to keep the photo until it gets pulled. The article on Doug Duncan has one form the same source, which is why I went there. Mocko13 00:05, 23 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 02:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Previous reviewers covered the major problems. Some minor remarks:

• Per WP:MoS do not wikilink single years (e.g. 2006); only full dates (June 2, 2006).
• Don't you have the full date of his birth?
• "First Term as County Executive" looks a bit stubby to me. Can't you expand it a bit, analyzing the controversial issues you mention?--Yannismarou 08:58, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Ralph Bakshi

A lot of work has been put into this article overtime. I'd like to know how well the various editors who worked on this article have done, and what more could be done to bring this entry to featured article quality. (Ibaranoff24 23:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC))

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 02:27, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Very nice in generel. Some remarks for further improvement:

• In the lead: "animated feature films that were aimed at adults ", "He pioneered animation with adult themes". IMO this looks like a repetition; maybe you could combine the two similar assessments.
• "and it was unquestionably aimed primarily at adult audiences—something that had previously been unheard of. Creator Robert Crumb, however, hated the film, and eventually wound up killing off the title character in retaliation." Proper referencing needed here.
• "animation scholars accused him of not producing "real" animation, but simply training artists to trace over live action." Citation needed again; otherwise it is weasel.
• "Bakshi turned away from race and cultural issues and began producing fantasy films." The connection of this paragraph with the previous one looks to me a bit sheamless.
• "Another unmade Bakshi project was to be called Bobby's Girl, to be made from a screenplay he co-wrote with a young and ambitious Canadian named John Kricfalusi." "Unmade" and then "to be made". Have in mind that if you go for FAC the prose must be brilliant.
• "The series was widely hailed by TV critics, and it is still prized by collectors of TV series today." Again citation needed. Try to ahve at least one citation for each paragraph.
• "to Bakshi's earlier films Coonskin[17][18][19]". Try to avoid more than 2 citations in a row. You can combine them in various ways in one citation. See for instance Tourette syndrome or W. S. Gilbert.
• Last paragraph of "Controversy and criticism" also needs citing.
• "He is widely believed to be the inspiration for the character of Comic Book Guy on The Simpsons and Ralph the Guard on Tiny Toons Adventures and Animaniacs." Who believes that?
• I added a in "Influence".--Yannismarou 09:18, 24 January 2007 (UTC)

• • Your concerns have been addressed. Please take a look at the current revision. (Ibaranoff24 18:52, 26 January 2007 (UTC))

The Notorious B.I.G.

This article has had problems with neutrality/weasel words, which I've tried to fix, and some debate over the amount of album information included. Has the article overcome enough of this to meet GA- or higher standards? Laalaaa 20:06, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 00:47, 20 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice job. But it needs some further "polishing", in order to "shine". This is my review:

• "Christopher George Latore Wallace (May 21, 1972 – March 9, 1997), also known as Biggie Smalls (after a gangster in the 1975 film Let's Do It Again), Big Poppa, Frank White (from the film King of New York), and The Notorious B.I.G. (Business Instead of Game[1])". From all these names, why do we choose "The Notorious B.I.G." as title of the article? Was it more often used than the other names? What makes it more special?
• Note 1:"After he switched from dealing drugs to rap; see [1]". This is an external jump. These jumps are not nice. Prefer link containing text.
• "Born in Brooklyn, New York, Biggie grew up during the peak years of the 1980s crack epidemic." What is your point here? What had the "crack epidemic" to do with his growing?
• In general, my impression is that the flow of the lead is not so good. An X statement is not so well connected with the next V statement.
• "Biggie was noted for his storytelling and freestyling abilities, and his easy to understand lyrics." His "easy" or his "ease"? And to understand what exactly; the meaning of the lyrics? Why is this notable? Don't other rappers understand lyrics?
• "Christopher Wallace was born ... ", "Wallace had started ...", "In August 1995, Biggie's protegé group ...". Choose a name for him? I think you should only use the title's name "The Notorious B.I.G. ...".
• "In March 1992, Biggie featured in The Source's Unsigned Hype column, dedicated to aspiring rappers and was invited to produce a recording with other unsigned artists, in a move that was apparently unusual at the time." Why was it unusual?
• "Biggie's first child, T-Yanna, was born on August 10, 1992." Was he married or not?
• "With his new daughter in immediate financial need ... ". Why was she sick?
• "Once discovered by Combs, Biggie quit and became a full-time hip hop artist." Quit the drugs' dealing you mean? How did Combs convince him?
• "This was his first remix to chart that featured solely hip hop artists." I asked for a citation here. Try to have at least one citation in each paragraph, and to cite all the important assessments.
• "In August 1995, Biggie's protegé group, Junior M.A.F.I.A. (Junior Masters At Finding Intelligent Attitudes), released their debut album." Why hadn't you told us earlier that he had created a protegé group? When was it created?
• "Biggie continued to collaborate with R&B artists, in 1995 appearing with Bad Boy groups 112 (on "Only You") and Total (on "Can't You See"), both charting in the top 20 of the Hot 100." Try to avoid one-sentence stubby paragraphs like this one.
• "In the summer of 1996, he arrested at his home in Teaneck, New Jersey for drug and weapons possession charges.[6]" But you had told us that "once discovered by Combs, Biggie quit and became a full-time hip hop artist." Had he really stopped dealing drugs? Is your first assessment that "he quit" accurate or not? He did stopped, but then restarted?
• "and that Biggie had adopted his persona". What do you mean here exactly?
• In "Style" there is a tense mixture; present tense in one paragraph and past tense in another one.
• "TIME magazine write Biggie raps with an ability to "make multi-syllabic rhymes sound... smooth".[32] Krims describes Biggie's rhythmic style as "effusive".[33] Before starting a verse, Biggie sometimes uses onomatopoeic vocables to "warm up"" The prose is a bit choppy here.
• In "Lyrical content" I see the verb "describe" repeatedly used, and I also see once again a tense mixture.
• "Before his death, Biggie created a hip-hop supergroup called The Commission, which consisted of himself, Jay-Z, Lil' Cease, P. Diddy and Charli Baltimore. " I think this should be a part of his biography.
• Get rid of "Trivia"! Such sections are no longer esteemed. If the info there is useful, incorporate it in the main text.
• Get also rid of "See also"! The links there are already linked in the main text, and, if one or two are not, you can easily link them (if you think they are necessary).
• Notes 31 and 32 are empty.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 14:59, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the suggestions. They're very helpful. Re: names, I was trying to refer to him as Wallace until he uses "Biggie" as his rap alias, but it does make more sense to use one name throughout the article. Laalaaa 19:33, 21 January 2007 (UTC)

BFeen

"Since his death, a further two albums..."
→At the least, fix the grammar. At the most, "Biggie's presence over rap music and hip-hop culture continues to influence modern day artists, as many cite, both explicitly and implicitly, him as a seminal influence in their lyrics, styles, and videos.

Childhood and Youth section
"These experiences with crime, drugs, and violence would serve as inspiration for Biggie's lyrical content and persona. In the song "Sky's the Limit," he centers the story around his school-day drug-dealing.

Ludwig Mies van der Rohe

I would like to see a peer review of this article so that it can achieve FA status. — Linnwood 17:43, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Informative and with nice prose, but no citations and some other issues. This is my review:

• A general remark for start. There are no inline citations. This is a problem for FA. Check WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTES.
• I'm not sure the lead offers a nice summary of the article. There is almost nothing for his life. It is just about this architecture. And I'm also not sure about the formatting: a stubby first par and a long second one. Maybe WP:LEAD could help you take some ideas.
• I also see that in the main article as well we don't have info for his early life, family, edication. The 22 first years of his life are missig from the article!
• "But after World War I, Mies began, while still designing traditional custom homes, a parallel experimental effort in modernist design ...". IMO it is not nice to start a new section with "but".
• "More than perhaps any other practicing pioneer of modernism, Mies used philosophy as a basis for his work." I think this sentence must go in the beginning of the section and then elaborate and "build" on it.
• "This masterpiece showed the world that exposed...". "Masterpiece" may be POV. In any case, you must use verifiable sourcces to support this charecterization.
• "The house has been described as sublime, a temple hovering between heaven and earth, a poem, a work of art." Again, by whom? You definitely need to cite here, so as to avoid WP:WEASEL and [[WP:POV}}. And does everybody describe it as "sublime" etc.? Aren't there any criticisms?
• "The house exists today as a part of the Elmhurst Art Museum.[1]." Avoid external jumps like this one. Use proper citations and take advantage of Template:cite web and Template:cite news.
• "But when none were able to match the genius and poetic quality of his own work." IMO POV!
• "Facts and Figures" is stubby. Get rid of it. If necessary, incoroporate its content in the main article.
• "See also" is toooo long. And why red links there? Do you intend to create them? Trim the section (and if possibly get rid of it) by incoroporating the useful links there in the main prose.--Yannismarou 17:28, 17 January 2007 (UTC)

Susanlesch

A good subject and a good FA for Wikipedia to have. I wish you luck.

• The red links could go away completely (unless you've requested articles for them).
• What about adding a {{wikiquote}} page since he has some notable aphorisms?
• I searched for and did not find the word "residence." I have no training in architecture but guess it might replace "Residential Home."

Léonce Perret

This article was recently translated from French to English. It went through the process of editing, revising and proofreading by multiple users. If it is possible, could you make some comments regarding the article's content and possible errors in the editing. Would you also comment on the article's potential as a good/featured article as well (and where to develop)? Thank you very much in advance! :) --lovelaughterlife♥^talk? 02:59, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Informative article, but, in order to be GA or FA in the English Encyclopedia, it needs work. This is my review:

• Cite properly the article pre WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTES. The article as it is now has no inline citations, and wouldn't pass neither GAC or FAC.
• "Léonce Perret (May 13, 1880 in Niort, Deux-Sèvres, France – August 14, 1935 in Paris) was a French stage actor and director, then author, actor, director and producer of French films." Why twice "actor" and "director" in the same sentence?
• "He later directed numerous short films and gradually gained significant notoriety in the world of French cinematography." Notoriety has a negative meaning.
• "that earned him a certain amount of notoriety in cinema circles." And repetition of the same forms of expression. I can jugde from the lead that the lead needs improvement. What about a copy-editing by an external native Engish speaker user or asking for the help of the Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors.
• "His 1925 ...". Per WP:MoS we wikilink only full dates (December 1 1925).
• "Around this time he met Valentine Petit, a singer and dancer who was working at the Folies Bergère, who was to become his wife several years later." Prose deficiencies again.
• Georges Sadoul stated: “Perret made brilliant use of every editing resource at his disposal: varied camera angles, backlighting, his cameraman Specht’s beautiful photography… all while working from a rather ordinary script that borrowed heavily from the Deux orphelines. Mixing Ennery’s melodrama with a few jingoistic episodes, Léonce Perret was able to render a graceful and lively story by using an extraordinarily refined cinematic repertoire: backlighting, low-angle shots, close-ups, moving shots and numerous other innovations, all of which Perret implemented with flair, in stark contrast to Louis Feuillade’s minimalist style and the still somewhat primitive technique of David W. Griffith at that time." When you quote italics are not necessary.
• "Today, Léonce Perret is considered to be a self made man who became successful by climbing the ladder rung by rung. He was well known for his independence, creative freedom and several innovations as well as a knack for discovering new talent." A characteristic example why citations are needed! Who asserts these things? Be careful with expressions like "a self made man who became successful by climbing the ladder rung by rung". They are on the verge of WP:POV. And "independence" from what?
• "For example, cinema historians give him little consideration in their published research." Without citations this is weasel.
• "Filmography" is too long and listy. I suggest that you keep the most important of his filmobraphy here and create a sub-article per WP:SS with his full filmography. I did not find another FA for a director (there may be although), but for ideas you could check Henry Fonda or Bette Davis. Per these articles you could also add a section with awards.
• "Quotes" is like a trivia section which is not recommended. Incorporate these quotes, if they are absolutely necessary, in the main article. For ways to do that, you can check to of my article: Demosthenes and El Greco.
• Get rid of the "See also" section. Incorporate these links in the main article, if they are absolutely necessary.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article, and add more (such as "Category:1935 deaths", "Category:1880 births" etc.).--Yannismarou 11:13, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

An update:

• Cite properly the article pre WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTES. The article as it is now has no inline citations, and wouldn't pass neither GAC or FAC. I cannot find the quotes, as this article was translated from the French Wikipedia. The quotes would be in French, not English. Help?

You can use French sources, but the majority IMO should be in English.--Yannismarou 21:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Léonce Perret (May 13, 1880 in Niort, Deux-Sèvres, France – August 14, 1935 in Paris) was a French stage actor and director, then author, actor, director and producer of French films." Why twice "actor" and "director" in the same sentence? Done. It was in the same sentence because he was first a stage director and actor, and later film director and actor. Hope it's more clear now.
• "He later directed numerous short films and gradually gained significant notoriety in the world of French cinematography." Notoriety has a negative meaning. I never looked into the word; in my mind, I think it just passed as acclaim in my head. Changed to acclaim.
• "that earned him a certain amount of notoriety in cinema circles." And repetition of the same forms of expression. I can jugde from the lead that the lead needs improvement. What about a copy-editing by an external native Engish speaker user or asking for the help of the Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors. Same as above. Requested copyediting help.
• "His 1925 ...". Per WP:MoS we wikilink only full dates (December 1 1925). Thanks. Last time I checked the manual of style, I don't think I saw that. Thanks for the refresher.
• "Around this time he met Valentine Petit, a singer and dancer who was working at the Folies Bergère, who was to become his wife several years later." Prose deficiencies again. Changed.
• Georges Sadoul stated: “Perret made brilliant use of every editing resource at his disposal: varied camera angles, backlighting, his cameraman Specht’s beautiful photography… all while working from a rather ordinary script that borrowed heavily from the Deux orphelines. Mixing Ennery’s melodrama with a few jingoistic episodes, Léonce Perret was able to render a graceful and lively story by using an extraordinarily refined cinematic repertoire: backlighting, low-angle shots, close-ups, moving shots and numerous other innovations, all of which Perret implemented with flair, in stark contrast to Louis Feuillade’s minimalist style and the still somewhat primitive technique of David W. Griffith at that time." When you quote italics are not necessary. Done.
• "Today, Léonce Perret is considered to be a self made man who became successful by climbing the ladder rung by rung. He was well known for his independence, creative freedom and several innovations as well as a knack for discovering new talent." A characteristic example why citations are needed! Who asserts these things? Be careful with expressions like "a self made man who became successful by climbing the ladder rung by rung". They are on the verge of WP:POV. And "independence" from what? Added citation needed request, and removed word "independent".
• "For example, cinema historians give him little consideration in their published research." Without citations this is weasel.Added citation needed request.
• "Filmography" is too long and listy. I suggest that you keep the most important of his filmobraphy here and create a sub-article per WP:SS with his full filmography. I did not find another FA for a director (there may be although), but for ideas you could check Henry Fonda or Bette Davis. Per these articles you could also add a section with awards. Created subpages.
• "Quotes" is like a trivia section which is not recommended. Incorporate these quotes, if they are absolutely necessary, in the main article. For ways to do that, you can check to of my article: Demosthenes and El Greco. I don't know if it's best to remove it. I'll propose it on talk page.

If you go in FAC with a trivia section like this one you will probably face criticisms.--Yannismarou 21:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

• Get rid of the "See also" section. Incorporate these links in the main article, if they are absolutely necessary. Again, I don't see how this change is necessary. Will propose it on talk page.

The trend is against "See also" sections. If you decide to keep it, make sure you don't repeat articles already linked in the main article.--Yannismarou 21:22, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article, and add more (such as "Category:1935 deaths", "Category:1880 births" etc.) Done.

--Thanks for the comments. --lovelaughterlife♥^talk? 20:47, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:08, 15 January 2007 (UTC)

Fahd of Saudi Arabia

In Wikipedia's list of long pages, this is tops among articles written about people, living or dead (at 220 KBs). This is almost close to FA level (I can feel it), but what needs to be taken care of before we take such a chance? --Slgrandson (page - messages - contribs) 23:24, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Jeffpw

Sorry to disappoint you, but this article is nowhere near FA status. There's not one single reference in this article, so it fails WP:V right off the bat. You (or somebody) will be busy for months citing every fact in an article of this length. There's also only one small picture at the bottom of this loooooong article. It needs a thorough copy editing, too. Additionally, the article (the parts I read, anyway) reads like a promotional piece for the Kingdom. Whole swaths could be deleted from the article, since they are more about the Kingdom than the King. I don't mean to be discouraging, but you asked for opinions. Jeffpw 23:49, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 67 tons, use 67 tons, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 67&nbsp;tons.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.^[?] Specifically, an example is 60 km.
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid using special characters (ex: &+{}[]) in headings.
• Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Wikipedia:Guide to layout.^[?]
• Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
• This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.^[?]
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • it has been
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• Please make the spelling of English words consistent with either American or British spelling, depending upon the subject of the article. Examples include: honor (A) (British: honour), behavior (A) (British: behaviour), harbor (A) (British: harbour), neighbor (A) (British: neighbour), favorite (A) (British: favourite), meter (A) (British: metre), defense (A) (British: defence), organize (A) (British: organise), recognize (A) (British: recognise), realize (A) (British: realise), criticize (A) (British: criticise), ization (A) (British: isation), analyse (B) (American: analyze), paralyze (A) (British: paralyse), travelled (B) (American: traveled), fulfillment (A) (British: fulfilment), program (A) (British: programme), sulfur (A) (British: sulphur).
• Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
  • Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”

Avoid misplaced formality: “in order to/for” (-> to/for), “thereupon”, “notwithstanding”, etc.

• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Senators^{Talk | Contribs} 00:34, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

An article needing work. Probably a new review will be needed after the suggestions of this one are implemented. These are some initial remarks:

• The article has no References and inline citations. Please add sources and citations, and read carefully WP:CITE and WP:FOOTNOTES.
• Do we know the exact place of Fahd's birth?
• Try to avoid one-sentence paragraphs. They are bad both for the layout and the prose flow.
• While at the Princes' School Fahd studied under tutors including Sheikh Abdul-Ghani Khayat. Who is this tutor, and why is he so important to be the only of his tutors to be mentioned here? And if he is so important, why don't you un-redlink him and create a stub for him?
• "Indeed, it is claimed that he once lost more than $6m in one night at the Monte Carlo casino. "[1] Summoned back to Saudi Arabia" Avoid external jumps like this one. Make proper inline citations, and use, where appropriate, Template:cite news and Template:cite web.
• "Numerous sources reported on Fahd's famously liberal youth ... ". What sources? Cite, otherwise this is weasel words.
• "King Fahd was generally considered a moderate and tolerant leader of an otherwise traditional and conservative nation, as was evident in his continued acceptance of a large foreign labour force in the kingdom and close ties to the west which became visible in the Persian Gulf War and liberation of Kuwait." Huh? What has this to do with his youth? Irrelevant uncited assessment placed in a wrong section.
• "Marbella" is also put in the middle of nowhere! Put your material in order, and avoid stubby sections like this one. Merge or expand (after you put in order!).
• "Early political positions" is also badly written. Stubby itself with insufficient information and stubby sentence.
• And in the middle of the narration of his political ascent, career and reign, we get this: "Family and progeny". Badly placed section once again! Put it after the narration of his political career under the title "Family and personal life" (or something similar) or place it in the begining of the article in "Early years", which could be renamed as "Early years and family". Or keep it as "Family" but not where it is now. The article desperately needs a better structure. Read also WP:LAYOUT, especially the "Structure" section.
• "King Fahd's foreign policies included support on for the War on Terrorism which he described would crush the terrorists "with an iron fist". He has been a supporter of the United Nations. He supports foreign aid and has given 5.5% of Saudia Arabia's national income through various funds especially the Saudi Fund for Development and the OPEC Fund for International Development." Choppy prose. I also thing you could find more things about Fahd's foreign policy, and, subsequently, offer to the reader a more comprehensive analysis.
• "The Islamic Revolution in Iran in 1979". Per WP:MoS we should not wikiling sole years; only full dates (January 3, 1979).
• Again in the "Foreign policy" section there is a huge project with the structure. You treat first the "War on terrorism" and then the events of 1979 and forward.
• "King Fahd helped finance the Contras in Nicaragua.[citation needed]" should be fixed with the adequate inline citations. In any case, this sentence is another example of choppy and clumsy prose, missing analysis, verification and correct placing.
• "Reform and industrialization": Where is the content of this sub-section?!
• "He was buried in the last thobe (traditional Arab robe) he wore." Don't start a new section with "he". "King Fahd ... "
• "Funeral" does not flow well. It gets listy.
• I don't know if all these links in "See also" section are necessary. In any case, the tendency in Wikipedia is to try to get rid of these sections, and link these articles, if they are so important, within the main prose.
• "Late Saudi King Fahd Modernized Kingdom is a dead link". If it is a dead link, why do you have it there?--Yannismarou 13:57, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Daniel Rodriguez

Good Article. Has had editing problems in the past, but is stable now. Jeffpw 10:53, 8 March 2007 (UTC)

Relisted to generate comments. 10:27, 7 November 2007 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 12:48, 8 November 2007 (UTC)

Anna Laetitia Barbauld

I would appreciate having this article peer-reviewed at this point; I am aiming for GA and eventually FA. I could use a copyeditor as really only I have looked at the prose (sometimes late at night) as well as some help with the pictures (see Barbauld talk page). Thanks. Awadewit 18:29, 5 February 2007 (UTC)

MLilburne

A very impressive article and a pleasure to read. It is certainly worthy of GA status at the moment and in my opinion it's well on its way to being FA-ready. I've taken the liberty of changing its assessment to A-class. Just a few comments:

• The lead doesn't really live up to the standard of the rest of the article. The prose in the second paragraph is awkward, with "Barbauld also... moreover... Finally" following each other in a rather monotonous succession. I also suspect that it will get criticised at the FA stage for making slightly exaggerated claims about the importance of its subject. Both "her famous primers shaped the minds of generations" and "her rightful place in literary history" have a rather un-encyclopedic tone.

I have been having trouble with the lead. Hopefully it is better now. It still has the same "monotonous" structure, but I feel that if I started adding too much more material, I would start violating the lead requirements. It would be nice if someone else who had some knowledge about Barbauld could help me out here. :)

• The discussion about Jean-Paul Marat could have been a bit clearer. From what source do we get the information that he "supposedly" proposed to her?

See footnote 8. The source prevaricates as well.

• I don't think you really need to wikilink "poems".

I was trying to add links per the automated peer review; the links have been removed.

• This sentence reads a little awkwardly: "In 1773 Barbauld published her first book of poems, entitled simply Poems, after they 'had been handed round from friend to friend and had been greatly admired.'"

I have tried to fix this.

• The quote of the letter from Barbauld to her brother about adopting one of his children is long enough that it should be set off as a block quote. Same thing with the later Isobel Armstrong quote. (As this one is a secondary quote you may possibly be asked whether you can paraphrase the argument instead.)

Done.

• I understand what you mean by "juvenile trials" but other readers may not. A little explanation would be an improvement.

Done.

• “Elizabeth Barrett Browning could still quote the opening lines of Lessons for Children at age thirty-nine.” This quote just floats in the text without discussion or attribution. There's another one a few sentences later.

These are quotations from commentators; they have citations - see footnotes 51 and 53. I felt that they were useful information and did not need any more explanation.

In conclusion, this is a very good article that I'll be happy to support for FA once these small issues have been dealt with. MLilburne 10:54, 13 February 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Excellent! Minor (almost trivia!) remarks:

• The lead looks to me fine now.
• "Anna Lætitia (Aikin) Barbauld". You don't have to repeat the full name.

Ok - now only "Barbauld."

• "Early life" has one huge paragraph. For layout reasons, maybe you would like to split it in two of them. Maybe you could do the same in "Political involvement and Hampstead". But the whole thing mey just be a personal reference ...

I have broken them up.

• "Barbauld now became a “woman of letters.” " It reminds me a lot a similar expression in the lead, and could be regarded as repetitive.

I have reworded the sentence.

• "Barbauld expressed some “misgivings”..." Why?

It is not clear from the source.

• "“unquestionably the first [i.e., best] of our female poets, and one of the most eloquent and powerful of our prose writers”". This quote belongs to whom exactly?

I have included the periodical title.

• "Not only ... greatest abuses of the industrial age." Maybe you should cite here.

These sentences are an explication of the Matthew Arnold sentence (which has a citation) - since it is basically repeating the same information but trying to explain it, I didn't think I needed to repeat the citation. Do I?

• Many quotes in "Poetry". I believe that some recasting into alternative language wouldn't go amiss.

I have tried to fix this.

• "Moreover, she contends that it is precisely the isolation forced on Dissenters by others that marks them out, not anything inherent in their form of worship. Finally, appealing to British patriotism, she maintains that the French cannot be allowed to outstrip the English in liberty." I think you should cite here.

I have done so.

• "Lessons for Children and Hymns in Prose had, for children’s books, an unprecedented influence; not only did they influence the poetry of William Blake and William Wordsworth[50], they also influenced generations of school children." A bit repetitive IMO.

You are absolutely right - how embarrassing. It is fixed.

• Very well-reseached.

Conclusion: I think this is ready for FAC.--Yannismarou 12:16, 14 February 2007 (UTC)

Andrew Orlowski

How much about Wikipedia should remain in this article? He makes it a focus of his works, but self-referencing is quite pointless. -- Zanimum 17:17, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• If this article is about a person, please add {{persondata|PLEASE SEE [[WP:PDATA]]!}} along with the required parameters to the article - see Wikipedia:Persondata for more information.^[?]
• Please provide citations for all of the {{fact}}s.
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]
  • Thanks for this review. -- Zanimum 15:38, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

A critic of Wikipedia ! This is my review:

• The lead is too short. Check LEAD.
• I see a . Fix it.
• Nothing about his life? Early years? Personal life? Stydies? You go straight to "Early career" and 1992. What about 1966-1992?
• "Early career" is stubby. I suggest you expand.
• I see some stubby one-sentence paragraphs. Merge or expand them.
• "The Register" is full of scattered info, not well-connected with one another, and, subsequently, the prose flow is bad. All this info may be useful, but you should put it in an order.
• Not all your online references use Template:cite news.
• The article on Wikipedia is not long. Especially if the rest of the article gets expanded.
• Trim the "see also" section. After my edit, it has just one link. It would be incorporated somewhere in the main article.--Yannismarou 20:13, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

What happens when a person keeps their pre-career life private? -- Zanimum 19:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)

Then, our cabability of improving the article is limited.--Yannismarou 10:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)

Ellis Paul

I'm a relatively new Wiki editor. Would like constructive feedback in my goal to reach FA status and would like a few members of the WikiBioProject to rate the article. Thank you in advance for your assistance. Kmzundel 00:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Wikipedia:Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (numbers), there should be a non-breaking space -   between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 3000 Miles, use 3000 Miles, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 3000&nbsp;Miles.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
• Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), avoid capitalizing words unless they are proper nouns or the first word of the heading.
• As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2]^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Senators^{Talk | Contribs} 03:48, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice job. But it needs some work to be in accord with Wikipedia's standards and criteria. This is my review:

• You must also tell us in the lead date and place of birth. Usually this is done in a parenthesis. Check a recently promoted biographical FA article to take an idea. Check also WP:LEAD about how a lead should be - the lead must be a comprehensive summary of the article.
• "Critics have praised him for a charismatic, personally authentic performance style that has influenced other folk-pop musicians. While remaining among the most pop-friendly of today's singer-songwriters with songs that have appeared in movies and TV, he has bridged the gulf between the modern folk sound and the populist traditions of Woody Guthrie and Pete Seeger more successfully than many of his songwriting peers." All these are assessments that need citing; otherwise they could be regarded as weasel words or, worse, original research. Unless you repeat and analyse these assessments in the main article. But I do not think you do that. Maybe if you decide to rewrite the lead, you could remove or repeat and further analyze these assessments in a new section named "Assessments" or "Criticisms". This is just a suggestion.

The lead is the only paragraph I did NOT write and was hesitant to remove it, but I will re-work it, taking your comments into consideration.Kmzundel

• Do not wikilink single years (1983); per MoS we wikilink only full dates (May 8 1983).

Not my work either. Thought it was odd. Will remove. Kmzundel

• Many short or bigger quotes interrupting the prose. Maybe you could trim some of them or use alternative ways to introduce them. You could take ideas from two of the articles I've worked on: Demosthenes and El Greco. Some recasting into alternative language could also help.
• "Although Paul goes on to say that the four musicians learned a lot from each other, End Construction eventually ran its course and disbanded." Try to avoid single-sentence paragraphs like this one. They are not good both for the layout and the flow of the article's flow.
• "Paul was signed to Rounder in 1994.

After trying for five years, Paul was invited to play the Kerrville Folk Festival in 1994. He won the Kerrville New Folk Award that year." Just an example of choppy prose.

Understood. Kmzundel

• Maybe you could add more infos about his musical style and what the critics and specialists of music say about it.

That is the next area I planned to tackle. Kmzundel

• Are all your references from magazines? If yes, don't you have any on-line versions of these articles. In any case, if you have or you find any online versions of other articles, you could use Template:cite news. I also think the current references need further formatting.
• In order to see how discography should be given, check any FA of an artist, e.g. Celine Dion.
• The awards section is long and listy for me. Maybe you could think about turining it into prose and speaking about the most important of these awards making a selection, if you think this section is necessary. But again, have a second opinion for this particular issue.--Yannismarou 19:27, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Will take all comments under advisement and continue editing. Thank you! Kmzundel 19:42, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Incorporated many of your suggestions! Thank you again! Kmzundel 02:48, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Chris Gardner

My goal for this project is to bring it up to GA, and if possible FA, status.

I am aware that the article could use a more NPOV. Perhaps my adjective choices are too dramatic? I tried my best to balance out the sources, but I find that most of the information that I find tends to focus on the movie The Pursuit of Happyness or the most recent twenty years of Gardner's life. Therefore, his autobiography provided most of the information I included about his early life.

Constructive suggestions for improvement are welcome.

Brinabina 21:01, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 00:45, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice job, but I do believe that there are some serious POV problems. This is my review:

• In some cases the tone of the prose gets hagiographic. This is not our goal in Wikipedia. A I say somewhere else "The prose can be sentimental but not un-encyclopedic or POV. Sentimentalism is a great weapon, if you know how to use it. If you don't know this "art", don't try it!" These are some examples from the lead, which IMO are problematic: "Gardner owes the greater part of his current success to his mother's early encouragement and to the sense of responsibility and high expectations placed on him, then her only son." "Chris Gardner's childhood was fraught with discouraging circumstances and hardships. Despite enduring abuse at the hands of his mother's husband, Freddie Triplett, Gardner resolved that he would someday become a loving and dedicated father to his own children. This determination, in addition to his mother's early encouragement, motivated him to succeed at life and business even when the odds appeared to be stacked against him."
• "Gardner's journey from a homeless single father to self-made millionaire is portrayed by the 2006 major motion picture .
  

Gardner's book of memoirs sharing the same title was published earlier the same year by Amistad, an imprint of HarperCollins Publishers." Why do you break the paragraph here? And why do you break it with a <br />? And not with an empty line, as we do when we want to create a new paragraph in Wikipedia. IMO there is no opinion two have two stubby paragraphs in a row at the end of the lead.

• "Gardner's journey from a homeless single father to self-made millionaire is portrayed by the 2006 major motion picture The Pursuit of Happyness, [4] starring actor Will Smith." Cite in the middle of a sentence only if it is absolutely necessary; otherwise at the end of the sentence. And do not leave a gap between the punctuation mark and the citation.
• "Early years" is another example of problematic and potentially uncyclopedic writing. What abou his education? Why he was in foster care? First, we give the necessary infos; then we assess the info if necessary and again in an encyclopedic way. And I also think you should repeat infos of the lead enriched (when he was born? Where?). The article starts from scratch! The problem of uncyclopedic writing is not confined in this section.
• "Then, just after the birth of Chris' first son". When? Was he married? You suddenly speak about his son, without having told us anything relevant previously.
• "In 1983 and in four years succeeded in making a notable impact on their yearly revenues". Per MoS do not wikiling single years. Only full dates (May 8, 1978).
• I was thinking that "Business ventures" is fine, and then I read that:"Gardner is currently working on an investment venture with South Africa that will create hundreds of jobs and introduce millions of much-needed foreign currency into the nation." Isn't it a bit ethnocentric?
• "Adamantly determined to raise". I don't like "adamantly"; it looks like a verbalism and a bit POV.
• I would like to have more infos about his personal life. I don't think I learnt everything I wanted. Does he also have a daughter? I thought I learnt that by accident.
• I also think more infos could be added about his course towards success. As a reader I got the impression I was given just a short summary version of this interesting story.

--Yannismarou 19:02, 10 January 2007 (UTC)

Hello Yannismarou,

User Brinabina and I have done a lot of work on re-editing the Chris Gardner article. Your comments were very helpful. Below I respond to each of the points you've raised and what we've done to correct it:

• The lead is now more concise, condensed into two paragraphs. The sentences you highlighted as being problematic have either been deleted or reworded to be less sentimental and more factual.
• 'Gardner's journey from homeless father to self-made millionaire is portrayed by the 2006 major motion picture" has been altered to Gardners personal journey is portrayed in the 2006..."
• The footnote citations in the article have been altered, where possible, so that they appear at the end of the sentence.
• I have rewritten and reordered 'Early years', adding in additional background info - hope this reads better now.
• 'Then just after the birth of Chris' first son' has been changed to 'Then shortly after the birth of Chris Jr. in 1981'
• I have removed the wikilink from 1983
• I have removed 'much-needed' from the phrase :"Gardner is currently working on an investment venture with South Africa that will create hundreds of jobs and introduce millions of much-needed foreign currency into the nation." so that it has less enthocentric connotations
• I don't like 'adamantly either - it has been removed!
• Info on Gardner's daughter Jacintha has been added.
• The whole article has been streamlined and various points have been enlarged upon.

We'd be grateful if you could re-read the article and give us your feedback. SJCharlton 09:07, 18 January 2007 (UTC)

Hi Yannismarou

Thanks for your review. I have made several edits that preserve the changes made by SJCharleton, while improving clarity, flow and NPOV. Here are some of the major changes. Please give us your opinion on them:

• The lead section has been restructured for clarity and better chronology, then a second paragraph has been added as a concise summary of the article.
• I added information about his sisters.
• The beginning of “early years” was modified to include his date of birth.
• I added infos about his experience as a medic in the Navy and his clinical research in the field of cardiology.
• I added a section called “marriage and fatherhood” where I included infos about his failed marriage and his decision to forego the pursuit of a medical career, as well as the chronology of the various challenges he faced in the pursuit of a position in a stock brokerage training program.

I hope that our changes will get the article to GA status. Brinabina 08:44, 19 January 2007 (UTC)

Joe Sehee

I'd like to improve upon this article and bring it up to a good or a good article rating. Please make any suggestions necessary. Eulogy4Afriend 18:51, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Again, another stub. Expand, restrucure (per WP:LEAD and WP:LAYOUT) the article and cite it properly (per WP:CITE). Check also WP:MoS; it could be useful. I don't think a review is now very useful; the article must first be expanded in order to reach B-Class status. Again, the same comment for the "See also" section: do you really need it (why don't you incorporate the links in the main prose, if they are important)? If yes, why is there a red link? Is it going to be fixed. Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 21:08, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Mike Salisbury

I'd like to improve upon this article and bring it up to a good or a good article rating. Please make any suggestions necessary. Eulogy4Afriend 18:46, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Anthony_cfc

This article is currently at starting quality; there is much need for improvement, as it currently is nothing but a shell of information. Also, goodness knows why it is listed as a "death-related article" using the template {{death-stub}}! Good work so far, but consider getting some external resources (perhaps from your local library) if you really want to get this article going. Regards, Anthonycfc ^{[T • C]} 16:09, 13 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

First of all, the article needs expansio. I do not think a peer-review is much useful, if the article does not first reach B-Class status. Try to gather more infos, and check also WP:LEAD and WP:LAYOUT for a better structure. And why do I see a red link in "See also" section? Do you intend to create it soon?--Yannismarou 21:03, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Dr. Billy Campbell

I'd like to improve upon this article and bring it up to a good or a good article rating. Please make any suggestions necessary. GA Eulogy4Afriend 18:34, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

It needs work. Some suggestions:

• The article must acquire a proper lead per WP:LEAD, and a proper structure per WP:LAYOUT. As it is now the structure is problematic.
• The article should also be properly cited per WP:CITE.
• Try to avoid stubby sections like "Personal history".
• Trim the "see also" section, and incorporate the links in the main text, if they are really necessary.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• Why is the article's title "Dr Billy Campbell" and not "Billy Campbell" or "Billy Campbell (doctor)" if there is a disamb. problem?
• Expand the article with more infos. Right now it is somewhere between stub- and start-class.--Yannismarou 10:21, 9 January 2007 (UTC)

Life of Joseph Smith, Jr. from 1827 to 1830

I'd like a good going-over for this heavily-cited article. Nearly all the referenced works are online, and there are links to them. This may seem like a very narrow article, but it's actually a very important part of the biography of Joseph Smith, Jr., for which a lot has been written by historians. Want to achieve FA status, like its sister article Early life of Joseph Smith, Jr., which was featured on the front page. COGDEN 02:06, 6 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Wow! Great! Excellent work! Some suggestions:

• I think the lead could be a bit more expanded per WP:LEAD. The article is quite long and I don't think that two very short paragraphs offer a comprehensive summary.

(Addressed. COGDEN 23:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC))

• "Once Smith said he had obtained the Golden Plates from the angel Moroni": I know the article discusses a part of Smith's life, but IMO the way it starts, its very first sentence after the lead is a bit abrupt.

(Addressed. COGDEN 23:08, 8 January 2007 (UTC))

• The article is heavily referenced and this is a nice think. But often these references are in the middle of the sentences, and interrupt the prose in a bad way. Couldn't they be (at least some of them) combined somehow, so as to avoid excessive interruptions in the middle of the sentences?
• Some minor format inconsistencies again with the citations. Compare these two cases which are the same, but in the first one we have one parenthesis and a combined citation, which does not happen in the second one: "( Smith 1853, p. 113; Roberts 1902, p. 19)", "(Howe 1834, p. 264); (Jesee 1976, p. 3)".
• You say too often "reportedly". It becomes tiring.
• "Smith loses 116 manuscript pages, and his gift to translate", "Early transcription and translation in Harmony, Pennsylvania": I do not know if headings like these ones are in accord with WP:MSH. I quote from there: "In general, heading titles should be nouns or noun phrases. See also is an exception to this rule. Thus "Effects of the wild", not "About the effects of the wild". "The", "a" and "an" should be omitted from the beginning of heading titles. Thus "Mammals", not "The mammals". Avoid restating the subject of the article or of an enclosing section in heading titles. It is assumed that you are writing about the same subject, so you usually do not need to refer to it again. Thus "Early life", not "His early life"."

(Addressed. COGDEN 19:55, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

• Avoid disamb. links like Lehi (fixed that one).

(I think that's addressed. COGDEN 21:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

• Try not to re-link already linked articles (like King Benjamin, Golden Plates, Harmony, Three Witnesses, seer stone etc.). This is over-wikifation. Even Joseph Smith, Jr. is repeatedly linked?!

(I think that's addressed, although I don't want readers to have to cross section boundaries to find a link. I think I have about one wikilink per section now. COGDEN 21:04, 10 January 2007 (UTC))

• "Meanwhile, a group of people in Harmony began to threaten the progress of Smith's translation." How? What did they do? Vague.
• Oups! What is that: "Smith deposited a copy of the title page in Utica, New York[citation needed] ". Fix . And another one: "He also attempted unsuccessfully to have acquaintances pre-order copies of the Book of Mormon [citation needed]." And a wholke paragraph: "Later in January 1830, a group of Palmyra citizens passed a resolution calling for a local boycott of the Book of Mormon (Smith 1853, p. 150). As a result, E.B. Grandin stopped printing in January 1830.[citation needed] In addition, Martin Harris was coming to realize that the full share of the $3000 cost of printing the book would fall on his shoulders when it came due in early 1831, and under the prodding of his wife Lucy, was considering breaching his contract to pay his share.[citation needed] In response, Smith traveled once again from Harmony, Pennsylvania to Palmyra, and placated Harris by entering into a contract on January 16, 1830 stating: "I hereby agree that Martin Harris shall have an equal priveledge with me and my friends of selling the Book of Mormon of the edition now printing by Egbert B. Grandin until enough of them shall be sold to pay for the printing of the same" (Smith 1830a). Smith and Harris then went to Grandin's office, and convinced Grandin to resume printing (Smith 1853, p. 150–151), which he did on January 26, 1830.[citation needed]" And in note 19:"The factual accuracy of this second-hand account by Addison Everett has been questioned, as there are some anachronisms.[citation needed]". And 13:"Some commentators interpret the Book of Mormon to contain anti-Masonic references [citation needed]". And 22: "Although the intended destination was west of the Mississippi, where Andrew Jackson had recently relocated several Native American tribes, the delegation didn't make it that far.[citation needed]".
• "the Book of Mormon of the edition now printing by Egbert B. Grandin until enough of them shall be sold to pay for the printing of the same" (Smith 1830a)" Isn't there a page number here?
• Again Native Americans leads to a disambiguation page. Lamanites=Native Americans? Is that correct, because that is what I understand from the text.
• "Smith then dictated a series of revelations chastizing David Whitmer" Who was he and why chastizing him? How chastizing him? What did he do wrong?
• "Although the baptisms were performed after dark "because of persecution"" What persecution? Who persecuted them and how in this particular case?
• "Although Smith did not give a date for this event, it could have occurred during this time when he was thinking about exorcisms and appearances of the devil near the Susquehanna." Citation please?

--Yannismarou 15:43, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

Great comments. Thanks. I'll start addressing them. COGDEN 19:26, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

Grand Duchess Maria Nikolaevna of Russia

I'd like to improve upon this article and bring it up to a good or a good article rating. Please make any suggestions necessary. I'd also appreciate feedback on whether the images used are all appropriate and within the public domain.--Bookworm857158367 05:47, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Inconsistance with the inline citations. They should always go after the punctuation mark without a gap between the punctuation mark and the citation.
• "nicknamed her "The Amiable Baby" because of her good nature." I am not sure if "good nature" could be regarded by some as POV.
• "She was surprisingly strong and sometimes amused herself by demonstrating how she could lift her tutors off the ground." The last sentence of the paragraph is uncited!
• "She particularly loved children and, had she not been a Grand Duchess, would have loved nothing more than to marry a Russian soldier and raise a large family." Was that said by herself? Is there a specific contemporary testimony?
• I don't know if the whole content of "Association with Grigori Rasputin" is relevant to Maria's biography. IMO there are too many details having to do, in general, with the status of Rasputin in the royal family. But, again do not take my opinion as granted on this issue: you may also want to take more opinions for this particular matter.
• "Life in captivity and murder" is excellent! Great prose there!
• You could have some more wikilinks. In "Rediscovery and sainthood", for instance, William Maples is not linked to an article, although he has one. "Communists" could also link to an article about the communistic regime of USSR I think.
• "Some historians believe the account of the "Yurovsky Note," a report filed by commander Yakov Yurovsky with his superiors following the murders, that two of the bodies were removed from the main grave and cremated at an undisclosed area. The rationale was that this action would create doubt that these were the remains of the Tsar and his retinue should the grave be discovered by the Whites because the body count would not be correct." You don't cite the assessments of this historians.
• Four paragraphs of the above section are dedicated to Anastasia; not to Maria. Should they be included in Maria's biography?

The article is well-written and well-researched. I can't rate it as GA or A-Class, because it has not yet gone through a GA review (or FAC of course). I have decided to rate as GA or A-Class from now only articles which have been upgrated to GA status.--Yannismarou 15:44, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Grand Duchess Olga Nikolaevna of Russia

I'd like to bring this article up to a good article rating. Please look at the content and make any suggestions to improve upon it. Also please look at the images used in the article, comment on whether they are appropriate and whether they are in the public domain. --Bookworm857158367 05:50, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• The lead should be expanded per WP:LEAD.
• The same inconsistancey with the citations I mentioned in Maria's article.
• "From her earliest years she was known for her compassionate heart and desire to help others" IMO a citation is needed here? And how was this desire to help expressed?
• ""The eldest, Olga Nicolaevna, possessed a remarkably quick brain," recalled Gilliard." Gilliard who? When you mention a scholar or wirter etc. for the first time within the text, I think it is better to write his full name.
• "Olga also occasionally found her mother's attitude trying.". "Trying" or "tiring": I am not sure if this is a typo or not.
• "Rasputin had released ardent, though by all accounts completely innocent in nature, letters written by the Tsarina and the four grand duchesses to him." You definitely have to cite this sentence.
• After reading all these articles about the Russian family and the canonization of 2000 by the Russian Church I thought of something maybe useful for (at least some of) the articles: How was this canonization received? Was there any debate? Controversies? Reactions? It could also be the subject of a seperate article.
• Note 6 is empty. Something is wrong there.

Another well-written article. For me it is almost A-class not far away from FA, but, for reasons I explained in Maria's review, I cannot rate it higher than B.--Yannismarou 16:09, 5 January 2007 (UTC)

Matisyahu

• The article has recently undergone some fairly significant rewriting and improvement, I'd like some feedback as to other areas of the article that could be improved in the hopes of nominating it for good article status soon. Thanks for your input! -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 06:12, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

User:Yannismarou

Nice, but it still needs work. This is my review:

• Inconsistency in the inline citations. They should always go straight after (without a gap) the puntuation mark.
• Avoid the external jumps. Turn these links into proper inline citations.
• "He counts Bob Marley, Phish, God Street Wine and Rabbi Shlomo Carlebach among his musical inspirations and gives credit to Rabbi Simon Jacobson's book Toward a Meaningful Life for the lyrical inspiration to Youth's title track. Matisyahu does not perform in concert on Friday nights in observance of the Jewish Sabbath." Both assessments need citing.
• Avoid the stubby often one-sentence paragraphs.
• Fix the {{fact}]s, and try to have at least one citation in each paragraph.
• Biography is a long section; you could divide it into sub-sections. Check also Structure of the article and WP:LAYOUT in general. After all what you call "Biography section" is not really biographic: you mix, early years (biographic), career (biographic as well), and stylistic, musical comments (artistic). I suggest that you divide these sections (biographic (early years, career) - artistic), and, then, you further develop them with additional infos and properly cite them.
• "Most of ... derived from hip-ho". The prose in this long paragraph looks to me choppy. Many short sentences, not well-connected, with a problematic prose and seamless jumps from one point to the other.
• "Matisyahu is married to Tahlia Miller, the couple have two sons." This sentence looks lost in the middle of a desert! Do something with it. Place it in the right context.
• "Origin of his name" is uncited.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 19:38, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks for the tips, I'll get right on them! -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 21:51, 4 January 2007 (UTC)

• Done! Thanks. -- Chabuk ^{[ T • C ]} 23:15, 16 January 2007 (UTC)

Erin Davis

a previous peer review was conducted on January 2nd, 2007 and is now archived here

It's been over a year and a half since the last review. Since then I've cleaned up and reorganized the article, and added more references to improve it. I'd like to get some fresh advice from the community regarding what else I should do to continue improving the article towards Good Article status. --Maelwys (talk) 14:52, 8 September 2008 (UTC)

Review by User:Anne Teedham

I would like to suggest to you that you reach out to a copy-edit volunteer. Anne Teedham (talk) 17:52, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

• Thanks for the advice, I'll try that. --Maelwys (talk) 18:02, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Grand Duchess Tatiana Nikolaevna of Russia

I'd like to bring this article up to a good article rating. Please suggest any improvements. Also please look at the images used with this article, comment on whether they are appropriate and whether they are in the public domain.--Bookworm857158367 05:52, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice work. For me, definitely GA quality. Therefore, I'm more orientated towards FA criteria (after all, IMO this is the best of your articles I've written). This is my review:

• "She was an elder sister of the famous Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia, who was widely rumored to have survived the assassination of the Imperial Family." I don't see this cited anywhere else in the text. So, you should cite the sentence, because, otherwise, "rumored" hears weasel.
• The lead could be a bit more expanded per WP:LEAD.
• "All of the children were close to one another and to their parents up until the end of their lives." Citation needed.
• "Tatiana Nikolaevna was described". "Tatiana" would be fine. We have her full name in the lead.
• "Tatiana was practical and had a natural talent for leadership." Again citation needed, and "the natural talent for leadership" could be regarded by some as POV.
• "The empress refused to believe her "and said that everything Rasputin does is holy." Who's quoted here? In general, I think you overdo it a bit with quotes. Maybe you could do some recasting into alternative language.
• "Tatiana was falsely rumored to have been present at Rasputin's murder on December 17, 1916, "disguised as a lieutenant of the Chevaliers-Gardes, so that she could revenge herself on Rasputin who had tried to violate her." Again who's quoted here? And why "falsely rumored"? Who says that the rumors were false.
• What are the conclusions of modern scholarly research concerning the nature of the relations between Tatiana and Rasputin? Have the the pornographic rumors any background of truth or not?
• "The fourteen year old found her distant cousin Prince Ioann Konstantinovich of Russia's engagement to Helen of Serbia "touching" but found the thought of Helen kissing him hilarious." I don't like "found" twice in the same sentence.
• Minor:Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• Your photos seem to be in the public domain either of Russia or USA. Only Image:Romanov.jpg has no indication, but I think you could tag it accordingly. I don't know what is going on with the icon (Image:Romanovsaints.png). Its caption is also not good for me (When was it created? Where is it now? In a church?) Maybe you could fair use tag it.--Yannismarou 17:30, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks. I've made most of the revisions you've suggested. I also think this is probably the best written of the four grand duchess articles I've contributed to. I'm a journalist, so I'm used to using quotes. It's hard to curtail the impulse! --Bookworm857158367 04:48, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Dannii Minogue

Main page: Wikipedia:Peer review/Dannii Minogue/archive3

Dannii Minogue is a popular Australian singer, songwriter, actress and fashion designer. I did a massive rewrite on the article and would like a peer review and any suggestion which would improve it to raise it to FA quality. -- Underneath-it-All 04:19, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Very nice. I think it is in the right path for FA status. This is my review:

• The lead looks fine. Personally, I would also mention there that she is Kylie Minogue's sister.
• "nationwide concert tours.[2][3]" Minor, but since this was the only place in the article I saw citations in a row, I would suggest that you combine them in one citation. Check Tourette Syndrome or Battle of Edson's Ridge for nice ways to do that.
• "which the Daily Mirror described as a "bass-bumping, shuddering return",[11]" - ""a nice serene and dreamy vocal on the dance floor anthem"[13],", ""snip snapping house beats and '80s flecked synths",[18]", "the cancer diagnoses of her sister Kylie Minogue and an unnamed friend[19],", ""lacks true conviction as she ploughs through the lines without capturing their full force"[24],": Sometimes the citation is before the quot mark; sometimes after. There are some inconsistencies.
• "It consisted of 1980s inspired pop–dance songs and provided Minogue with some of the strongest reviews of her career." What reviews about her. In the following sentences I just read about one review about one of her songs.
• "Singles "I Begin to Wonder" and "Don't Wanna Lose This Feeling" were substantial successes on the U.S. dance charts, and established Minogue's presence in the mainstream North American market." This looks to me like an assessment deserving his own citation(s). I added a .
• I see that you interrupt the sentences very often with inline citations. I recommend that you do that only when it is absolutely necessary for emphasis; otherwise put them at the end of the sentences.
• "The film was not well received by audiences or critics", "The musical was not well received by British critics who called it "lame" and its songs "reminiscent of [the] Eurovision song contest"". Repetition of the same forms of expression. I would prefer a better variety of expression.
• "In 2001, Minogue also appeared in the controversial stage play The Vagina Monologues, which co-starred Kika Markham and Meera Syal." Why was that controversial? Explain? Had the controversiality to do anything with Minogue? Explain a bit.
• "In 2002, the British National Party ... called it a "harmless girls' night out". I think that all this paragraph has nothing to do with personal life but with "Personal beliefs" or "controversies" about her person. I would create a seperate section.
• Is the "See also" section necessasry? Can't you incorporate these 3 links in the main text?
• In references I see no printed sources, but I guess this is an inherent problem of actors', singers' etc. biographies.--Yannismarou 09:56, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your review! I've made some changes already and will make some more later today. Some of the magazines that are cited in the article were printed sources, but since there was a scan available online I linked to it instead. -- Underneath-it-All 17:10, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Plek's comments

It's a good article, but there's definitely room for improvement. I like the general structure, the extensive notes, and the lack of obvious fluff (i.e. a "Trivia" section). The article also seems to touch on most of the notable things she's done.

My main criticism of the article is that it's very "descriptive" as opposed to "explanatory." It mainly describes what she has done, but hardly ever explores her motivations for doing so. Thus, the main body of the article gets a bit repetitive with lots of "and then she did this, and then she did that..." constructs. Yes, people are defined by their actions, but a biographical article can be made more interesting by exploring some of the "whys" behind those actions.

My suggestion would be to take a (small) number of Dannii's career moves and personal events, and to try to find out what her reasons were for making those moves, or what her reactions to those events were. The article already does this with her Playboy session, but it could also be applied to (for instance):

• her move to the dance music scene,
• beginning her acting/stage career,
• the ambassadorship for the Terence Higgins Trust, and
• her reaction to Kylie's breast cancer (currently, all the article says about this is that she released a single inspired by her sister's diagnosis; I'm sure that it definitely had a greater impact on her than just that).

You could try to illustrate things by using information gleaned from interviews and other statements she made. This would also have the effect of shifting the article's viewpoint from the predominantly third-person view it has now to a more mixed third/first person view. I think this will help to make the article more involving, personal and interesting.

Some other notes:

• Live performances and concert tours: it seems the "Recording and performing career" section tells mostly about her recording work. Did she ever do a concert tour? Is there anything to say about her live performances?
• The "Controversies" section: is she really such a controversial person that a separate section is warranted? It might be better to move these tidbits to other sections. I'm not sure.

Thanks, and good luck! --Plek 17:59, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the review. I've acted on your suggestions and have added the reasons behind many of her career moves. I'm still working on where to add how Kylie's diagnosis had an impact on her, but have found an interview in which she discusses it. The "controversies" has now been moved to the "Personal life" section under a sub-heading. -- Underneath-it-All 20:33, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Saner Wonggoun

I hoped to move this on to WP:GA review, but wanted to first get WPBIO's peer review, following with a general peer review. Thank you. — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 21:22, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article as it is now is a stub. It is well sourced and with a quite good prose but it needs expansion and more infos. It must be organized per WP:LAYOUT with a proper structure, with a lead per WP:LEAD and the proper sections (or even sub-sections) if necessary. The current version is quite premature for a thorough peer-review. I would also like to stress that in some parts (e.g., "United States Code Title 10, Subtitle A, Part II, Chapter 47, Subchapter I, Section 801, § 885 & 918 (also the Uniform Code of Military Justice Articles 85 and 118)") the langage is not as encyclopedic as it should be (the above sentence reads like a legal document and not an encyclopedic article). Continue the good work!--Yannismarou 21:57, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

The article and it's information as they stand now are all that I could (at the time) learn about the subject. If I cannot find more information (and even before making those efforts), do you still recommend the subdivision of the article into sections? Reading WP:LEAD, I'll work more on fleshing that out to fully summarize the whole article. And the last, I just rather enjoyed researching exactly what statutes dictated what; maybe I should just reference them (with [ref]s)? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 22:15, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Well, if you cannot find further infos, the article, as it is now, remains a stub. And with sub-sections or not I'm afraid this could be a problem in GAC. Now I am also a jurist and I know about legal provisions! But, you know, I see here too many numbers, titles, chapters, sections, subchapters etc in a row! Why don't you just say: According to the Title 10 of the United States Code and articles 85 and 118 of the Uniform COde of Military Justice ... And again! It is still too legal!! If you put them in a note, I think they wouldn't be a burdain for the main text. But again, this is my personal opinion and not the one correct opinion. You can have more of them, in order to make your mind!--Yannismarou 22:40, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Opinions are why I brought it here! I went ahead and dropped all the legal references into a citation, and it should read better now. I'll go ahead and look for more from my military sources if I can, but in the interim -- should I subdivide it as it is now, or wait to see if I get more? — pd_THOR ^{| =/\=} | 23:12, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

My opinion is gather more material and then sub-divide it. Reasearch and material is the first step towards a good article. Good structure comes next!--Yannismarou 09:23, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Ernest Emerson

I've been working on this one article on Ernest Emerson for a bit and feel it's time to have it reviewed. I have more pictures enroute...just need some thoughts or areas for improvement, one reader thought it may be too technical one other very negative editor called it "crap". I'd like to see this as a featured article someday!

Thanks --Mike Searson 22:23, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

From SG

• Seven references for a one-sentence lead? (Please see WP:LEAD.) Sandy (Talk) 01:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Why is this page noincluded, and why isn't it shown as a link on the talk page of the article? The peer review should be linked on the article talk page.

Allright, I found the link - darn stupid talk page templates, cluttering up the page, and you have to hit show to know it's there - that's not good. Sandy (Talk) 14:47, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Some responses from my talk page:

I understand the problem, Mike - the other editor was saying that the article didn't establish notability, or more specifically, bio notability - you should carefully read those two pages, as any editor can put an article up for WP:Prod or WP:AfD if notability isn't established in the article. Some of your sources aren't complete, and some of them may fail notability. So, while we're on your sources, they should all include author, article title, and publication date, when available - and they should be correctly formatted and in a consistent style throughout the article. Looking at the six sources you used in the lead - and showing you how to correctly format them (if there is no author, you can delete, but we must have article name and pub date):

• Author last name, author first name. "Article title". Knives Illustrated, June 1994.
• Author last name, author first name. "The Hottest Grind of All". Blade Magazine, January 1998.
• Combs, Roger. "Ernest Emerson". Knives Illustrated, April 2004.
• Ewing, Dexter. "Stand and Salute the CQC7". Knives Annual, 2006.
• Ewing, Dexter. "Rock-Star Knifemakers Part 1". Blade Magazine, January 2006.
• Nielsen, Eugene. "Emerson Combat Karambit". SWAT Magazine, March 2006.

The next question is whether you need these sources in the lead - the answer is no. Pls have a look at WP:LEAD for guidance on what the lead should be/do. Extraordinary facts are often sourced in the lead, but generally, the lead is a summary of facts already sourced elsewhere in the article. Seeing six sources on one statement in the lead is highly unusual and unnecessary. If you feel you must have one source in the lead to establish notability, I found one for you that should work (you can edit my page and edit copy, edit paste these sources into ref tags in your article):

• Cover, Pat. "Strike Force!" American Handgunner, January 2000. Available at findarticles.com, Retrieved on December 29, 2006.

I see you've used that source, but not formatted it correctly. The statements in that source - which could be quoted - establish notability ("sets the standard for combat folders", "edged weapons guru", and "makes the most sought after custom knives in the tactical world" are certainly enough to establish notability) - that one source could be used in your lead (and your lead needs to be expanded to meet WP:LEAD). You can remove the other sources from your lead, and use them in the article where necessary.

I also see you haven't learned how to use named refs when you refer to the same ref more than once. You name the ref on its first occurrence, and then just refer to that name on subsequent occurrences, so that all of those footnotes summarize into one line - you can read about that on WP:FN - let me know if you need help.

Another thing - don't use Ibid in Wiki - if another editor in the future inserts new text in between, ibid becomes invalidated - use named refs instead, to make all instances of one source point to the same line.

Also, you have a large number of blue links that should be expanded correctly in your footnotes. For example:

• Soldier of Fortune Magazine July,1997

should be:

• Waterman, Steve. "Brown Water to Silver Screen: Story & Photos". Soldier of Fortune Magazine, July 1997. Available at stevenlwaterman.com, Retrieved on December 29, 2006.

You have to say where you got it, since it's not from Solder of Fortune magazine - which raises another issue - it's a copyright violation. IF the link were actually to the Soldier of Fortune article, you would just include the link as the article title, rather than adding it at the end of the ref.

Other things you need to do:

• All book sources need page numbers. They should also be correctly formatted:
  • Wynne, Marcus. Brothers in Arms (2004), Publishing place: publisher name. ISBN 0765346915
• Examples of ref that needs work:
  • Blade Magazine February, 1998 (needs author and article name, and correct formatting) - do this throughout.
• Now, a huge pet peeve (read WP:NOT): Wikipedia is not a blog and not a webpage - it's an encyclopedia. We don't link to external websites except in references, External links, and few other places. External jumps (imbedded links) should be removed from the text. You can do that by converting those statements to referenced statements, sourced to the external site, or by writing the Wikipedia article about the external site, linking to it, and including the external website on that article. Examples of imbedded links in your article that need to be eliminated:
• Night of the Running Man: Scott Glenn's character carried a whitehandled one of a kind Emerson folding tanto. (Remove the IMDb link from the text - use it as a reference to the statement instead.)
• (ugh) In addition to the individual Martial Arts Instructor Rankings listed above, Mr Emerson's teaching credentials include, California POST(Peace Officer Standards & Training) Instructor,Gunsite instructor, Hand-to-hand Combat Instructor for H&K Defense Group, and Director of the Combat Research and Development Group. Mr Emerson is also an expert witness for the Los Angeles Prosecuting Attorney's Office and has been consulted as a technical advisor to various television and movie productions, including National Geographic.
  • The source proving that he has these credentials should be stevenlwaterman.com - if Waterman doesn't source these claims, they need a source, and linking to the websites which explain what those credentials are isn't a source. Those external jumps don't belong in the article - if you want to explain what POST is, you can either write the Wiki article and link to it, or include information about what that is in a footnote, referencing the site there - but those external jumps don't belong in the article. (Notice some copyedit needs in that section as well - take care of missing spaces, etc.) You have external jumps throughout.

Hope this helps get you going. Sandy (Talk) 14:44, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks Sandy, this is good. I did not start out to write this article, I found it by accident and tried to fix it. Eventually rewriting it. An editor with an agenda had me source every other sentence and without multiple sources was accusing me of not being neutral, sycophantic, etc.

It seemed as if it took 6 sources in one sentence to establish to this naysayer that Mr Emerson was who he claims he is!

I will work on this more today and use the guidelines you've given me for source formatting. I must have looked at them on another article and did it that way!

I don't know if I'm qualified enough to write the POST article, but maybe I'll try the Gunsite and HK ones.

Thanks again for your help! --Mike Searson 15:41, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Good luck - you've got a fine start ! Sandy (Talk) 17:39, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice start and nice material, but, in order to become FA or at leat GA, this article needs a lot of work and a lot of wikifation. This is my review:

• The lead does not constitute a comprehensive summary of the article. Please read carefully WP:LEAD and fix accordingly your lead.
• The knife photos are miniscule! Why? IMO they should be a bit bigger, but again, other editors may have a different opinion.
• "Although Emerson began his martial arts training at the age of 16 in Korean Judo; he continued his study of the martial arts while attending the University of Wisconsin." Maybe , instead of ; here?
• The article flow is quite often bad. These two phrases are a good example:"He graduated with degrees in Physical Education and World History. He moved to Southern California for the sole purpose of studying martial arts." You see, often a word can make the difference: "He graduated with degrees in Physical Education and World History. He then moved to Southern California for the sole purpose of studying martial arts." This link could be helpful (here).
• "Background" could be split in two sections which will contain more personal and career infos (if you can find any more): "Early life" (or "Family") and "Backgroung".
• Try to avoid the stubby one-sentence paragraphs. They are bad both for the prose and the layout.
• Try not to have citations in a row like [1][2] or [1][2][3]. There are ways to merge more than one citations in one. Check, for example, Tourette Syndrome or Battle of Edson's Ridge or an article I rewrote: El Greco.
• Try to have the inline citations at the end of the sentence and not if the middle. Place them in the middle only if it is absolutely necessary for reasons of emphasis.
• "First knife-Custom knifemaking-Pre tactical models" are three one after the other stubby sections. Try to avoid them by mergers or expansions.
• I now saw that your article has 20 sections! This is not good structure. Try to organize your article with not-stubby sections, sub-sections and sub-sub-sections if necessary.
• In "Specwar Knives" I see two stubby paragraphs.
• "Emerson Knives, Inc" is stubby. "Semi retirement from custom knifemaking" as well. All these stubby sections do not help the reader: they continuously interrupt the article flow and impede the reader from getting the general idea about what he reads and from properly following the story.
• "Mr Emerson's teaching credentials". Why Mr Emerson here and Emerson elsewhere? Emerson everywhere. No reason to use Mr. I fixed some of these.
• "Author" is stubby. If the content of these articles is important, expand. Otherwise merge or think if the content of this section is necessary.
• "Knives in Books" has only stubby paragraphs.
• Films and television shows need italics. Check Wikipedia:Manual of Style (text formatting).
• Notes 4, 5, 10, 11, 18 are empty. What is wrong there. Formatting and layout problems.
• In the books you don't mention page and publisher. For a ready format for books, check Template:Cite book. For articles in journals Template:Cite journal. For webs Template:Cite web or Template:cite news.

I suggest you make the necessary arrangements and you initiate a new peer-review. I think it is premature to go right now for GA.--Yannismarou 22:33, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you, I'll make the necesarry changes you mention. As far as the empty notes, I was told by a previous reviewer to format my notes in this manner as opposed to having the same source cited throughout...which is the preferred method of doing so?--Mike Searson 23:46, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I suppose Sandy told you to gather the same notes (with the same content I mean) together, so that they are grouped, and I agree. But I said another thing: The specific notes I mentioned have no content! They were empty! They said nothing. Now, I looked again at the article, and they look fine! You probably fixed them.--Yannismarou 09:27, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

I did, I was missing a character and I looked at some of your articles for help and found my mistake! Thanks! I've rewritten some of the prose, too. The tagging was getting in the way of my writing style. Thanks again for the help and constructive criticism. --Mike Searson 09:44, 31 December 2006 (UTC)

Christopher C. Kraft, Jr.

This article achieved GA status at the beginning of December and I am hoping to nominate it as a FAC shortly. As such, I would welcome any comments and suggestions for improvement. There are two particular areas on which I would welcome outside opinions. One, how does the lead look to readers who are unfamiliar with the subject, and does it need more context? It would be difficult to overemphasise Kraft's importance to the history of manned space exploration, but I didn't want to belabor the point too much. Two, does the article seem to be drawn too much from Kraft's autobiography? The reviewer at GA stage thought that it did. Since then, I have made some changes, and the article references thirty sources in total, but I would like to know how it looks. MLilburne 16:24, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

One of the main reasons I really enjoy reviewing articles is because I have the chance to read amazing, almost flawless, articles like this one (and your previous FA). My only problem in these cases is that I do not have mush to suggest! These are my remarks:

• The lead: It looks nice to me. I would suggest not to add more context. The reader gets the point and the last paragraph is very well-written. But there are some repetitions in the lead. For instance you say twice that "Kraft became NASA's first flight director" (in the first and the second paragraph) and that he spent 10 years in the Johnson Space Center (1st and 3d paragraph). I think you could fix these repetitions and merge the 1st (stubby paragraph, which will be more stubby if the repetitions go) with the 2nd one. Something else in the lead: flight director leads me to a disambiguation page. It shouldn't. Pick straight away the link you want me to go. And something last: who described as "a driving force in the U.S. human space flight program from its beginnings to the Space Shuttle era, a man whose accomplishments have become legendary". You mention Lunney in the first quote but nobody here. Is it Nystrom you cite? And why you mentio Lunney and not Nystrom? Isn't he notable ecough? I don.t say what you did is definitely wrong. I just try to understand your thinking.
  • I'll consolidate the first two paragraphs. My original intention had been to say right up front what Kraft was most notable for, but I suppose that if the reader can't persevere through the lead in order to figure that out, then I shouldn't worry about it. As for the Lunney/Nystrom question, I took another look at the Nystrom article and remembered that it was quoting the announcement from the Rotary Club. So I have made that clear in the lead.
• I see you're using {{cquote}} for your inline quotations. I also did and I like it, but in my El Greco User:Plange had a different opinion, which may be right. I repeat word by word what she told me - it may be helpful for you as well: "I see you're using {{cquote}} for your inline quotations and while they look pretty, they're really not in keeping with WP:MOS. Inline quotations (where you have "someone said:" and then the quote) should just use <blockquote>s. cquote template is for "pull quotes" that are outside of the flow of the prose, like you do with your nice blue ones (which I use as an example, BTW, when I try to show people what a pull quote is)".
  • Hmm. I dislike the idea of having two different styles of quotes in the same article (which is what that explanation would lead to). Think I'll wait for the FA stage and see if anyone minds it...
• You overwikilink sometimes. Flight director for instance (where you send us to a dismb. link repeatedly!).
  • Yeah, I'll fix that, and go over the wikilinks to make sure that I don't repeat any.
• Do you follow the British or the North-American spelling? You say "In his autobiography, Kraft recognises", but also ""The report," it said, "characterized"", "again criticized", "awards and honors". Check the whole article for consistency.
  • I intend to use the North American spelling, but I'm not surprised that I got some wrong. I'll see if I can find someone to proofread it for me, because clearly I've missed some!
• "In films" is stubby, but I do not know if you could expand it a bit.
• The article reads very well. The prose seems fine to me.
• It is true that the article depends a lot on the autobiography (37 of the 80 notes are from this book), but I do not think this is an important problem in this particular case. You offer a great variety of sources (30!), and, thus, the article cannot be considered single-sourced. After all this is something inevitable sometimes: in Pericles I used repeatedly Thucidydes and Plutarch; I had to do it! Of course, further variety is welcome. What you could maybe do is to offer in the same citation another source in parallel with the autobiography. And you don't have to make notes in a row like this [1][2] to achieve that. You can combine them: check different ways of combinations of more sources in one citation in Tourette Syndrome and Battle of Edson's Ridge.--Yannismarou 11:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Thank you very much for your comments, which I'll certainly take to heart. I'm very glad that you enjoyed reading the article. MLilburne 00:01, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Henry Pittock

Would like third-party assessment, and advice to bring up to GA level. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 08:55, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

This article is of very high quality; congradulations are in order! I would say that you have a 50:50 chance of this article passing a WP:GA review - it would solely depend on the leniency of the editors who review it. I would like to, however, make a few constructive comments about the article; these may seem picky - and also, I can fix them myself - but I would like to offer you the opportunity to do so as the main contributor. Firstly, the final sentence of the introductory paragraph reads rather clumsily and perhaps you ought to re-write that. Secondly; the opening sentence of the final paragraph of the section Oregonian publisher and editor: clarify what "it" (first word) is. Lastly, try to either find sources for or re-use existing sources for the opening paragraph. I often find that sources are second most effective in the opening paragraph - after, obviously, controversial statements - as they seem to make a bold statement saying "this article is well-researched and worth your time to read". That's it! Well done, and I would advise after both these advised changes and a little expansion (remember your sources - see WP:CITE) and your sailing that Good Article review! If you have any questions, in particular about my review, please don't hesitate to ask me at my talk page. Regards, Anthonycfc ^{[T • C]} 03:42, 8 January 2007 (UTC)

"J-M" (Jgilhousen)

• July 11, 1857, should be wikilinked to July 11, 1857 as with other years with dates.
• Remove the space in front of reference 2 and 11
• I think you will need an infobox which can be found at wikiproject biography, also any kind of picture, painting, drawing of him would be be nice. M3tal H3ad 08:51, 27 December 2006 (UTC)
  • Done. Thank you. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 18:22, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

MLilburne

I think this article is most of the way there. Just a few things...

• There are a couple of sentences that have an unencyclopedic, rather POV tone. "His life was a rags-to-riches story befitting a hero in a Horatio Alger story" and "In a career that spanned over sixty years, Pittock forever left his mark on his community, its media and culture, its politics and even its architecture."

• Any general conclusion about the subject's life ought to go in the lead, not at the end of the article.

• The article is a bit undercited for a GA. At least one footnote per paragraph is a good general rule, and there are factual statements that really need citation. (For example, "He is reported to have made most of the journey barefoot." Who reported it?)

Hope these comments are useful to you. MLilburne 16:21, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

They are indeed. Since they involve recrafting some major portions of text, rather than just quick error correction, they will take me some time to implement. The barefoot reference is ubiquitous in the work of his biographers, including those I included as "general references." There are bits from those two sources in virtually every paragraph, and marking them all seemed to have a significant impact on readability. I'll revisit that issue in view of your remarks. The "conclusion" sentence and Horatio Algier remark attempts (obviously unsuccessful) at adding color, which my writing has been criticized for lacking... I tend to favor a much more dry style that some people seem to find dull. I'll rework them. All in all, thank you. I'll make a note here when I've completed a redraft. -- "J-M" (Jgilhousen) 04:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

I think the article is too close to GA status. This is my review:

• Prose problems. Let's take the first sentence of the lead: "Henry Lewis Pittock (March 1, 1836 - January 28, 1919) was an Oregon (USA) pioneer, newspaper editor and publisher, and wood and paper magnate, active in Republican politics and Portland, Oregon civic affairs, and an avid outdoorsman and adventurer." How many "ands" do we have in this not so long sentence: 6!
• "He is frequently referred to as the founder of The Oregonian, although it was published as a struggling weekly before he reestablished it as the state's preeminent daily newspaper." And how many "as" do we have here? The rest of the article is much much better, but don't forget that the first thing a reviewer reads is the lead (some of them aren't even interested in reading the rest of the article!). I would strongly suggest a detailed copy-editing by you (if you feel capable enough of doing it) or by an external native English speaker.
• The lead could be a bit more expanded per WP:LEAD.
• "Pittock assumed the duties of manager and editor the newspaper". Don't we need an "of" before the newspaper or am I wrong?
• We linke full dates: 4 February, 1861.
• In "Later life and legacy" I read things about his later life, but almost nothing about his legacy. Note that legacy is something more than the legal term of heritage (who took the shares ans why). Did his work survive him? Did he influence the next generations? Is his mark still present? If he had a significant legacy, expand. If not, I think a title without reference to legacy, would be better.
• Note 7: "Pittock, Henry Lewis." American National Biography. (2004) Oxford University Press. Reprinted in Biographies Plus Illustrated, H. W. Wilson. Is this a book? If yes, where is the ISBN? Always put ISBNs in books (especially the recent ones, where the ISBN exists).--Yannismarou 11:02, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Laxmi Prasad Devkota

Spent about half an hour wikifying this article today, removing copyvio stuff and trimming it down. Where do we go from here? RedRollerskate 16:24, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• Try expanding the lead to at least a couple of sentences. Talk about the period of writing and the influence he had on others in the lead then echo that in the body.
• The early life is not written chronologically, and this might help its readability.
• The line about the administration being against public education needs to focus either on his family, or use contrasting language (although the administration...) at the beginning.
• Summarize his college education path with more flowing language. The writing is very choppy. The sentences are short and not well connected.
• the linkage between his family tragedies and smoking is not obvious. This needs to be elaborated so that the link is clear and well justified.
• watch out for where adjective phrases end up "three inches of cancerous colon was removed in India" is an example of an out-of-place phrase.
• his productivity is lost on those of us who do not know the works to which the article refers
• perhaps add some comments from critical analysis of his works? --Chrispounds 23:23, 23 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you! RedRollerskate 16:07, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• Expanding the lead per WP:LEAD.
• Trying to find at least one photo for the infobox.
• Adding inline citations per WP:CITE.
• Expanding the sections from "Caree" and on, because there is not a good balance now.
• Trying to find verifiable and esteemed sources; preferably printed, if there are any available.

And this is just the beginning. When you are done with this stuff, come back!--Yannismarou 20:01, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks! I'm hoping I can get this up to a B-class (can't decide if it's Start or Stub right now). Part of my plan for today is to head to the library and see if they have anything on him. RedRollerskate 20:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Pauline Johnson

This article has been through the generic Peer Review process and I have addressed the concerns and incorporated suggestions. I'm not the original writer, but thought this article has a lot of potential because it's an interesting subject in Canadian cultural history, it reads well, and is informative, and is well illustrated. I also nominated it as a Good Article candidate before I knew this process was here. Thanks, any feedback will be appreciated. Eventually I'd like to see it become a featured article.Bobanny 06:58, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

RedRollerskate

• Embedded citations would make the article easier to read.

The citations are from books, not the net, so I can't embed them. I'm not a big fan of the author/date format myself, but did tag them to make it more Wikipedia-esque, in line with the policy of not changing format style without a consensus to do so.Bobanny 17:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

• "Atwood’s commentary indicates that questions regarding the validity of Johnson’s claims to Aboriginal identity have contributed to her critical neglect." Expand on this, please. What are the questions? Who raised them? Do they have any merit?

I'm not sure what else to add except that I can tell you put in a lot of time and effort on this, and it's a very interesting article. Nice job! RedRollerskate 16:46, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for your feedback, Bobanny 17:21, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice and informative. This is my review:

• The second paragraph of the lead looks a bit stubby to me.
• If you want this article to go through GA, I think you should wikify your citations, creating a "References" or "Notes" (or both!) section(s). Check WP:CITE and WP:MoS.

hmmm...technically, it is "wikified" in line with the Harvard referencing style (including a references section). According to WP:MOS, this style is as legit as the others, and changing a pre-existing style is a faux pas without achieving consensus. But, I'll put a note on the talk page and see if anyone else has a comment. It seems that the original writer is no longer contributing to Wikipedia, so it's not too likely I'd be stepping on any toes. Thus far I've been defending the format of the article, but I haven't yet come across anyone else who doesn't much prefer Chicago-style (the normal one with footnotes), including myself.

No, I am not against Harvard system. I just think your citations should be in a seperate section. Would you like to check Tagore to see what I mean.--Yannismarou 08:39, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Interesting. I hadn't seen it done like that before. That does look preferable because it has the advantage of allowing you to flip back and forth from footnote to text. But then, I only like it better because it brings it closer to Chicago style. It also loses what seems to be the defining characteristic of any author/date system in that the author/date is not in the text. Also, having 2 sections, one with just the name and page # and the other with the full reference, seems only to take up extra space and add an extra step to get to the full reference. Unless I'm missing some obvious advantage, it still looks like the best option is just to switch to Chicago, which also wouldn't take me as long because I'm used to that one. Bobanny 09:20, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Thinking again, Harvard style as you have it is also acceptable.--Yannismarou 15:47, 7 January 2007 (UTC)

• IMO "Family history" is too long. This is Pauline's biography; not her family's. You could shrink the article (and possibly merge it with the next one) and create a separate article for her family, to which you will link.

good point. It seems her family heritage is important in explaining her significance (which is more about her identity than her actual writings). But that could still come across without devoting so much space to her family.

• ""as an indestructible monument to Clean Fatherhood."[1] Try not to link extrernal links like that. Create an inline citation, and properly cite your link using Template:Cite news or Template:Cite web.

Done. I found the specific Project Gutenberg cite tag and stuck it in.

• "the largest in Vancouver up to that time": This assertion needs a citation.
• "Despite the acclaim she received from contemporaries". Such as? Could you be more informative and cite?
• "see, for example, Van Steen or Jackel": The citation here is not fully verifiable per WP:VERIFY. Book and page?

Sort of done. Those aren't specific references within the books, but the works generally, but I did tag them to link to the full reference at the bottom.

• Minor: Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 19:56, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Done.

Thanks for your review, Bobanny 00:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

• Comment: The suggestions I haven't responded to specifically all sound pretty good and helpful so far, but I can't address them til I get a chance to head down to the library. Bobanny 00:31, 22 December 2006 (UTC)

Neal Boortz

Getting ready to submit this for GA and would like a peer review from the Biography workgroup. Thanks.. Morphh ^(talk) 18:29, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice. A few remarks:

• Some prose problems. Let's take the lead: "He considers himself to be a Libertarian, and supports eliminating the war on drugs, lowering taxes, and shrinking the size of government, while disagreeing with the Libertarian platform by firmly supporting incremental tax reform, the war in Iraq, and opposing unrestricted immigration." How many participles do we have here?
• Again: "In 2005, he co-wrote The FairTax Book, proposing to implement a national retail sales tax in lieu of federal income taxes, payroll taxes, estate tax, etc., and the hardcover version held the #1 spot on the New York Times bestseller list for two weeks." I would like two sentences here or something like that:"In 2005, he co-wrote The FairTax Book, proposing to implement a national retail sales tax in lieu of federal income taxes, payroll taxes, estate tax, etc.; the hardcover version held the #1 spot on the New York Times bestseller list for two weeks." I would propose a slight copy-editing by an external native English speaker copy-editor.
• I don't like this stubby last paragraph at the end of the lead. Can't you merge it? In any case, you do not have to mention these personal infos in the lead. They are not absolutely necessary.
• "he, for the next two years, took a job working": I am not a native English speaker so I just ask: is it nice to put things between the subject and the verb?
• "Career" is under-cited.
• "Politics" is also under-cited. Try to have at least one citation for each paragraph.
• "former Representative Cynthia McKinney.[16][17][18][19] ". Try not to have more than two citations in a row. There are ways to combine them. Check: Tourette syndrome.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• You printed sources are a bit pooor, but this is not an obstacle for GA; neither for FA, if you have good quality online sources.--Yannismarou 19:38, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

Stephen Barrett

The article could use the help of experienced, patient editors with the NPOV and BPL problems and disputes that have been going on since early last year. If nothing else, some advise to the current editors would be appreciated. Ronz 05:45, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Just took a quick look - things I would do. Morphh ^(talk) 16:50, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

• Add Infobox for main pic - see Infoboxes
• No space between ref and punctuation per WP:FOOT
• See also goes before Refs (should probably be "Notes") per WP:GTL

I added an infobox,however I would suggest --Maniwar (talk) 21:47, 18 December 2006 (UTC):

• Finding out his birth month and day
• Adding Birth city and state
• I'd like to see more paragraph structure and less bullet structure
• The bio seems lacking. What about his early life as an MD...where is that?
• Move the Recognition section down lower in the article

Thanks for the suggestions! I tried to track down more biographical information on him and found little other than birthplace and wife's name. Seems to be a very private person given all the opportunities he has to give more information. --Ronz 20:30, 19 December 2006 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 22:54, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• "Biography" is awful! Nothing about his early life. Not a clear line of events. It obviously needs rewriting and expansion.
• "Recognition" is listy. It needs rewrting and proper prose.
• Don't leave a gap between the citation and the quotation mark.
• should be fixed.
• IMO "Qualifications and objectivity" also looks listy and trivia.
• If you want to quote, you should use {{cquote}} or <blockquote>s per WP:MoS. In "Defamation lawsuits" you do not quote properly. Try to avoid the long and one after the other quotes which interrupt the prose.
• I do not the way you have the lawsuits. In some of them we have inadequate infos and stubby pars. Others lack proper prose, being listy. Have in mind that your purpose is not to enumerate events but to right a proper article with a nice prose flow, which the current article lacks.
• You start "Credentials" with half sentence and another long quote. I don't think this is nice. Try to make clear to the reader of your article which is the topic of this section. A quote straight away without any other introductory comment rarely helps.
• When you quote, you do not have to use italics. Quotation marks are OK.
• "Credentials" could also provide material for his biography. You could rearrange and reorganize this material, trying, of course, not to be repetitive.
• "A California court stated:". Clumsy and un-cyclopedic prose, especially when you open a new paragraph.
• "Ray Salhelian M.D. ... nutritional medicine." This par is just a compilation of quotes.
• "Selected publications": I am not sure that underlining the titles of books is in accord with WP:MoS.
• The online sources should be cited in a consistent way. In some of them I see author, date it was retrieved; in others just the title.
• The "see also" section is big. Can't you incoroporate these links in the main text? Have in mind that we do not relink articles already linked in the main article.
• Something easy: alphabetize categories at the end of the article.
• If you want to see this article GA or FA, the POV tag should somehow go. I don't have the time to read the talk page in detail, but the article should try to expose all different views without espousing any. I think that, in general, it is not POV.--Yannismarou 19:19, 21 December 2006 (UTC)

From SG

I would offer to help, but there are names in the edit history indicating you've got a very tough row to hoe - sorry, but this article may end up at ArbCom. Sandy (Talk) 17:54, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

Biff Rose

This article needs a good dea lof clarification on the man's later life, which seems to be rabidly guarded by a fan who doesn't want it to represent all the facts.Macinneedofhelp

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

• The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
• See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
• There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
• There are a few occurrences of weasel words in this article- please observe WP:AWT. Certain phrases should specify exactly who supports, considers, believes, etc., such a view.
  • apparently
  • might be weasel words, and should be provided with proper citations (if they already do, or are not weasel terms, please strike this comment).^[?]
• This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.^[?]
• Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.

Regards,
Anthonycfc ^{[T • C]} 22:41, 11 January 2007 (UTC)

Slayer

This article is on the thrash metal band. I wish to bring this article up to FA standards and would like any input on the subject. As far as i can tell, its well referenced and layed out. I think the weakness is some of the wording and would like some help with that, thanks!. M3tal H3ad 12:07, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

Underneath-it-All

• Well written, interesting article! The image in the infobox should be a free use image as that seems to be the trend now with featured articles. I've also noticed from looking at other featured articles on musicians that the chart peaks are written out. For example instead of #2 it's written number two. It just might be a stylistic thing though. Good luck with the article. -- Underneath-it-All 15:52, 24 December 2006 (UTC)

I looked at other band FAs and chart peaks were written as you suggested, changed it in this. I also can't seem to find a decent picture of them with one of those CC licenses (best picture is under 'Christ illusion' section, Thanks for tips. M3tal H3ad 11:01, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Just added a new picture under a CC license. It's not great but it will have to do for the article to get FA. M3tal H3ad 13:08, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Looks good. Good luck with the article! Underneath-it-All 04:24, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

Seegoon

I've given it a quick look, and here are the things I've noticed:

• It's common these days in band articles to add a flag icon to the infobox before the text in "origin". In this case, it'd be {{flagicon|USA}}, producing .
• "Reign in Blood", which has been labeled "the heaviest album of all time"" - needs citation.
• Another stylistic thing I've seen becoming prevalent in band articles is including years in parentheses at the end of each section heading in "History". For instance, maybe amending "Early days" to "Early days (1982-1983)", or "Early days: 1982-1983". This is a matter of taste, but personally I think it helps the audience establish context more clearly.
• I think WP:MUSIC asks that you put "(see 19xx in music)" after the more important years in the existence of a band. For instance, I'd put "(see 1982 in music)" after "In 1982", at the start of "Early days".
• ""Aggressive Perfector",(sample (help·info)) [3]" - there's a space between the closing bracket and the reference.
• You have "Haunting North America" in quotation marks, but 1984 Combat Tour in italics. I don't know which is the preferred style, but I think you should decide on one.
• I don't feel that the second paragraph of Hell Awaits flows particularly well. The sentences seem unrelated and choppy, but it shouldn't take too long to rectify.
• "Although the album received virtually no radio airplay, Reign in Blood" - you have an audio sample here. If the sample is of a song, it should be in "quotation marks", not italics.
• "Lombardo later said: "I wasn't making any money. I figured if we were gonna be doing this professionally, on a major label, I wanted my rent and utilities paid."" - needs citation.
• "As a result, 1988's South of Heaven received criticism from longtime fans, although the album was Slayer's most commercially successful release at the time." - I'm not sure that this needs citation, but I'm sure it could do with it if you're ever winging for GA or FA.
• "Judgement Night" - I think movies go in italics. I might be wrong, so check the WP:MOS or something.
• Paragraph titles for "Undisputed Attitude", "Diabolus in Musica", "God Hates Us All" and "Christ Illusion" need to be made italic. Also, the sections on the first two albums I just mentioned are very short, and surely the lawsuit is a massive part of the bands' history, and could be expanded.
• "The release date was delayed, as Wal-Mart would not carry the album with the original nailed bible cover art." - this must be quite easy to find reference material for, and needs citation.
• "pushed the release back to 9/11" - "9/11" is very American, so could do with changing to "September 11" for simplification for an international readership.
• ""Best Metal Performance" on January 8, 2002, the award was won by Tool." - this doesn't flow very well. Consider changing to something like "2002; the award eventually went to Tool, for "song title"", or something similar.
• With ""Tattoo the Planet"", you've again reverted to putting tour names in quotation marks - you need to check the whole article and come up with a standard.
• "Dates had to be canceled or postponed due to flight restrictions. The bands decided to withdraw or postpone dates." - this doesn't flow very well. It could easily be improved by deleting the full stop and "The", and replacing with ", and some". Meh I'm not explaining myself very well.
• "Slayer toured playing Reign in Blood entirety throughout the fall of 2003, under the tour banner "Still Reigning". Their playing of the final song "Raining Blood" culminated with the band being drenched in a rain of fake blood." For one, you need to italicise Reign in Blood, and secondly, I'd advise you rewrite this completely. The standard of prose at this stage in the article has fallen dramatically since the beginning.
• In the last sentence of that same paragraph, there's a "with" with a capital W.
• "During 2002 to 2004" - change to "From 2002 to 2004". In fact, consider rewriting that entire paragraph. Don't consider, actually. Just DO. It's crap.
• "The anticipated album Christ Illusion was to be released on June 6, 2006. Due to recording difficulties, the date was pushed back." - I'd rewrite this too. My take: "The highly anticipated album Christ Illusion was originally set to be released on June 6, 2006, but due to recording difficulties, the date was pushed back."
• "Cult was also released on the bands website on June 6, 2006 at 6:06am." - "Cult" should be in quotation marks, not italics.
• "Christ Illusion improved on their previous highest charting album Divine Intervention, which debuted at #8." - this prose isn't as good as it could be. I'd change it to "Christ Illusion's performance in the charts improved upon that of the their previous highest charting album, Divine Intervention, which debuted at #8."
• "Slayer fans are referred to as the Slaytanic Wehrmacht,[51] which refers to the armed forces of the Nazi-Germany." - who refers to them like this? It might say so in the reference, but I sure as hell don't want to bother reading through another article to find out. Also, I don't think "Nazi-Germany" needs a hyphen.
• "...death and Satan among other things. Tom stated they..." It seems weird for the article to be on a first name basis with him.
• "...depicts Christ himself..." - "himself" makes the writer sound Christian. This is supposed to be neutral, I'd remove it.

OK I said I had a quick look... in the end this took a fair while. However, some of what I've written might be complete nonsense or confusing. If you have trouble, just reply here or on my talk page. All in all, I hope some of this has been useful for you; a good band article is a rare thing on Wikipedia and needs all the TLC it can be afforded. Good luck with it. Seegoon 21:03, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks, I've dealt with most of the problems(i hope), but there is still some choppy sentences. I still need to expand Diabolus, can't find any more information during that period . I also need a reference for South of heaven most successful album.

• * "Reign in Blood", which has been labeled "the heaviest album of all time"" - needs citation. With this i have it referenced under the Reigning Blood section, is that ok or do i add one to the lead?

Once again thanks for all your help! :) M3tal H3ad 10:35, 26 December 2006 (UTC)

Hmm... I'm not sure about that. I'd read WP:CITE as a starting point, or ask a veteran Wikipedian. Besides that, I think the article looks a lot tidier now. It flows better too, and bears striking similarities with some GA and FA music articles. If you come unstuck in the future, just hit up my talk page and I'll do what I can. Seegoon 11:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

PS - "While opening for Bitch at the Woodstock Club in Los Angeles, Slayer were spotted by Brian Slagel, a former music journalist who had recently founded Metal Blade Records. Slagel convinced the band to record an original song "Aggressive Perfector",(sample (help·info))[3] for his upcoming Metal Massacre III compilation, released in July 1983. The song created underground buzz, and the band signed a recording contract with Metal Blade." - you say Metal Blade twice here, which is probably unnecessary, and both mentions are wikilinked, which is also extraneous. You're only really required to link the first mention of something. Besides that, the second wikilink is to the wrong article. Seegoon 11:13, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. I think the weak section of the article is God hates us All and Christ illusion, lots of choppy sentences. I've done my best to try remove but it still needs work, if you could take another look i would greatly appreciate it. Also if you want any pointers to get Isis to GA status i will gladly help. M3tal H3ad 13:10, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Resetting the indent...

I know what you mean about those sections, they feel a little bit like information has been tacked on, one thing after another, as opposed to it all being written at once. With that in mind, here's my take on how it could be improved: "After delays regarding remixing and artwork,[28] including slip cover inserts being made to cover the original artwork after censorship issues, God Hates Us All was released on September 11, 2001. Promotional material announcing the album title and release date drew an unintended connection with the September 11 terrorist attacks. The title track "Disciple" received the band their first Grammy nomination, for "Best Metal Performance" on January 8, 2002; the award eventually went to Tool, for "Schism".[29] Drummer Bostaph left the band shortly after the album's release due to a chronic elbow injury, stating it would hinder his ability to play.[30] He was replaced by original drummer Dave Lombardo.[30]" I swear there was information about Walmart boycotting the cover in there before, too. You'll have to re-wikilink and re-reference, but I'm sure that wouldn't be too tough. As for the second paragraph: "The 2001 European tour Tattoo the Planet was jeopardized by the September 11 attacks. The tour was originally set to feature Pantera, Static X, Biohazard and Vision of Disorder, but dates had to be canceled or postponed due to flight restrictions, and some bands decided to withdraw, leaving only Slayer and Static X remaining for the European leg of the tour.[31] Pantera, Vision of disorder and Biohazard were replaced by Cradle of Filth and other bands dependant upon location; among those bands were Amorphis, In Flames, Moonspell, Children of Bodom and Necrodeath." I hope that's a little better, I can look at more later. As for Isis - just read through and if any of it sounds like shit, tell me! I know it's at 80% of its potential at best, it just needs a fresh set of eyes. Seegoon 16:53, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

Changed a lot of wording, the second paragraph of Christ illusion is the only choppy section left (i hope). M3tal H3ad 09:40, 29 December 2006 (UTC)

I think WP:MUSIC asks that you put "(see 19xx in music)" after the more important years in the existence of a band. For instance, I'd put "(see 1982 in music)" after "In 1982", at the start of "Early days". Please don't put parenthetical (see whatevers) into the text - just link to the year in music. Nice ref work :-) Sandy (Talk) 00:34, 30 December 2006 (UTC)

I can't believe I'm correcting Sandy here of all Wikipedians, but sorry. Wikipedia:WikiProject_Music/MUSTARD/Internal_linking guideline two states (in full) "Do not use piped links to years in music (e.g., do not write: The Beatles Please Please Me came out in 1963). Instead, sparingly use parentheses after years mentioned in the article, such as The Beatles released Please Please Me in 1963 (see 1963 in music). In discography charts or other specialized forms, it is acceptable to use non-piped links to the 'year in music' articles. Generally avoid linking non-dated chronological items, such as "1988", "1920s" and "20th century"." There ya have it! Seegoon 17:15, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannsimarou

I love to review articles about bands! I'm sorry if I repeat what the other reviewers have suggested, but I do not have the time to read their remarks in detail. This is my review:

• "Slayer is often credited as one of the "Big Four" thrash metal bands, along with Megadeth, Metallica, and Anthrax." Citation please!
• "Reign in Blood, which has been labeled "the heaviest album of all time". I read the discussion above. If you cite this assertion later, you do not have to repeat the citing in the lead. Otherwise, you have to cite this assertion in the lead.
• Try not to have stubby paragraphs as in "Early days (1982-1983)".
• I have the impression "label" (used very often in the article) usually has a negative meaning (label somebody as a criminal). But again I'm not sure!
• "Slayer returned to the studio to record their fourth studio album. To contrast the speed of Reign in Blood, the band consciously decided to slow down new material, incorporating melodic singing, rather than screaming." What do you mean, when you say that they "slowed down new material". The slowing down was the incorporation of melodic singing?
• ""pounding speed of Reign in Blood". Who is quoted here? Steve?
• Try to have at least one citation in each paragraph.
• "1994 saw the release of Divine Intervention. The new record, Slayer's first with new drummer Paul Bostaph." I think the syntax is a bit problematic here. Two choppy sentence one after the other. I would suggest an overall sopy-editing by an external native English user.
• "God Hates Us All was released on September 11, 2001. The release date was delayed several times, due to remixing and artwork concerns.[28] Slip cover inserts were made to cover the original artwork, delaying the albums release till September 11. Promotional material announcing the album title and release date drew an unintended connection with the September 11 terrorist attacks. The title track "Disciple" received the band their first Grammy nomination, for "Best Metal Performance" on January 8, 2002; the award went to Tool, for "Schism".[29] Bostaph left the band shortly after the release of the album due to a chronic elbow injury, stating it would hinder his ability to play.[30] He was replaced by original drummer Dave Lombardo.[30]" This paragraph is another example of the problematic article flow. Too short sentences, not well-connected together, and with seamless passings from one issue to another (from terrorist attacks to Grammy, from Grammy to Bostaph's leaving).
• Minor: alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 18:25, 27 December 2006 (UTC)

thanks,

• What word would i use instead of 'labeled', called doesn't sound formal.

• Characterized as, regarded as; personally, I also prefer called than labeled. But I cannot give you the best kind of advice here, since I am not a native English speaker. I just don't feel comfortmble with 'labeled' (don't take my opinion for definitely correct!). I remember that User:Tutmosis had recently written a nice FA about a musician K-os, and seems familiar with music terminology. You could advise him or even read the article to take some ideas.--Yannismarou 10:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• That quote is taken from Steve so do i mention that?

• Not necessarily, if you put a citation where the quote ends.--Yannismarou 10:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

• When mentioning slowing down material should i put slowed down the tempo?

• It sounds better to me, but again per my answer in your first question.--Yannismarou 10:38, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

I'll add that citation later thanks for the pointers. M3tal H3ad 03:16, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Done, done and done. Thanks M3tal H3ad 11:05, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Just fixed the Grammy and terrorist paragraph by moving the mention of terrorist attacks to the tour which was jeopardized by it. M3tal H3ad 11:42, 28 December 2006 (UTC)

Han van Meegeren

I just stumbled across this article, which at this point is mostly based on the equivalent German article. I haven't edited it yet, but thought I'd attempt to at least get this to GA. Right off the bat, what I could do:

1. Shorten the lead.
2. Add inline citations (although some statements are cited with text and could potentially be converted into standard footnotes).
3. Use more English references instead of the German-language works that are currently listed. (To make verification easier)

but other than that... suggestions? Quarma 13:30, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:16, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The currect form of the article is a good basis for an excellent article. You have realized most of the existing problems of the current article. These are some additional remarks:

• The lead must indeed get shorter, but you should also imrove its format. Don't keep the current stubby pars. Create a consize lead with 2-3 middle-sized pars.
• "(or “knight’s hall” see: Binnenhof)". I think it is not nice to link other wikiarticles like that. Try to incorporate such links in the prose. Maybe something like that: met weekly in the Ridderzaal.
• Try to have the citations at the end of the sentences. I know, of course, that this is not always possible.
• "Artistic development": You could divide this section in two sub-sections, like "Early years" and "Career as a painter". But this is just a proposal.
• When you quote, you don't have to use italics. Quotation marks are OK.
• "The confession". The first word of a heading is recommended not to be an article. Thus, "confession" instead of "the confession" is recommended. In this particular section is "confession" an accurate title? Does it cover the content of both sub-sections?
• "Million today[1]." Inline citations go after the punctuation. This is thus the correct: "Million today.[1]"
• "Han van Meegeren remains one of the most ingenious art counterfeiters of the 20th century." You definitely have to cite this claim. And I think that you could expand a bit "legacy" with some more infos. Maybe something more about his art in this or another sections. All the focus is on his forgery talent!
• "Retrospective exhibitions in museums": I'm not sure this should be a seperate article. And do you think the mentioning of all these exhibitions is necessary?
• In Refs, some books are in qms (Falsification and Research (1976) "Museum Folkwang, Essen and Staatliche Museen Preußischer Kulturbesitz, Berlin".); some others in italics (Bailey, Anthony (2002). Vermeer. Berlin: Siedler Verlag). Consistency needed.
• Your references are they all cited?
• The names of the books's writers etc. should also be mentioned with consistency. I see "Guarnieri, Luigi" but also "Peter Greenaway" and "Marijke van Brandhof".
• "This article was translated into English from the German Wikipedia article of the same name." This should leave, of course, after you complete your re-writing.
• After the your effort is completed, you could always ask another native English speaker to take a look at the prose. It looks fine to me, but I'm not the best judge of prose!--Yannismarou 18:42, 20 December 2006 (UTC)

Prince Sadruddin Aga Khan

This article has been significantly rewritten, and I would like it to be assessed and rated. I would also like to receive constructive comments on how it could be improved. Thanks - Cimm^[talk] 20:14, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Can you find an image? Kaisershatner 14:49, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

There are images available, for example this AFP file photo from 1988. But I don't know whether it would qualify for uploading to wikipedia. Cimm^[talk] 15:56, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Done. Cimm^[talk] 01:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article needs expansion and work. Most of the sections are still stubby. I rated it as B-Class, because despite its problems, the article is informative. These are the major problems IMO:

• Already mentioned: there is no picture. I think you could find a fair-used one and add it the the infobox.

Done. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• There are no inline citations. I think you should take a look at WP:CITE.

I have added some where appropriate. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• Don't wikilink more than once the some links, before then your text gets over-wikified.

I agree, thanks for pointing this out. Working on it. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• I think you could add some more infos in "Childhood and Education". Especially the first par just repeats part of the lead.

I have expanded this section. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• The two first sub-sections (I fixed the sub-headings) of "Career" are stubby. Merge or expand.

Done. Merged the first section into a Career summary and expended the sub-sections. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• We wikilink full dates: May 2, 1986, not 1986 or May 1986.

Fixed. Cimm^[talk] 23:58, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• There are obvious prose problems. Let's take this sentence: "In 1958, Prince Sadruddin joined UNESCO, becoming in 1961, Executive Secretary to its International Action Committee for the Preservation of Nubia, which brought together archaeologists from Eastern Europe and the West at the height of the Cold War to save the ancient treasures of Abu Simbel, the temples of Philae and Kalabsha and the Christian churches of Nubia." Don't you think that it is long and not well-written?

I agree. I have corrected this and other run-on sentences as well. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• I have also another question. He was born in france, but what are his roots? From which country does his family come from?

Good question. It has now been answered in the expanded childhood and family sections. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• I don't think that it is necessary to call him "Prince Saddrudin". We know from the lead he is a prince. "Saddrudin" alone would be fine.

I disagree with you on this one. Many of the source texts refer to him throughout as Prince Sadruddin. It appears that he was commonly referred to as "Prince" throughout his life, and I think it is appropriate that this article reflect that. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Born to Sir Sultan Mahomed Shah Aga Khan and the Princess Andrée Aga Khan". I think I read the same info 3 times. Be careful with these repetitions.

I agree that repetition of information should be avoided, but the information parentage is relevant to the context of the lead, childhood and family sections in which it appears. I have tried to word it differently to avoid the feeling of repetition. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Family and Marriages" apart from repetitive is also badly written. Stubby paragraphs, too short sentences and a problematic prose flow.

I have moved more information into this section. The marriage paragraphs could probably use some expansion (if I can find more information). Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Awards and Decorations" is also stubby. Offer some more information or get rid of this section.

I'd like to keep this information because these awards represent significant recognition of his life's accomplishments, but I'm not sure where to relocate it. I'm leaving it alone for now and will revisit later. Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

I boosted this section with additional refs. Cimm^[talk] 01:08, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

--Yannismarou 18:59, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Thank you for taking the time to review the article and providing such thoughtful and comprehensive comments Yannismarou. I will consider them carefully and revise the article accordingly. Cimm^[talk] 19:19, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

I have updated the article based on your suggestions, and responded to each of your comments above. If you get a moment, I'd appreciate your thoughts on the updates. Thanks Yannis - Cimm^[talk] 18:08, 1 January 2007 (UTC)

Additional comments by Yannismarou

• I did some tweaks in the lead: put years of birth and death in parenthesis which is the trend, put some commas (I hope I'm correct!) and merged the last two paragraphs. If you don't like the changes, feel free to revert.

Thank you - looks good. Cimm^[talk] 23:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• "His UN diplomatic career continued through the 1970's and 80's and he was twice a candidate for Secretary-General of the United Nations." And "he has been" you mean?

This sentence reads well to me... not sure what you mean. Cimm^[talk] 23:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Oups! My mistake!--Yannismarou 09:01, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• "By the 1970's the European refugee problems were mostly solved, but had been replaced by millions of displaced persons in the Third World. The scale and complexity of refugee issues has continued to increase, and the UNHCR together with the international community at large has had to adapt." How did he help UNHCR to adapt? It is not that clear from the text.

Reorganized the text to improve clarity. Cimm^[talk] 00:24, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Despite this, Prince Sadruddin was able to successfully negotiate with Foreign Minister Tariq Aziz for the establishment of a UN relief program for tens of thousands of Shia Muslims trapped in worsening conditions in the marshlands of southern Iraq." I think you should cite here.

Done. Cimm^[talk] 23:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• Try to have the inline citations at the end of the sentence. Cite in the middle only if it is absolutely necessary for emphasis.

Noted. Cimm^[talk] 16:37, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• When you use articles or interviews from online news magazines or newspapers, it is advisable that you use Template:Cite news and not Template:Cite web

Done. Cimm^[talk] 00:03, 3 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Although he won the 1981 vote, the Soviet Union considered him too Western and vetoed his election." I would cite that.

Done. Cimm^[talk] 23:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• "Bellerive was also amongst the first organisations to warn of the potential human health hazards of modern intensive farming methods." Source?

Added source citation. Cimm^[talk] 23:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

• In "Family and marriages" the prose looks to me a bit "choppy". Some too short sentences. Looking to me a bit seamlessly connected. I would propose a careful copy-editing there.

The article has been improved. It looks comprehensive. The prose is not perfect, but, in general, looks to me fine. Maybe some more photos would also help (only if you find, of course, relevant and not copyvio photos serving the article - after all photos are not a prerequisite for GAC neither for FAC). These are the things I further managed to locate. Maybe two fresh eyes reviewing the article would be even more useful!--Yannismarou 15:53, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Yannis - thanks for reviewing this article once again. Your comments provide a valuable contribution to the quality and accuracy of the article! Cimm^[talk] 23:43, 2 January 2007 (UTC)

Princess Elisabeth of Hesse

I would like to submit this B class article for a peer review in hopes of bringing it up to good article status. Please suggest any needed changes.--Bookworm857158367 07:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nicely done! I don't think I have many things to suggest, since the article looks to me quite comprehensive. Just a few remarks:

• The inline citations go straight after the punctuation mark. Do not leave a gap between the punctuation mark and the inline citation.
• 17 of the 22 citations are based on one book. I'm a bit concerned that the article relies so much on a single source. But this could be a problem for FAC; I do not think it is a major problem for GAC.
• Since you have "References", there is no reason to have all these details of Sullivan's book in note 1. The same with notes 6, 15 and 19.
• I see ISBN only for Sullivan's book (and in "Notes" - not in "References", where such details should be). What about the other two books published in 1997?--Yannismarou 18:48, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Robert Garran

Most of the prose here was written by myself, so I'm looking for some fresh eyes and some comments about the quality of the writing, as well as comments about the overall standard of the article, since I'm ultimately looking towards FAC for this one. There's also a regular peer review open at Wikipedia:Peer review/Robert Garran/archive1, I hope it's not a problem submitting this in two places, I'm just hoping for plenty of comments. --bainer (talk) 00:19, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

Update: this is an old peer review, I ran out of time to implement the suggestions that arose last time before I went away on holiday over the New Year period, but I've come back to them now. I've relisted this peer review to hopefully get some more comments. --bainer (talk) 07:51, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

• I'll try to re-review it tomorrow!--Yannismarou 20:41, 15 April 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 23:19, 15 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

• I do not like some prose stuff in the lead. First sentence: "Robert Randolph Garran (10 February 1867 – 11 January 1957), Australian lawyer, was an early leading expert in Australian constitutional law, the first employee of the Government of Australia and the first Solicitor-General of Australia." I would rephrase "Robert Randolph Garran (10 February 1867 – 11 January 1957) was an Australian lawyer and an early leading expert in Australian constitutional law, the first employee of the Government of Australia and the first Solicitor-General of Australia." Then:"Garran was also an important figure in the development of the city of Canberra, organising the creation of the Canberra University College and later contributing to the establishment of the Australian National University, and founding several important cultural associations in the new city." This second end extends a sentence which should have ended. According to my IMO, I think you should split the sentence.

• I agree, I've shuffled the sentences around.

• "Garran, like his father, was strongly involved in the Federation movement." You could explain us in a few words what is this movement.

• I've included a brief description, and the term "Australian Federation movement" is linked to a page discussing it fully.

• Too many read links. Officially this is not an obstacle for FA status, but it would be nice if you could reduce them, creating some stubs.
• "Garran and his fellow staff aimed for a simple style of legislative drafting, a goal enabled by the fact that there was of course no pre-existing federal legislation on which their work would have to be based." I think we do not need "of course" here.

• It does read better without that clause.

• "Garran "consistently advocated the establishment of what he prophetically called 'a National University at Canberra'"" Who's the quote? Since you use quotation marks, I think you should mention the name of the person saying that in the text. Otherwise, recast into alternative language.

• The whole sentence was cited, but only the first part of it was a direct quote, the remainder was paraphrased. I've added a comma following the direct quote and repeated the citation to make this clear.

• "This vision was evidently influential on the establishment of the Australian National University (ANU) in 1946, the only research-only university in the country (although in 1960 it amalgamated with the University College to offer undergraduate courses)." I would like a citation here.

• Done.

• Try not to have inline citations in the middle of the sentences, unless it is absolutely necessary.

• Apart from a few citations following direct quotes (see two points above), the only citations in the middle of sentences are details of books that are mentioned in the prose. It would be misleading to offer the citation at the end of the sentence as it would imply attribution to that source.

• Garran's "personality, like his prose, was devoid of pedantry and pomposity and, though dignified, was laced with a quizzical turn of humour." Again, who says that? The same problem with the next sentence: "His death "marked the end of a generation of public men for whom the cultural and the political were natural extensions of each other and who had the skills and talents to make such connections effortlessly.""

• The quotes are cited, did you want me to name the source?

• The last quote of "Legacy" is Garran's. What has to do this quote with his legacy? Maybe you should place it in the sections you discuss his work for the Federation and the Constitution

• It's his answer to the question 'has federation turned out as you expected?' posed to him near the end of his career. I think it nicely illustrates his own view of the things he gave his career to and is appropriate for that section.

• Your printed sources have no pages (except for the articles). I'm afraid this is a problem for FAC. You should rewrite your citations, by adding specific pages..

• I've done this for the book that's referenced the most. The first source is a specialist encyclopaedia entry, and it's all on the one double page IIRC, so I doubt it's necessary to split that one up into individual citations.

• Unfortunately with the business of the Christmas period I've run out of time to implement these suggestions before I leave for my holiday tomorrow, but I'll definitely do so when I come back. --bainer (talk) 14:26, 29 December 2006 (UTC)
• Ok, now that it's definitely no longer Christmas, I've come back to take a look at these. My responses are in blue. --bainer (talk) 07:38, 10 April 2007 (UTC)

Additional comments

• "Garran graduated with a Bachelor of Arts degree with first-class honours in 1888, winning the University's Medal in Philosophy, and a Bachelor of Laws degree in 1889." I would cite that.

• That was from the same source as the preceding sentence, I've clarified that by adding another footnote.

• You have some red links. Though red links are not an obstacle for FA status, some reviewers do not like it, and you might lose some supports. Maybe, you could stub some of them.

• I'll do so if serious objection arises. I would prefer to do the articles properly when I have the time.

• "In June 1893 ... the following five years." This paragraph has no citations.

• I've remedied that. I've also mentioned the Bathurst conference alongside the Corowa one.

• "The creation of the office and Garran's appointment to it was to some degree recognition of his existing role". IMO this assertion should be sourced.

• I've done so, and clarified the point by rewording it and bringing in material from another source.

• As far as the prose is concerned, I am not the best judge, since I am not a native English speacker, but I don't see any major flaw. Maybe, in some cases it could be further improved ("The family lived in Phillip Street in central Sydney. Garran's mother "had a deep distrust, well justified in those days, of milkman's milk" and so the family kept a cow in the backyard, which would walk on its own to The Domain each day to graze and return twice a day to be milked.[2] The family later lived in the suburb of Darlinghurst, just to the east of the centre city.), but, again, not any huge prose flaws I think.

• Hmm, a failure to read that sentence out loud on my part :) I've substituted alternative words for those cases.

In general, the article is very nice - some thinks I do not like very much are probably just personal preferences (such as the long quotes in "Legacy", which are long and IMO interrrupt the flow of the prose) - and I think I would support it in FAC. But, if you don't feel sure about it, you can go first to GAC - it is another way to get feedback.--Yannismarou 11:50, 21 April 2007 (UTC)

Again, responses in blue. --bainer (talk) 07:12, 27 April 2007 (UTC)

I think this could go to FAC as it is - it's an excellent article. Rebecca 02:06, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

Grand Duchess Anastasia Nikolaevna of Russia

I'd like to bring the quality of this article up to featured article status. The subject of the article is fairly significant. I attempted to add references and sources, but considerable work still needs to be done. Please offer any suggestions to improve the article. Also look at the images included with the article to see if they are appropriate and included within the public domain. --Bookworm857158367 05:55, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Well-researched article and worked with devotion by its editor. My main problem is that sometimes the wording and the structuring become uncyclopedic. This is my review:

• "Robert K. Massie, The Romanovs: The Final Chapter, 1995 ISBN 0-6794-3572-7". Page is missing here.
• "Gilliard, Pierre (1970). "Thirteen Years at the Russian Court", Ayer Company Publishers Incorporated, ISBN 0-4050-3029-0" Page is also missing here.
• "Dehn, Lili, 1922. "The Real Tsaritsa", ISBN 5-3000-2285-3". And here!
• "Kurth, Anastasia: The Riddle of Anna Anderson, 1983." And here!!
• Cite properly the external link in note 15. Check also Template:Cite web.
• "But the unwelcome girl made herself noticed from the start with the vividness of her personality." Such assessments need citing. In any case, be careful with such wordings, so that you are not accused of POV.
• "Those who knew her remembered Anastasia as a vivacious and energetic young girl. " Those who knew her? Who knew her?! I think sometimes the writing gets uncyclopedic.
• "She was reportedly good at wicked impersonations of those around her, and possessed a sharp wit and appreciation for sarcastic jokes." Veribiable source is needed here.
• "(She) was very roguish ... her mother's friend Anna Vyrubova. [7]" This paragraph has so many quotes that I think the prose gets a bit problematic.
• Do not link sigle years like 1911; only full dates like May 2, 1911. Per WP:MoS.
• Get rid of "Older namesakes". If you want create a disambiguation page, but the place of this section is not in the article.
• Get also rid of "Trivia". Try to incorparate its content somewhere else in the prose. As it is now, it is stubby and trivia! Trivia sections are no more recommended.
• The first three paragraphs of "From Mystery to Legend" are uncited. Try to have at least one inline citation in each paragraph.
• "Historians have always assumed that Anastasia was murdered along with her father and the rest of her family during the early morning hours". If you do not cite, words like "historians" are weasel. What are your sources?
• "Historians have ... superiors after the execution". This paragraph looks to me like a repetition. You have already told us about her execution in the previous section. Do you have anything new to add? The next paragraph is again about her execution. Thinking again, I wonder if you would like to create a seperate section about her execution just before "From Mystery to Legend". In this way, I think you would avoid a sense of repetition and going back to something you have already described (In the current article, you tell the story of her execution, after you close her biography with her death).
• Do not repeat the same wikilinks. Anna Anderson is linked more than once for no obvious reason.
• "DNA testing confirmed these were the remains of the Imperial Family and their servants, although the fate of the two missing children remains a mystery." Avoid stubby paragraphs like this one.
• "low-key fanfare"? Can you explain this term?
• I do not think you should analyze with so many details Anastasia (1997 film). After all there is a seperate article.--Yannismarou 20:44, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Bookworm857158367

Thanks for reviewing the article. I've made most of the changes suggested. Three of the books are actually on-line, so I couldn't list page numbers that aren't shown. One of the other editors must have looked up publication information for the print editions that I don't have. I changed the citation to go along with an on-line edition. I will wait to nominate it for a GA review until I find out the status of one of the photos. I'm not sure if the Beinecke Library permits its use. Any other suggestions?--Bookworm857158367 05:56, 13 December 2006 (UTC)

• Archive 1
• 2

Hayley Westenra

From this peer review I am hoping to get this article up to the level of GA. Andrew D White 03:12, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

The reference notation could be more informative - you have a through t on the main page of her official site? Has she been interviewed or had newspaper articles written about her? I'd suggest that you read other GA or FA singers' articles to get ideas about how the article should look. - Malkinann 05:50, 11 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice start, but it needs some more work. These is my review:

• For the current length of the article the short lead is not a problem, but, if you expand the next sections, you should expand the lead as well. In any case, check WP:LEAD.
• I understood that she is succesful, but reading the article I did not understand why she is successful?! What is the nature of her talent? Is there something special with her voice? Are there any other factors that boosted her career?
• "The pair drew a large crowd, and one woman asked the girls if they had ever recorded anything. This woman turned out to be a journalist with CTV, and asked Hayley to appear on air." What is the name of this journalist? I think it is an important information.
• I think "International success" needs better writing. Many stubby paragraphs and a sense of trivia throughout this section. I think the flow of the prose there should be improved.
• "Philanthropy and Charity" is stubby. It would be nice if you could add some more infos.
• 20 citations of her official site?!!! Hmmmm! I think you need a better variety of sources. Some more research would be helpful.
• Why do you cite in "References" articles of Wikipedia?! This is obviously wrong. You can easily cite them in the prose. No reason to have them also cited in "References".
• In general, the formatting of "References" is not nice. Check Template:Cite web, in order to see what the reference of an external link should include.
• I think all your photos are fair-used tagged. If you ever submit the article in WP:FAC, this could be a problem.
• Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 20:13, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Improvements baised upon comments

I have started to apply the improvements that you have suggested. I have started by revising the material which is already in the article before I add any of the possible topics that you indicated would be good to have. I have hopefully cleaned up the references section. I have gotten the webpages to use the Template:Cite web. I have hopefully found a few new sources which have taken out a bit of the excessive usage of the official web page, is that enough now or should I try to find more? I tried to located the name of the journalist with CTV but I could not find her name in any of the references which I found in my University's Library, they all just refer to her as a journalist with CTV (one of them refers to the reporter being female but that is it). I am hoping that someone else can find her name. I am not sure what you would like to see Alphabetized at the end of the article, can you elaborate a bit more? I shall work on the other suggestions as I get time. Thanks. Andrew D White 06:05, 14 December 2006 (UTC)

I alphabetized the categories. If you can't locate the name of the journalist, this is not a very important proble. Something I now saw: further reading goes after references. I think that the article is ready for GAC. Either it will immediately pass either they will ask you some further imrovements. But I do not think that a straightaway GAC failure is probable.--Yannismarou 14:48, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

"Many people note that Miss Westenra does not display any diva tendencies.". What people? You should cite here and be more specific. Otherwise it is weasel words. And I think that this particular paragraph needs an overall more encyclopedic writing.--Yannismarou 14:51, 16 December 2006 (UTC)

I thought I did source, although I may have reworded it too liberally. Source as pointed out on article [14] at time of writing.

D'Souza, Nandini, and Venessa Lau. "Can't Stop the Music; From Bach to Brahms, Kids are Going Crazy for the Classics These Days. Cases in Point: 17-Year-Old Soprano Hayley Westenra Tours the U.S. With Her Album "PURE," While Juilliard Students Show Their Distinctive Style and SONY Unveils the Youngest Conductor Ever to Take on Beethoven.(QRIO conductor robot)(Juilliard music students and their clothes)." WWD (April 29, 2004): 6. InfoTrac OneFile. Thomson Gale. Susquehanna University. 13 Dec. 2006 .

Here is the exact wording from the article.

While Westenra, born and raised in Christchurch, has the kind of pipes that could bring her lasting international stardom, she displays none of the diva tendencies to which other talented singers succumb at a tender age. This may be partly thanks to the fact that her parents and younger brother and sister have made the trip with her. "They keep an eye on me," she says of her parents, Jill and Gerald Westenra, who take turns chaperoning her at various events, shoots and interviews.

Andrew D White 03:57, 17 December 2006 (UTC)

Allegra Byron

I'd like to turn this into an article with a good article rating. Please make suggestions on how to improve the article.--Bookworm857158367 05:37, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

Nice article. It mostly needs some formatting adjustments, in order to be GA and maybe even FA. These are my remarks:

• The lead should be a summary of the whole article. I'm not sure that this particular lead serves its role, because I see there important information not further analyzed in the main article. I suggest you take a look at WP:LEAD. Let me be clear: It is not a bad lead, but it may need some content revision and restructuring.
• The same revision of content and restructuring may be needed in the next section, "Resemblances to Byron". First of all, you should tell the story from the beginning. Forget the lead! The article starts now! Where was she born? Explain us a bit the background of the relation between Lord Byron and Claire Clairmont. What was Byron's reaction to the news of Cairmont's pregnancy? And Clairmont? Was the pregnancy and the birth of the child good news for her? I suggest you follow a lineal narration of Allegra's short life and of the relevant events. Reading the whole article, I felt I was going back and forward, back and forward and that I was losing the course of Allegra's life.
• Cite properly with footnotes. The research is good, but the formatting wrong. Read carefully WP:CITE, which is a part of WP:MoS. You can use either the Oxford or the Harvard system. The one in line citation you have is not properly written. Why don't you use the Template:Cite web?
• "However, Percy Bysshe Shelley, who visited the toddler Allegra while she was being boarded with a family chosen by Byron, had a different opinion of the child's living arrangements over the years." I do not think you should start a new section with "however".
• I think all your links in "See also" section are already linked within the main prose. So, I think you should get rid of this section. It is redundant.
• I see no bibliography? Why?! The printed sources you have used should be mentioned in detail either in "Footnotes" or in a seperate section ("References"). For instance, what is "Eisler 1999". Title? Full name of the writer? ISBN? Publisher? Check also Template:Cite book.
• In "Death, burial and a memorial" I see many stubby paragraphs. This is not nice for the prose.
• I don't know if you would like to add a biography infobox in your article.--Yannismarou 19:49, 12 December 2006 (UTC)

Charles Edward Magoon

I'm looking to improve the quality of my contributions to Wikipedia with more inline sourcing and more closely following the Biography guidelines. A review of this article will give me pointers that I can put towards other work, but I'd also like to eventually make it my first "GA". JRP 23:39, 5 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article is well-written and well-referenced. I think it will easily go through GA and it can stand in FAC. Some minor remarks:

• Check carefully the prose and, if necessary, ask for an external copy-editing. I saw that another reviewer in the talk page of the article has done some accurate remarks concerning prose.
• "Death and afterward" is tooooo stubby, and the heading is inaccurate. We have the "death", but what about the "afterward"?!!
• I see you have a variety of printed sources; all of his era. Well-researched indeed! But If I was the editor of this article, I would also like to have some more modern analysis and assessments about the controversial events you point out and his tenure as Governor. In this way, you could enrich the article and make the research even more comprehensive.
• Minor: Alphabetize categories at the end of the article.--Yannismarou 08:48, 6 December 2006 (UTC)
  • I've made some changes based on your suggestions. First, some copy-editing (though since it's my work, I should find someone else to do it). I also alphabetized the cats and reworked the stubby section. I don't yet have more recent resources, though I am working on that. Another editor on the talk page indicates that he may be able to help in that department also. How does these changes look so far? JRP 06:40, 14 December 2006 (UTC)
    • The article was and remains good. The sources I propose will just add a beeter variety and maybe some additional assessments. I'm sorry I cannot ce the article myself! I'm not a native English speaker, and I'm afraid that as far as the prose is concerned, I cannot help a lot. But there are some excellent copy-editors around, who could help you with the (minor I think) prose problems.--Yannismarou 19:06, 18 December 2006 (UTC)

Nina Simone

Hello everybody, I have requested a review of this B-class article, because I think this artist deserves a good representation in the wiki-encyclopedia. I have been expanding and changing the article since september, as well as add almost Simone's total discography. But because I am a bit new to this, and not completely knowledgable about the more detailed underlying wiki do's and don'ts, I would really appreciate it to hear you comments so that the article can be made better in the future. Marcel flaubert 12:13, 2 December 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article looks well-written to me (in terms of prose). These are the main problems I con point out:

• The article lacks inline citations. I fyou ever decide to nominate it for FAC, try to have at least one inline citation for each paragraph.
• The existing citations, mainly the external links need wikifying. Check any recently promoted FA to see what I mean. And check also Template:Cite book and Template:Cite web.
• When you cite a book, you should mention pages.
• Something more about the citations: they go after the quotation mark not before. I noticed some inconsistency.
• The lead could be further expanded per WP:LEAD.
• "Performing live" provides a nice summary of her unique style, but I would like some more infos and analysis.
• I'm not sure these bolded texts in "Well known songs" are in accord with WP:MoS.
• "Quotations" is a listy section like "Trivia". I think you should get rid of it and incoroporate the quotations there in the main prose if possible.--Yannismarou 08:23, 6 December 2006 (UTC)

Thanks + question

Hi Yannismarou, thanks for your comments, esspecially about the citations and stuff.

Do you mean by inline citations the naming of a source immediatley after the sentence, such as (Simone & Cleary, 1992)? Does this way of citating substitute for the 'automatic' references section that is created as you add references (like [1]), or is it appropriate to do them both together?

Thanks again, it really helps me to see where I need to patch up (or anyone else who wants to of course ;). Any other comments are very welcome!

It is recommended that inline citations follow the Harvard or the Oxford system. You can check any recently promoted FA (especially biography) and you will understand what I mean.--Yannismarou 07:42, 8 December 2006 (UTC)

Elizabeth Clare Prophet

This is a request for peer review by scholars, Wikipedians, and other interested parties prior to nominating this article for GA status. BlackSun 21:55, 27 November 2006 (UTC)

Yannismarou

The article looks to me comprehensive and informative, but there are several problems. Most importantly:

• There are no inline citations.
• Some sections are full of one-sentence paragraphs, like "Mark Prophet". In this case I recommend rewriting.
• You could create a seperate article about the doctrine, and have here a summary of it. The current section is too long and not strictly related to Prophet's life, but to her church as well.
• These red links in the lead are not so nice. Delink them or create stubs.
• Why 5 paragraphs in the lead? And why the last one is so stubby. Check WP:LEAD to see how a lead should be exactly.
• ISBNs and publshers in books?
• "Controversial Issues" are also more about the church and not about Prophet. I thnik that you should think what material should remain in this article and what should go to a sub-article or to the church's article.--Yannismarou 12:16, 29 November 2006 (UTC)

Emma Goldman

My latest FA-bound project. With the help of Kaldari, Malik Shabazz, and Lquilter, I've rewritten and reorganized it. I believe it's in very good shape, but I'd like to get other eyes on it before taking it to FAC. Thanks in advance for your comments. – Scartol • Tok 21:13, 15 December 2007 (UTC)

From Jay

• The lead mentions the emotional distance from her mother, but Family doesn't explain this much except to say she didn't intervene in beatings.

• Removed mention in lead. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Rochester: "Her parents, furious at her intransigence" Is intransigence the best word? It seems she's discontent or non-committal as opposed to stubborn.

• They really wanted her to marry and stay married; they considered her behavior "loose". I reworded it. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Also, check tweak I made to see if this is okay with you.

• It's just lovely. =) – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Emma Goldman#Most and Berkman the second paragraph is a quotation, but the {{bquote}} doesn't seem to properly indent with a picture on the left. In my browser at least, this block quote is not indented and I didn't realize at first that it was a quotation.

• Hmm, yes. The template is supposed to make the font smaller too (it does on my browser at home, but not at school). I manually made the font size 90%. I did the same for the other quotations. I should make a bquote2 template which does this automatically, since blockquotes often look better with slightly smaller text IMO, and it's not like the non-spaced left margin problem is unique to this article. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Also in this section, I'm not exactly sure what is meant by "Berkman and Goldman regarded each other as comrades of the deepest sort." Does this mean they always remained political allies?

• Looks like someone else reworded this for us. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Homestead plot the steel plant "became the focus of attention" as in the focus of Emma's attention? The focus of national attention? Anarchist attention?

• National attention. Reworded. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• I'm embarrassed to admit that I don't know what stockbreakers are.

• You're an ignoramus. Just kidding – I stupidly wrote the wrong word for strikebreakers. My bad. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In "Inciting to riot", what sort of relationship did she begin with Havel?

• Fairly sure it was romantic in nature; I'll have to check Wexler once I get back home. There's some discussion on the EG talk page about how much we should include about her various romances. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In World War I is "No conscription League" correct capitalization?

• It's very hard to find documentation; the capitalization I used was used in Drinnon. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Also, which one of them actually spoke the block quote?

• Not sure, since I didn't add it. I'll have to ask on the talk page. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Also, is "twenty-on-year-old boy" correct? It's in quotation so I didn't want to change it without access to the quote.

• No, I'm just a moron. Fixed. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Russia, "Although her marriage to Jacob Kershner had offered some grounds for arguing Goldman's citizenship, the US government invoked the 1918 Anarchist Exclusion Act and deported them both to the Soviet Union, along with over two hundred others." I initially read this to mean that the government deported her and Kershner. Also "for arguing citizenship" is a bit of an odd construction.

• I agree. Rewritten. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Anarchism: is the sentence at the start of this section a bit of a tautology?

• Yes. I didn't add it, and felt odd about rewriting it straightaway. I will do so now, however. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Capitalism, I don't know what she meant by "take bread". She advised workers to steal bread from the market?

• This was part of what had led to her "inciting to riot" arrest; I've added a refresher in the Anarchism section. Once again, I took something someone else added and tried to mesh it together with my redux. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Legacy is "If I can't dance I don't want to be in your revolution" really an abridgement of "the right to self-expression, everybody's right to beautiful, radiant things"?

• No, "paraphrasing" is more apt. Shulman used abridgment, and so I did too. But I was wrong, wrong wrong. Rewritten. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Also, "Goldman's belief in the value of aesthetics, for example, can be seen in the later influences of anarchism and the arts." She was among the later influences?

• Again, I didn't add this, and I don't really understand what it means. I'll ask for clarification on the talk page. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Red Emma is unpublished in Norway for political reasons?

• Another one I didn't add. This one has been discussed on the talk page; I'll try to get something definite. – Scartol • Tok 18:30, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

I must say, it's an exquisite piece of work. I will note, however, that it's approaching the upper limit (in my mind at least) in terms of article length. No point trimming down something this well done, but I think we should be careful at this point not to grow it too much further. As you're the ones who've done the research, feel free to disregard any of my above comments and questions that are off the mark. Great work to all! --JayHenry (talk) 01:45, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks kindly. I agree that it's at the upper limit; I actually removed some items (particularly about her mother's emotional distance, heh) for brevity. Now I have to convince other folks not to add more stuff in. I appreciate your kind feedback and careful commentary. I'll make the specific repairs tomorrow or the next day. – Scartol • Tok 03:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• Also, I'm a bit curious about the sources. For someone who supported the assassin of a president the article seems to me quite sympathetic. Were some of the sources fairly critical? Or is it the consensus of scholars and biographers that Goldman was more or less unfairly demonized? --JayHenry (talk) 01:50, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

• The latter, definitely. I checked out every book about Goldman available from the University of Wisconsin-Madison, including one they had to get from the special reserve section of the State Historical Society. I obviously can't judge how NPOV I've been, but (as with Chinua Achebe vis a vis Conrad) I've tried to represent the facts, the subject's commentary, and the world's response. If there are specific spots where you think this needs to be improved, please let me know. Thanks again! – Scartol • Tok 03:17, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Comments from Awadewit

I am having great fun reading this article - well done all. Here is my first batch of comments.

• Lead is too long - examples:

• Still, she read voraciously and found a literary role model in Vera, the protagonist of Nikolai Chernyshevsky's novel What Is to Be Done?. - Is this detail necessary for the lead?
• Goldman herself was imprisoned several times in the years which followed, for "inciting to riot" and distributing information about birth control in violation of the Comstock Law. - perhaps cut "inviolation of the Comstock Law"?

•  Done Rewrote to pare it down. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Infobox is unnecessary - detracts from the picture and all information is in the article already.

• I've put it to the talk page. (I agree, but I don't feel comfortable doing this on my own.) – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done Removed by consensus. – Scartol • Tok 18:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Emma Goldman (27 June 1869 – 14 May 1940), known as 'Red Emma', was a Lithuanian-born anarchist known for her writings and speeches. - Somehow I want this to say "anarchist writings and speeches" so that the content of the writings and speeches is clearer.

•  Done Rewritten. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Goldman suffered from a violent relationship with her father and a powerful emotional distance from her mother - "powerful emotional distance" doesn't make much sense to me

•  Done Removed. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Together they planned an act of propaganda of the deed, or attentat, in the form of assassinating Henry Clay Frick, whom they viewed as the villain of the 1892 Homestead Strike. - seems wordy

•  Done Rewritten. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Goldman also published a magazine called Mother Earth, which provided a platform for her anarchist treatises, as well as articles from other writers and philosophers. - odd diction: "platform for her anarchist treatises" - perhaps "platform for her anarchist ideas"?

•  Done Rewritten as "journal of anarchist opinion". – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Although she distanced herself from first-wave feminism and its efforts toward women's suffrage, she incorporated gender politics into anarchism which had only been hinted at by earlier anarchists. - awkward syntax

•  Done Rewritten as "she developed new ways of incorporating gender politics into anarchism." – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Her father ruled the house with an iron fist - sounds a little melodramatic

•  Done Rewritten. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• "Adolescence" section feels melodramatic.

• I suppose it does, but from all accounts it was a pretty tumultuous childhood. The elements I've highlighted ("first erotic sensations", father throws books in the fire, violent sexual contact) seemed particularly relevant to her later perspectives and attitudes. If there are specific things you think need toning down, I can take a closer look? – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• When she was a young girl, Goldman's family moved to the village of Papilė, where her father ran an inn. At the age of six she became friends with a servant named Petrushka, who played jovially with her, exciting her "first erotic sensations".[10] When her father fired Petrushka after an argument, she was crushed; she described it as "one of the greatest tragedies of my child-life."[11] Another tragedy struck when she witnessed a peasant being whipped with a knout in the street. Horrified by this spectacle, she was haunted for days as her mind replayed it again and again. - We go from "jovially" to "erotic" to "crushed" to "greatest tragedies" to "horrified". All in one paragraph. I think this is just too much. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Yeah, I think I'm having trouble reading and re-reading this article so many times. Thanks for pointing that out for me. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)
• I've taken another whack at it. – Scartol • Tok 12:07, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Unfortunately, now the first paragraph of that section is a bit choppy. Awadewit | talk 10:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Geez, it's never enough, is it? =) Agreed. I've rephrased some things and tried to tie it all together more effectively. – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Much improved. Awadewit | talk 07:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

• Should "nihilist" be capitalized?

• It is in Wexler and Drinnon; since they represented a different ideology from the "we believe in nothing" brand of nihilists, the capitalization, I think, is designed to demarcate as much. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• On their wedding night she discovered that he was impotent, and he became jealous and suspicious. - need a little more here

• Yeah, I worded that funny.  Done Rewritten. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• caption: Johann Most trained Goldman in public speaking and organized her first tour to promote "the Cause". - You might consider saying what "the Cause" is.

• Okay.  Done Added. – Scartol • Tok 15:58, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Impressed by his fiery oration, Goldman began to learn from him about public speaking. - Just sounds a bit odd - also, I'm wondering about agency here - the caption makes it sound like Most was the actor while this sentence makes it sound like Goldman was. Who was the initiator? Do we know? Later, you make it clear that Goldman asserted her independence - this suggests that early on she did not initiate the speaking training. Is this correct? Should this be emphasized?

•  Done Most was the one who encouraged her. I rewrote it to clarify. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• She left the society of Die Freiheit and joined with another publication, Die Autonomie. - I thought Die Freiheit was a publication - why describe it as a society? Was it also a group of intellectuals?

•  Done Removed "society" – I was trying to mix up my language and (as so often happens) wound up being confusing. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• The beginning of "Homestead plot" needs a transition from the previous section - it is jarring to go from Berkman to steel strikes.

•  Done I added a transition sentence; I'm not sure how polished it is, but I'm not too ashamed of it. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• When a majority of the nation's newspapers came out in support of the strikers, Goldman and Berkman resolved to carry out an attentat — an attack that would rouse the people to revolution. - A revolution against what and for what?

•  Done Added "against the capitalist system". As for "for what" – from what I can tell EG and AB expected the people to rise up in a spontaneous mass action and create something new in its place. Goldman, at least, was adamant about not prescribing a replacement. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Goldman, meanwhile, decided to help fund the scheme by selling herself. - terrible connotations to this phrase - cannot we find a more neutral phrase? We don't want to sound like we are judging Goldman.

• Yeah, I mostly chose it because it's how she described it in Living My Life. But I replaced it with "through prostitution". – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would remove some of the details from the "Homestead Plot" section (more summary style, less detail).

• I assume you mean about the assassination attempt itself. If so, it's been  Done – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps even more, regarding Berkman's actual attempt, for example. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I've trimmed it a little more, but it's relevant that a group of workers beat Berkman unconscious, I think. And given the fact that it led to him being sent away for so long I think it's risky to cut any further. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Perhaps these connections should be made more explicit, then. We cannot always rely on the reader to make them. We have to show them these larger linkages. Awadewit | talk 02:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

•  Done Added two phrases for clarity. – Scartol • Tok 17:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Better. Awadewit | talk 10:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would start the "Inciting to riot" section with something like "The next year" so that the reader can more easily follow the chronology.

•  Done Good call. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• By year's end nearly three million workers were unemployed, and "hunger demonstrations" sometimes gave way to riots. - An unemployment rate would be better here than the number of people

•  Done – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Despite this positive publicity, the jury was persuaded by Jacobs' testimony and made anxious by Goldman's politics. - "made anxious" doesn't seem like quite the right emotion, does it?

• Actually, I think it does. That's certainly how Wexler presents it. Insofar as there was no riot to speak of, they convicted her on what they were afraid she might have caused. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would mention the fear then. "Anxiety" doesn't sound as serious to me as fear. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Fair enough. Changed. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• In Vienna she achieved two diplomas and put them immediately to use back in the US. - don't people usually "receive" diplomas?

•  Done Yeah, I think I was looking to show her agency, but it ended up being just awkward. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Although Czolgosz repeatedly denied Goldman's involvement, the police held her in close custody, giving her the "third degree". - colloquial

• Not my phrase. I'll see how the editor who added it feels about removing it. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
• The phrase was Goldman's. We're working on a page number from Living. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Important to attribute it, then. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

•  Done We've added a citation. – Scartol • Tok 17:37, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Goldman's attitude toward assassination had changed — while in jail, Goldman offered to provide nursing care to McKinley before he died, referring to him as "merely a human being".[60] However, she yet defended Czolgolsz, standing virtually alone in doing so. Throughout her detention and after her release, Goldman steadfastly refused to condemn Czolgosz' action. - How had her attitude changed, then?

• Again, not mine. I'll recommend a reversion to my original wording. – Scartol • Tok 16:44, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done We've repaired this. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would remove some of the details from the "McKinley assassination" section, particularly in the first few paragraphs which detail the ins and outs of the meeting of Goldman and the others. More WP:SS is needed here. (There is a whole article on the event, after all.)

•  Done Trimmed. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I still think more can be trimmed. The details of the faux-infiltration are not that important, in my opinion. It is Goldman's supposed link to the assassination that needs to be explained and her support of the assassin. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think I have to disagree. Infiltration was/is a serious business, and the distance they put between themselves and him is relevant for the government's later charges that she was in on it. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Again, perhaps more explanation of these linkages is needed, then. Facts without interpretation aren't always enough. Awadewit | talk 02:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

•  Done Added a phrase for clarity. – Scartol • Tok 17:35, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I still think that the first paragraph of this section feels a little disconnected from the rest of the section. Awadewit | talk 10:17, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• I've added a sentence about keeping their distance, but unless I want to say something like "showing a wise foresight", I'm not sure how I can link it up more clearly. If you think it needs more connection, would you advise adding something to the first paragraph, or something elsewhere? I think the structure we've got at present effectively mirrors that in Wexler and Chalberg, which indicates something untoward is coming from Czolgosz while explaining how the events unfolded in the eyes of Goldman and her friends. – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Since encyclopedia articles aren't stories, I think that letting the reader know where this whole section is going is a good idea. I was confused by it the first time I read it (particularly the relationship of the first paragraph to the rest of the section) and I still think it is confusing. Awadewit | talk 07:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)

• I see what you're saying, but the only remedy I can conceive of would be to describe Czolgosz's attack on McKinley first, and then discuss Goldman's interactions with him later – which would disrupt the chronological order. Do you think this would work? Or do you have another suggestion for it? – Scartol • Tok 03:09, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would mention the link to McKinley first, so that the reader knows why this material is important. Chronological order is not all that important in an encyclopedia article - emphasizing the connections between items is, however. Including a bunch of facts that readers don't really understanding the purpose of is not really useful. Awadewit | talk 17:15, 24 December 2007 (UTC)

• Okay, I've taken a whack at this. Hopefully it's both readable and clarifies the purpose of the section from the start. – Scartol • Tok 14:47, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

• This is so much better! Awadewit | talk 05:07, 27 December 2007 (UTC)

• Although Turner and the League lost, Goldman considered it a victory from a propaganda point of view. - wording is slightly awkward

•  Done Agreed. Revised to "a victory of propaganda". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would leave out the detail of the changing of names of Mother Earth - more appropriate for the Mother Earth (magazine) article.

• Sure, no sweat.  Done – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• As a doctor, he returned to the underworld, attending to people suffering from poverty and disease – particularly venereal disease. - "The underworld"? More objective language, please!

• Yeah, I got caught up in how Chalberg and Wexler described it.  Done I just removed that bit. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• He and Goldman began an affair; they shared a commitment to free love, but Reitman found his way into many more beds than she. - This sounds a bit sordid. More neutral language is needed.

•  Done Agreed. Curse my poetic flourish! Rewritten as: "whereas Reitman took a variety of lovers, Goldman did not". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Two years later Goldman had added frustration with lecture audiences to her list of woes. - I feel like the language of the article, while poetic, is becoming a bit unencyclopedic.

• Again, I'm not giving my creative urges a proper outlet, so they spill over into Wikipedia. Alas!  Done Rewritten as: "Goldman began feeling frustrated with lecture audiences…". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• When Margaret Sanger, an advocate of access to contraception, coined the term "birth control" in the June 1914 issue of her magazine The Woman Rebel, she received aggressive support from Goldman. - support for the coining of the term?

• D'oh! I got caught up in what Sanger did, and forgot to revise the other clause.  Done Added a phrase for clarity. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• To this end, she and Berkman organized the No conscription League of New York Should "conscription" be capitalized here?

• I need to check the sources on this. Will do so tonight. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done Checked, fixed. – Scartol • Tok 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• To reduce the length of the article, I would remove some of the quotations in the "Biography" section. Some of these are a luxury. I think that quotations are more important in the sections describing Goldman's thought.

• Yes, I agree. Will do. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done Trimmed many of them. – Scartol • Tok 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• This article has lots of links - it is overpowering at times. I delinked some obvious terms, but perhaps you should think about delinking some of the geographical terms. I think that the "high quality" links, as they say, get a bit lost here.

• Fair enough. Will do. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done I've removed a number of the geographical terms. – Scartol • Tok 17:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• I wondered if some of the uses of "communist" should be "Communist".

• Yes.  Done – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• As World War Two began to take shape in Europe - Something about this wording seems off to me - perhaps its vagueness?

• Yeah, it didn't really begin, but I agree that the wording is vague.  Done I've replaced it with: "As the events preceding World War Two began unfold in Europe…". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• She helped found the philosophy known today as anarcha-feminism. - briefly explain in a sentence

•  Done – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Goldman was first drawn to anarchist thought after the persecution of anarchists after the 1886 Haymarket Riot in Chicago. - too many "after's"

•  Done Changed the first to "during". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Later, while working at the newspaper Die Autonomie, she was introduced to the writings of Peter Kropotkin. Before long she found herself torn between his patient belief in the mass of humanity and Mikhail Bakunin's advocacy of urgent, violent action. She gravitated more toward Kropotkin's perspective through her life, but never completely sided with one or another. - This seems unnecessary to me - I would focus these sections on her thoughts and writings, rather than on the biography behind them. Also, this makes it sound like she didn't really have thoughts of her own.

• Fair enough. I was trying to ground her in the grand scheme of anarchist evolution (the same sort of thing can be said about most philosophers, I expect), but you're right that it's not really necessary. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• While she never encouraged audiences to commit acts of violence - I thought it wasn't clear whether she did or not in the "Inciting to riot" section?

• I'm making a distinction between property destruction ("take bread") and violence ("kill people"). Perhaps it needs to be clarified? The other thing is that the sources indicate that some of the observers present were motivated by a general distrust of Goldman, and heard what they wanted to hear. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Yes, that needs to be clarified. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I removed the statement about never encouraging audiences to commit acts of violence during the reorganization, so while I can add a distinction in the Anarchism section, it doesn't seem necessary to me now. (But I recognize that my perspective is getting hard to maintain, so please let me know if you disagree.) – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Without that earlier statement, I don't think the problem will arise. Awadewit | talk 02:34, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Her experiences in Russia led her to reassess her earlier belief that idealistic ends justified violent means. - we need a more precise word than "idealistic"

• Agreed.  Done Changed to "revolutionary". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I feel like the "Violence" section repeats too much of the "Biography" - either dramatically reduce the explanation of these events in the "Biography" section and move that material here or integrate the "Violence" section into the "Anarchism" section, deleting some of the redundant material.

• Agreed. Will work on this. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done I've trimmed what I can, but to be honest I don't really see much to remove. If you can suggest specific other spots, I'd be happy to take a look. – Scartol • Tok 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• The "Tactics" section (I like the new organization) repeats the same examples as the article. Are there other examples of these tactics from her life that can be utilized? Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• You know, I've searched over and over, because I agree with you; but I just don't think there's much else to pull from. The section on violence in Red Emma Speaks includes "The Psychology of Political Violence" (from which I've quoted and summarized already), as well as a section each on Homestead and McKinley and prisons. I feel like we've exhausted the possibilities. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• The "Voting" section seems like it should be more about Goldman's methods of revolution (and therefore retitled). It is probably good to mention in passing her objections to voting, but it is more important to describe what she thought were the best means to achieve her ends. Perhaps the "Violence" material could be integrated into a new "Revolutionary methods" section (terrible name, but you get the idea).

• Something similar was proposed on the talk page. I'll indicate your agreement and we'll make the change. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done Combined, streamlined and refined. – Scartol • Tok 18:04, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think that the picture of Anthony and Stanton is not the best choice - Goldman didn't associate with them much, so it doesn't seem that relevant. How about a book cover?

• I dunno; the Russia cover is the only one I've found in my quest, and I generally prefer people to book covers. Despite Goldman's lack of interactions with them, they were important people at the time, and I feel recognized easily by many readers. (And she didn't ever interact with Frick or Sacco & Vanzetti, either.) – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done Removed during reorganization anyway. – Scartol • Tok 17:38, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• I feel like the "Philosophy" section as a whole could be explained a bit more thoroughly.

• EX: In essays like "The Hypocrisy of Puritanism" and a speech entitled "The Failure of Christianity", Goldman made more than a few enemies among religious communities. - Why? Missing the "because" clause.

• I suppose so. Perhaps I was trying to race through to the end on my first pass. I'll deal with this. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
• I've tried to rework this, but I feel as though more explanation would conflict with the "pare it down" comment below. All things considered, I feel as though the latter recommendation is the more urgent one here. If there are specific things that you feel needs more explanation, I can add it. Meantime, I'm going to try keeping the word count down. – Scartol • Tok 17:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• Other things can be pared down, so these sections can be expanded. That's why I suggested paring down some of the details in the biography. :) I'll read through the whole "Philosophy" section again in a day or two and see. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Thanks much. Apologies again for the breakneck pace I've implemented. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think that this section is much improved, however I still have some suggestions:
• How come "anarchism" is sometimes capitalized and sometimes not in the "Anarchism" section?

• Because there are many many cooks working on this broth. =) I've gone through and de-capitalized it where necessary. – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• she is considered one of the most important figures in Anarchist history, and helped found the philosophy known today as anarcha-feminism, which analyzes patriarchy as a hierarchy to be resisted alongside state power and class divisions. - Is "analyzes" the best word here?

• Agreed. Replaced with "challenges". – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• In the title essay of her book Anarchism and Other Essays, she wrote - Because this comes right after the sentence about anarcha-feminism, the reader expects it to explain or expand on that idea more, but it doesn't really seem to do that. Perhaps the anarcha-feminism bit should come later?

• Agreed. Moved it down into the "Feminism" section. – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• I would briefly explain "expropriation" in the "Capitalism" section. It appears to be a crucial idea.

• Good call.  Done – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think that a more effective organization of the "Tactics" section would be to present the tactics that Goldman endorsed first and then the ones that she opposed.

•  Done – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• —Preceding unsigned comment added by Awadewit (talk • contribs) 10:28, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• These works brought Goldman's life and writings to a larger audience, and she was in particular lionized by the modern women's movement. - a particular movement? There have been several. :)

•  Done Added "of the late twentieth century". – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Is there a good link as well? Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

•  Done Added a link to Second-wave feminism. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• An image of the iconic statement on a button or t-shirt would be nice in the "Legacy" section.

• Yeah, I wanted to use this graffiti pic, but it's apparently not free for use. I suppose I could take a picture of a button or shirt, couldn't I? – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Would be nice, wouldn't it? I imagine that it could be used on other articles as well. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I'll keep my eyes peeled, but no one I've contacted has one of these. Maybe they're not as ubiquitous as I thought, heh. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• Is Ragtime (musical) really a "significant retelling" of Goldman's life? She is only one of many figures in it.

• I agree. Someone else added it; I'll seek to remove it. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I think it is a bit odd to have only one "Further reading" book. That is why I prefer "Bibliographies" - why split up the "References" and "Further reading"? For people really interested in the references, two lists are not particularly helpful.

• I think someone added it as FR since she had not read it herself. I'll combine it. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)
•  Done – Scartol • Tok 17:31, 20 December 2007 (UTC)

• I don't know if anyone will get on your case about this at FAC, but I've had people complain about it to me. Page ranges with three numbers are supposed to be expressed thus, apparently: 211-15, not 211-215 (this includes the ridiculous looking 100-01).

• I cannot abide such formatting. Can you point me to a source for this rule? After all, logical consistency would indicate that 211 and 215 share both the hundreds' and the tens' place digit, so why not 211–5? Blech. – Scartol • Tok 18:43, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• I don't know where the rule is, but I have actually seen it. Please note that I agree with you. Just wanted to warn you. Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I appreciate this. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

I'll keep adding as I read. Awadewit | talk 22:24, 17 December 2007 (UTC)

Thanks, A. I'll probably wait until you're finished before I go through and make repairs. – Scartol • Tok 00:21, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• Ok! Done! The article is about 10,200 words. I think this is a bit long. I would try to cut a bit (I hope you don't think this is a pot-and-kettle situation). It is however, difficult to make it through such a long article. Perhaps, like I did, you should aim to cut 1,000 words or so? (I fully recognize the horror of this statement - I'm just trying to be a reader, here.) Awadewit | talk 04:36, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

I hear you. I tried to scale it back as I went, but I can accept that it may still be too long. (Although when I see article like Theodore Roosevelt at 100k+, I feel indignant that the divine Ms. G. must be pared back from 80k.) I'll see what I can do. Thanks again for your careful attention to detail. – Scartol • Tok 12:34, 18 December 2007 (UTC)

• In a way, it doesn't matter of TR is 200K if readers don't make it to the end. :) (And by the way, it is "the divine aunt Jane".) Awadewit | talk 01:24, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I've done another round of trimming quotes from the biography and other reductions. Thanks again for your careful commentary. – Scartol • Tok 02:20, 21 December 2007 (UTC)

• I really appreciate your willingness to go over and over and over this stuff, A. You rock. – Scartol • Tok 13:11, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

• Have you had Brighterorange run his dashbot? It's very helpful. Awadewit | talk 07:12, 23 December 2007 (UTC)