Wikipedia:WikiProject Biography/Peer review/Andrew Orlowski

Andrew Orlowski[edit]

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)[reply]

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)[reply]

Yannismarou[edit]

A critic of Wikipedia ! This is my review:

The lead is too short. Check LEAD.
I see a ^{[citation needed]}. 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)[reply]

What happens when a person keeps their pre-career life private? -- Zanimum 19:06, 12 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Then, our cabability of improving the article is limited.--Yannismarou 10:39, 14 January 2007 (UTC)[reply]