Wikipedia:Peer review/Dennis Berry/archive1
Old peer review
[edit]I'm hoping to get some feedback on the paragraph structure, wording and any general comments on this article. Also please point out any parts which need to be clarified. HowardBerry 17:00, 9 November 2005 (UTC)
- For a start, the introduction is too long. Much of the material in it should be put into at least one other sections on Berry's career or something like that. The introduction should give a few essential points in summary form. Then the specific details and expansion should come later. Logophile 07:23, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
- Do you mean the second paragraph, or the introduction? Because the introductory line is what you say - "a few essential points in summary form". The following paragraph then goes on to talk about where he worked (in chronological order). That paragraph then leads into the kinds of work he did in the following paragraphs (composing, publishing, recording, producing - in that order) - so I don't think there is anything that should be in other sections. HowardBerry 08:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
- Mr. Berry, most Featured articles have an introduction of 1-3 paragaphs and then a first section, which has a title. Most of them have several sections. For a good example, see Louis Armstrong. What your article needs is well thought-out sections with good headings. The introduction should then prepare the reader for the specific details in those sections. Logophile 14:03, 12 November 2005 (UTC)
- Do you mean the second paragraph, or the introduction? Because the introductory line is what you say - "a few essential points in summary form". The following paragraph then goes on to talk about where he worked (in chronological order). That paragraph then leads into the kinds of work he did in the following paragraphs (composing, publishing, recording, producing - in that order) - so I don't think there is anything that should be in other sections. HowardBerry 08:12, 12 November 2005 (UTC)