Wikipedia:Peer review/Golden Domes/archive1

Golden Domes

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I'd like to raise the article to GA standards. Thanks,   Will Beback  talk  01:19, 14 December 2011 (UTC)

Comments

• "for ladies is " for women.
• coherence is a dab link.
• "eight hours there." -> "eight hours at the domes."
• "A TM website says" I think you need to state why this particular website is worthy of inclusion here. There are a lot of websites spouting rubbish out there...
• "Eight hundred did so right away, and thousands came later" I'm not keen on this. I know what you're saying, and it's reasonably clear but it doesn't seem like elegant prose to me.
• "was done in the " -> "was performed" or "was carried out"?
• "is a couple of hundred yards (meters)" unencyclopedic (a couple of hundred) and a yard isn't the same as a meter.
• "It was completed in 1981" why not merge that back into the previous sentence, "The ladies dome, completed in 1980, ..."
• "Aerial photograph showing the Golden Domes. The Men's Dome is the southern one on the left and the Ladies' Dome is the northern one on the right." -> "Aerial photograph showing the Golden Domes, the Men's (left) to the south and the Ladies' (right) to the north."
• "20–25,000" you mean 20,000–25,000? i.e. not 20 square feet?
• Actually, "They are each 20–25,000 square feet (1900–2300 m2) in area, about 150–200 feet (46–61 m) in diameter, and about 35 feet (11 m) high.[1][2][26][27]" is odd since there are only two domes, presumably their dimensions are well known, so we don't need these ranges or the "about" guesses.
• 1900 etc, -> 1,900 for internal consistency.
• "Photographs show flagpoles outside the domes flying the flags of the United States and of the Global Country of World Peace" if this is a tourist attraction, why isn't it just reported that these flags are flown rather than a nebulous "photos show..." (a bit like "photos show the development of a nuclear reactor in ...", you get me?)
• "a space for doing asanas" again, avoid "doing", maybe "performing"
• "seven and a half feet (2.9 m) tall and five feet (1.5 m) wide" 7.5 ft ... 5 ft.
• alum - do you mean alumnus?
• "Hundreds, or over a thousand TM-Sidhi practitioners" which is it?
• "An office building across the highway from the domes is said to be "just a few seconds from the Golden Domes by car".[64]" what is the relevance of this? And why is this a quote? Surely it'll be obvious if it's across the highway that it's close? Do you mean it advertises itself that way? If so, make it clear.
• " Fees for a couple were about US$150" -> The fee for a couple was approximately $150.
• "See also: Other notable assemblies" does that really link to what you want?
• Events section is a little choppy, many short paras.
• flutist->flautist.
• You have dozens and dozens of "References", a lot are very specific (i.e. down to a page number), these would be better off as footnotes as presumably such precise references cite precise facts. If not, this is a WAY over the top list of external links masquerading as so-called References, and is entirely unnecessary. Especially considering you have a citation almost every sentence which you call footnotes.

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:30, 19 December 2011 (UTC)