Wikipedia:Peer review/Hayward Fault Zone/archive1

Need review by soils engineers and earth scientists. - Leonard G. 02:15, 19 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I just took a brief look at the article and it definitely needs a source to maintain verifiability. Please read this: WP:V. — Indon (reply) — 15:53, 5 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

I'm neither, but I will make some suggestions regarding organization:

Per WP:LEAD, the lead section should probably be expanded by briefly summarizing the article's content.
The table of contents is extremely long. I would suggest consolidating many of the smaller sections (such as "A dangerous situation", "Fuel pipelines", "Lake Temescal", to name a few) into larger ones. Numerous small sections give the article a scattered feel, anyway.
"Freeways and Overcrossings" probably does not need a subsection for each paragraph.
Many of the section titles (such as "A related fault", "BART's exceptional conditions") are more fitting for a magazine or newspaper than an encyclopedia.
"Virtual tour" should be an external link, not a section of the article.

And, as Indon noted above, references are essential. -- bcasterline • talk 02:11, 7 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]