Wikipedia:Peer review/International Religious Freedom Act of 1998/archive1
This is obviously a law-related articles. I would like to have your valuable suggestions on the matter, so that this article may (hopefully) be promoted to FA or GA status. Regards, --Nearly Headless Nick 13:28, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question (due to possible javascript errors/uniqueness of articles).
- Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, 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 WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -
between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like:18 mm.
- Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:BTW, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006, but do not link January 2006.
- Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at WP:GTL.
- Please alphabetize the categories and/or interlanguage links.
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that the it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 2a.
- You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions (and the javascript checklist; see the last paragraph in the lead) for further ideas.
- Thanks, Andy t 14:31, 23 June 2006 (UTC)
- It can be improved by reducing links to solitary years. A monobook tool allows this to be done with one click on a 'dates' tab in edit mode. You can then accept or reject the changes offered and/or do more editing before pressing 'Save'. Simply copy the entire contents of User:Bobblewik/monobook.js to your own monobook. Then follow the instructions in your monobook to clear the cache (i.e. press Ctrl-Shift-R in Firefox, or Ctrl-F5 in IE) before it will work. Hope that helps. bobblewik 19:18, 28 June 2006 (UTC)
- Alternatively, WP:AWB also helps. --Nearly Headless Nick 10:24, 29 June 2006 (UTC)
You might want to consider making section 2 and sections 4 through 6 subsections of "Scope and substance of the act," or some other organizational scheme. The titles of sections 4, 5, and 6 are kind of wordy given the article's title: perhaps "State Department office," "Bipartisan commission," and "Special advisor" would do? What have been the effects of this act in Sino-American relations or more broadly?--Monocrat 12:49, 1 July 2006 (UTC)
Quickies:
- "Scope and substance of the Act" is extremely confusing. It needs to be broken down into smaller paragraphs.
- Several single-paragraph sections.
- instead of "see also" at the end of "History", thearticle should be linked in its occurence within the first line of that same section.