Wikipedia:Peer review/Ipswich/archive1

Ipswich

I feel a peer review for this article would be useful. Any suggestions are welcome. Cєlαя∂σяє^Talk 18:47, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, AZ _t 23:22, 15 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the automated suggestions, while these are fine (but not entirely accurate) some human review would be appreciated. I'm biased, Ipswich is my home town and I would very much like for it to become a FA or a good article at least. Cєlαя∂σяє^Talk 21:15, 16 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]

It's a decent start, but I think it still needs some expansion to be a comprehensive article. Here's a few, hopefully useful, comments:

The introduction is somewhat on the short side. It would be good if it could summarize the important points about the town that are mentioned in the remainder of the text.
History section, p2/s2: one too many uses of "convenient" in the sentence. Is there another word you could use?
Several of the paragraphs in the history section are all too brief. Can you, for example, expand on what the Mildenhall Treasure and the Sutton Hoo treasure have to do with the history of Ipswich?
For somebody who is not from England, say, what does it mean when a King grants a city its charter? Can this be explained in the context?
The "Modern Ipswich" section could use a better flow to the text. It reads like a bulleted list that has had the bullets removed. Also it's not considered good practice to use the name of the article in the section headers.
Your in-line links should follow the punctuation, not precede it. Personally I like to use the {{cite web}} template for external link citations so they can provide more information about where the reader is being redirected.
Please link the first use of UK, tonnes, and £.

Thank you. — RJH (talk) 16:19, 17 November 2006 (UTC)[reply]