Wikipedia:Peer review/List of tallest buildings in Nashville/archive1
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for February 2009.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am focusing on Nashville building articles and want to get them up to standards.
Thanks, Anonymous615 (talk) 22:06, 4 February 2009 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments
- Can you say what criteria you applied for inclusion in the list? If you decided to limit it to 16, what was the reason? Or, if you decided on a minimum height of 80 metres, again why?
- The panoramic shot is magnificent, but why not make it useful as well as ornamental, by identifying the major buildings in a caption? There must be seven or eight buildings from your list in this photograph, and it would be good to know which they are.
- By comparison with most of the featured tallest building lists I've looked at, your lead is very sparse. You also have fewer and less informative notes on individual buildings within your main list. Perhaps a little more research would enable you to expand both the lead and the notes.
- Other than these points, the format is that which is obviously approved at FL. There are, however, a number of minor prose and punctuation fixes to be made:
- A full stop or a semicolon, not a comma, is necessary after "1905"
- No comma is necessary after "As of 2008...", in both second and third paragraphs
- I suggest that a full stop, rather than a semicolon, would be appropriate after "...which began construction in 2008"
- In the third paragraph, "would become" should be "will become" (or, better still, "will be")
- The prose would improve if you can find a way of avoiding having the word "construction" five times in one short paragraph.
I hope you find these comments helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 21:53, 9 February 2009 (UTC)