Wikipedia:Peer review/Martin Luther/archive1

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

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:MOS, avoid using words/phrases that indicate time periods relative to the current day. For example, recently and yesterday might be terms that should be replaced with specific dates/times.^[1]
Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.^[2]
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.^[3]
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.
Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.

*Please alphabetize the interlanguage links.^[4]

This article may need to undergo summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is United States, than an appropriate subpage would be History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.
Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
- Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “~~All~~ pigs are pink, so we thought of ~~a number of~~ ways to turn them green.”
- Temporal terms like “over the years”, “currently”, “now”, and “from time to time” often are too vague to be useful, but occasionally may be helpful. “I am ~~now~~ using a semi-bot to generate your peer review.”
Please provide citations for all of the {{fact}}s.
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. ^[5]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Eyu100 03:37, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are quite a few short paras, they should be expanded or merged. There are other paras missing references - please add inline citations. It also seems that 'Luther views/influence on...' sections are mixed with biography; they should be split into two disting groups. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus | talk} 03:50, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The story about the 95 theses on the church door seems to be disputed. I just read an article concluding that it is a complete myth.[1] (in Danish). It would be nice with a little more information about this topic although we also have the 95 theses article. Do we have any good German / English material for this topic? Valentinian ^{(talk) / (contribs)} 11:31, 31 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]