Wikipedia:Peer review/Millennium '73/archive2
- 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 March 2009.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
This article was peer reviewed back in October, and recently passed Good Article review. It was nominated for Featured Article, but did not pass. Many of the objections at FA concerned the quality of the prose. For that reason, copyediting suggestions are especially welcome. Will Beback talk 00:29, 19 March 2009 (UTC)
- Comment
I took a look at the automated peer review page:
- Not sure which other places to link to this article from, this seems more like a recommendation.
- Ah looking into this further this appears to actually be a recommendation to add more wikilinks in the article's text itself - that might be a good idea to do a pass through the article and examine that. (Don't want to overdo it though.)
- Don't know if there is an appropriate infobox to use.
- Cut down on the subsections/table of contents a bit, changed some subsection breaks to simply bolded formatting.
- Disagree with the automated recommendation that the article should be broken up into subpages, it is well-written and organized as an article about the event.
- Could perhaps indeed do with a copyedit to watch for redundancies.
- The contractions appear in quotes and not in article syntax itself, so this checks out.
Cirt (talk) 07:37, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- Redlink potential
One redlink in the article at present - Eric Mercury. Might be worth doing some quick research and creating an article on this individual if satisfying WP:NOTE. Cirt (talk) 07:40, 22 March 2009 (UTC)
- I started an article on Eric Mercury. Cirt (talk) 17:27, 22 March 2009 (UTC)