Wikipedia:Peer review/Utica, New York/archive2

Utica, New York

Previous peer review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to improve it for FAC at some point.

Thanks, Buffaboy ^talk 00:32, 11 September 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Cirt

Comments (having stumbled here from my Peer Review)

Thank you very much for your efforts to contribute to Quality improvement on Wikipedia, it's really most appreciated !!!
NOTE: Please respond, below entire set of comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!
Footnotes in the Notes sect - please add in-line citations at ends of these to back up factual assertions.
Checklinks tool - http://dispenser.homenet.org/~dispenser/cgi-bin/webchecklinks.py?page=Utica%2C_New_York - shows lots of problems. Problem defined as anything other than rating of "0" or "200" or even a "200" but with side comment is not good. Recommend archiving at the very least those links to Wayback Machine by Internet Archive using WP:CIT template fields archiveurl and archivedate.
Suggest instead of all the daughter sects for references, just 3 sects with each their own 2-level subheading, being: Footnotes, Note, and References.
Lede intro sect is a bit imbalanced. Two-sentence-long-paragraph in lede for last paragraph is a bit short.
This is a very long article. Recommend lede length of 4 paragraphs, 5 sentences each.
Notable people - not sure if this needs devoted its own sect, and the pictures should probably go too. Comes off as a bit promotional in tone.
Crime and public safety - quite a short sect to require its own subsection header, suggest just have it as paragraph within its parent sect.
Copyvio Detector - https://tools.wmflabs.org/copyvios/?lang=en&project=wikipedia&title=Utica%2C+New+York&oldid=&action=search&use_engine=0&use_links=1 - shows copyvio unlikely. Excellent job here, well done !!!
Quite an excellent job with referencing and use of in-line citations, throughout the article, very well done here.
Recommend posting to WP:GOCE to request a copyedit from the WikiProject Guild of Copy Editors.
Suggest placing neutrally-worded notice to talk pages of relevant WikiProjects linking to this Peer Review and asking for additional comments.
NOTE: Please respond, below entire set of comments, and not interspersed throughout, thanks!

I see quite a lot of research and effort has gone into this. Quite well done so far. Good luck, — Cirt (talk) 23:13, 19 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the review and constructive criticism! Buffaboy ^talk 03:30, 20 October 2015 (UTC)[reply]

I think that the culture section is a little bit short. Is there any landmark or cultural properties in this city?--Pkh409 (talk) 02:30, 8 December 2015 (UTC)[reply]