Wikipedia:WikiProject Taxation/Peer review/Business rates

Business rates

Having expanded the article up from a stub, I'd appreciate some guidance on where to go from here. As it's my first major piece of wikipedia work, I'd appreciate more experienced opinions. In particular, I'd like to know:

Is the article is reasonably clear to someone unfamiliar with the topic?
Does it go into the correct depth? (There are potentially reams of details that could be expanded on; does it hit the right note?)
Does the structure help, or is it a bit too sub-sectioned?
Explaining the billing side first, and the rating side second, is technically the wrong way round, but it's the way I usually explain the topic to people. Doing it the other way round seems to leave them bogged down in detail. Does it work in wikipedia?
Any manual of style elements I've missed.
The lead is undoubtedly weak; I've spent little time on it in the theory that fixing the body of the article will let the lead flow. All hints gratefully received.

All comments gratefully received - I'd rather a harsh comment on something I've missed than leaving it unfixed. Winklethorpe 21:35, 2 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Several sections have multiple one sentence paragraphs. Consider forming these into more complete paragraphs. The lead displays this. Morphh ^(talk) 3:33, 05 May 2007 (UTC)
In this phrase "property could have been let for on a particular valuation", I'm not familar with the meaning of the word "let" as used here. Morphh ^(talk) 0:14, 06 May 2007 (UTC)
"An evolving systems of rates" seems like it should say "Evolving systems of rates" or "An evolving system of rates". Morphh ^(talk) 0:16, 06 May 2007 (UTC)

Automated peer review

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

The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.^[?]
The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.^[?]
Consider adding more links to the article; per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (links) and Wikipedia:Build the web, create links to relevant articles.^[?]
See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.^[?]
There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.^[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, Morphh ^(talk) 3:10, 05 May 2007 (UTC) 03:10, 5 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]