Wikipedia:Peer review/Albania/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 July 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because there is a dispute on whether Bulgaria and Serbia should be listed as countries who have left cultural marks in albania, the discussion is here
Thanks, CD 10:12, 4 July 2008 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments: Here are some general observations before detailed comments on the text.
- Lead: Given the range of the article evident from the Contents list, the lead is a little too short to be "a concise summary of the whole article", as required by WP:Lead
- Etymology: I don’t think a whole section on etymology is necessary, especially as there is a main article dealing with this. Some of the information might be transferred into the section dealing with early history. Also, the satellite image looks wrongly placed in this section.
- Structure: The article looks in need of a more formal structure. At present it is subdivided into a large number of sections, but they don’t appear to be organized in any particular order. Information in the article needs to be presented in a more logical sequence, with sections grouped together as subsections under a main heading. I would suggest that you look at the article Greece, or Finland, to get ideas of how the sections might be better structured.
- Climate: You need to include a climate subsection under Geography.
- Gallery: I’d check the Wikipedia policy on picture galleries. Offhand I can’t quote the exact regulation, but I’m pretty certain that they’re not allowed.
If you would respond to these initial points, I will come back with my comments on the text.