Wikipedia:Peer review/Boddingtons/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've done a fair amount of work on it and would like an external opinion.
Thanks, Farrtj (talk) 19:47, 27 April 2011 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments: Could you be a little more specific about the purpose of this review. You say you would "like an external opinion" – with what in mind? Are you, for example, thinking of a future nomination at GAN, or FAC? For the present I can offer a few general suggestions as to how the article might be improved, whatever your future intentions may be:-
- Without commenting on he prose in detail, I'd say there is a big problem in the History section, where a brief opening paragraph covering just over 100 years up to 1883 is followed by a 99-year gap to 1982. The rest of the section (about 80%) is all recent history.
- The "Advertising" section seems disproportionate and overdetailed., and only deals with the brewery's most recent advertising history.
- Sections should be written in prose, not bullet points
- The citations need a lot of attention. Many are unformatted urls. Others are unexplained , e.g. "Euromonitor, 2011" and "Marketing (00253650), July 30, 2008". Some references, e.g. 16, 20 and 21, are identical and can be combined under a reference name. Newspaper and journal titles should be italicised. Etc, etc; perhaps some study of Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style would be appropriate.
- A couple of your wikilinks go to disambiguation pages: Magor AND Widget. In each case, you should pipe-link to the page you want.
- Bolding should not be used in the text for emphasis, except in the initiating sentence of the lead.
- Italics should not be used to represent quotations. Use quotation marks
- Date ranges, e.g. "1990–1999" need ndashes, not hyphens.
Attention to these points would be a good starting point for improving the article. Brianboulton (talk) 21:57, 12 May 2011 (UTC)