Wikipedia:Peer review/Brigham Young, Jr./archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I am not a great proof-reader. I am looking for input in general to improve the article. Anything missing, prose to rewrite, etc.
Thanks, --ARTEST4ECHO (talk/contribs) 16:43, 9 February 2011 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments: I think you are misunderstanding the purpose of peer reviews. The WP:PR pages stipulates that the peer review process "is intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work, often as a way of preparing a featured article candidate." In its present form, this article cannot be described as "high quality", nor has it had any recent extensive work. You have not, yourself, contributed to the text. The main problems with the article can be summarised:-
- Overall, this does not appear to be an in-depth, comprehensive study of its subject.
- The prose is sketchy, poorly organised, with many very short paragraphs. Facts appear to have been added in indiscriminately, without any attempt at logical sequences or prose flow.
- There are numerous uncited statements
- There are undevloped sections, e.g. Politics
- The infobox is far too big for a relatively short article, Detail should be in the prose; the box is for brief summary information.
- Overlinking; it is not necessary to wikilink continents or major countries (United States, France, Germany etc)
I have amended the class to "start" as I don't think it warrants more than this. If you wish to improve/expand the article, it might be worth working with other editors with interest in and knowledge of this subject. A considerable amount of work needs to be done, but it could be a worthwhile project. Brianboulton (talk) 00:55, 14 February 2011 (UTC)