Wikipedia:Peer review/Chalcogen/archive1

Chalcogen

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…It's currently rated as GA and I'd like to get it to FA. I think there are a few stylistic tweaks that need to be done first. If anyone could point them out, that would be great.

Thanks, ^King Jakob _C2 20:26, 22 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

You can talk about periodic trends and extensions. (Get the Haire pdf. It's in one of the WT:ELEM archives. Also look at the various papers I and others have posted in WT:ELEM. I have been mining that source for months.) Double sharp (talk) 14:33, 23 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry I didn't get back earlier. Which archive is the Haire pdf in? I couldn't find it. ^King Jakob _C2 13:08, 27 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I would recommend looking closer, since it's been cited in more than one archive, but here's the main link: Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements/Archive 11#Actinides. Double sharp (talk) 11:54, 28 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

For some reason comments are appearing not here but at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Elements#Chalcogen FA, so you really should look there and act on the comments.

(Yes, I know you already looked at the last one. It's the easy one. Nevertheless I would urge you to, if it really is not free and the question I asked has a "no" answer, at least try to get it via OTRS or something. If you're uncomfortable with it, you can ask someone else to do it for you. But you should try to act on some of the other points that are not so easy to do. While they are harder to do and require more research, the end result is more rewarding. Also it generally results in more improvement. In spite of the fact that there is no deadline, you should at least try – it's quite rewarding and educational.) Double sharp (talk) 14:08, 2 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]