Wikipedia:Peer review/Detroit Automobile Company/archive1

Detroit Automobile Company

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I intend to submit this to WP:GA. The lack of information available about this company is probably going to prevent it from ever becoming an FA, I guess. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 18:54, 23 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 01:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Finetooth comments: Since you asked for them, here are some ideas for expansion:

Give some examples of those "many early car ventures" that floundered.
If possible, explain what Ford specifically disliked about the Detroit Automobile Company vehicles. That is, what specifically did he view as "imperfect"? It would be OK to talk about car mechanics here, malformed pistons, bad lights, screechy brakes, or whatever the case might be, if known.
Include more details about the people in the article, something about the investors' love or lack of love for cars, something about their connections to and faith in Ford.
Include more about Ford's "racing". Readers won't typically know anything about his racing and might wonder whether he was a race driver at one time or whether other people won races driving his cars. For that matter, it might surprise them that he was ever a mechanic and not always a manager.
It would be delicious to see the exact cost analysis published by the DAC of the difference in maintenance costs in 1900 between one of their automobiles and a horse-drawn vehicle.
- Will add this information in the meantime. Good ideas for expansion! — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Here are some other observations:

Full dates need a closing comma after the year.
- Fixed. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
Please use one link for cities rather than two. An example is Detroit, Michigan.
- Why? City and state are separate. As it is now, Detroit and Michigan are both separately linked (with Detroit a disambig link). Is there a WP policy that says otherwise? — Wackymacs

(talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

- - MOS:LINK says to avoid "two links [that] are next to each other in the text, so that it looks like one link..." Readers may want to see something more about Detroit, Michigan, because it is directly related to this article. If they happen to click on the Michigan link, they will get sent to an article that will be less helpful in learning about Detroit, and they may not realize why they went to Michigan instead of to Detroit. The single link solves this problem. Finetooth (talk) 01:36, 29 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
It's OK to put US in front of $ on the first instance but not necessary since this is an article about a subject in the US.
- Fixed. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The following sentence is ambiguous: "Henry Ford managed the manufacturing plant at 1343 Cass Avenue, Amsterdam in Detroit, initially with no pay until he left his job at the Detroit Edison Company (DAC), when he was given a salary of $150 a month." It's not clear what his connection was to Detroit Edison or how much he was making there or how he could hold two jobs at once. Perhaps this is a place where the article could be expanded.
If the article expands to make room for more images, it would be better to move the delivery truck to the left side of the page so that it seems to be running into the page rather than out. This would pull the reader's eye into the text, which is where you want it.
It's not clear from the article who Samuel was.
- I don't think I meant to leave it as "Samuel" - added full name - will add more info later. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
You might translate the $86,000 lost dollars into 2008 dollar-equivalents to give the reader a better sense of the value. Ditto for Ford's salary and other turn-of-the-century dollar amounts.
- I have entered 2007 dollar-equivalents. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]
The lead mentions "20 automobiles", but the history talks about trucks. Did the company produce trucks as well as the 20 cars?
- Changed to 'vehicles'. — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 10:11, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Finetooth (talk) 03:24, 28 May 2008 (UTC) xplain what Ford specifically disliked about the Detroit Automobile Company vehicles. That is, what specifically did he view as "imperfect"?[reply]