Wikipedia:Peer review/Formula, Vol. 1/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it was recently promoted to GA and I would like to further work on it for FA. I know the background may seem short, but that's all I relevant information I could find.
Thanks, Erick (talk) 19:35, 16 September 2013 (UTC)
Hi there - I just reorganised the Lead to foreground the topic's importance - for me as an uninitiated reader, I wanted to know why this album is notable before getting into the details. See what you think. Depthdiver (talk) 22:33, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- Hmm, well I don't know. See, the thing is, the opening paragraph should focus on what the article is about. And since the background is what comes first, I am not so sure. Compare with my first Featured Article Romances. Erick (talk) 23:23, 18 November 2013 (UTC)
- Sure - it's a stylistic thing, i think they both work. I prefer my suggestion because it catches my attention and makes me want to read further - but for someone interested in the topic already, I'm sure it works just as well the original way. I can also see it's nice to have a set of articles on this area with a consistent structure. Go ahead and revert as you prefer. Cheers Depthdiver (talk) 04:49, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- All righty then. I thank you for correcting the other issues at the article. So how is the prose in the article itself? Erick (talk) 05:18, 19 November 2013 (UTC)
- Sure - it's a stylistic thing, i think they both work. I prefer my suggestion because it catches my attention and makes me want to read further - but for someone interested in the topic already, I'm sure it works just as well the original way. I can also see it's nice to have a set of articles on this area with a consistent structure. Go ahead and revert as you prefer. Cheers Depthdiver (talk) 04:49, 19 November 2013 (UTC)