Wikipedia:Peer review/Legalism (Chinese philosophy)/archive3
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
It's been awhile since I've been able to get any feedack on the content of the page. One user left a tag on the top of the page, but gave no feedback. In terms of whatever problems, I am at least attempting to get feedback. I am not saying the page is entirely done, it's not. The current introductory sections however, have been recently compiled to their present state.FourLights (talk) 09:22, 31 October 2023 (UTC)
- FourLights, Hi, I think that was me! I put those tags there in part for my own sake to circle around later, since it seemed you were chugging away at it and I wanted to wait until you were done to dig into it. This is not my forte in ancient Chinese philosophy, but I'm eager to take a pass over it now that you've gotten a good chunk of work in. :) — Remsense聊 13:19, 2 November 2023 (UTC)
Sure, if you needed me to wait for you to finish, I could cut back when you start and work in the background.
The Blue Rider's comments
[edit]I'll take a look at this in the forthcoming days. The Blue Rider 
17:39, 26 November 2023 (UTC)
Airship
[edit]The article is a complete and utter mess. When a three paragraph Britannica summary can get the basic concepts across more clearly than 9,000 words of confused rambling, you know you've gone awry. Apparently there were 2931 edits to this article in a month—where did they go? You would do well to try and work towards a goal like the good article criteria, otherwise this article is doing a disservice to our readers. ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 14:21, 7 December 2023 (UTC)
- I think that is potentially too harsh. I think FourLights needs help from an editor who can appreciate the research better than I can, otherwise I would take it on. I've been watching them iterate on this article for a bit now, and I feel bad that I can't properly help. Remsense留 22:52, 7 December 2023 (UTC)