Wikipedia:Peer review/Marsupial Lion/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've just looked over this article and think it looks good. There does not appear to be any flaws, but I would like some feedback on whether it is good enough for GA or FA nomination. Thanks, Twilight Helryx 03:22, 26 November 2009 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments: You are not a contributing editor to this article. It seems that the most active contributors have ceased to be interested in the page; however, before bringing for peer review it would be a good idea if you showed a personal commitment by tackling some of the more obvious problems with the page, namely:-
- The shortage of citations. Many statements made in the article need to be cited. At present whole paragraphs, and even whole sections, are completely uncited. One "citation needed" tag has been placed, but there could be many more.
- The citations that are present are not formatted correctly. Online citations require, minimally, title, publisher and access date. One of the citations is to another Wikipedia article. The "bibliography" does not appear to have been used in the preparation of the article.
- There are disambiguation links that need fixing
- The images lack alt text.
These are the fixes that need immdiate attention. Please note that Peer Review is "intended for high quality articles that have already undergone extensive work." I will happy to review the article more thoroughly after these basic issues have been addressed. Brianboulton (talk) 11:08, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Okay, thank you. Getting to work on those issues. I should read the rules more carefully. x.x" --Twilight Helryx 19:03, 1 December 2009 (UTC)
- Hmm...Tell you what; I'm closing this discussion until this article is properly cleaned up. Again, thank you for your time and I apologize for not being more vigilant. Cheers!--Twilight Helryx 19:21, 1 December 2009 (UTC)