Wikipedia:Peer review/Medieval Bulgarian Army/archive1
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for June 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like the article to be checked for structural and grammatical mistakes. I would also like to know whether it can be promoted as GA or FA and if not, what is missing.
Thanks, Gligan (talk) 18:13, 21 June 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: I think this article, which is quite interesting, has some ways to go to reach GA status, let alone FA. Here are some suggestions for improvement:
- A model article is useful for ideas and examples to follow. There are many FAs at Wikipedia:Featured_articles#Warfare and some of these may be useful models
- The article's lead needs to be a summary of the whole article - see WP:LEAD
- The article needs a good copyedit - for example, The Medieval Bulgarian Army was the primary military body of the First and the Second Bulgarian Empire. There are two empires so it should be "the First and the Second Bulgarian Empires."
- Also, should "Medieval" be capitalized here? Is that the normal usage? As the first word in the article title is automatically capitalized, but is it an adjective (so just "medieval") or part of the accepted proper name (if so, capitalized)?
- Lead should probably be three paragraphs per WP:LEAD - My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way
- Biggest problem right now with the article getting to GA is references. Article needs more references, for example the first paragrpahs of the sections Hitory, Krum's Dynasty, Asen Dynasty, and Tactics all have no refs.
- My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
- Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. Ref 16 is just a title and link now, for example.
- Sources also have to clearly identify what is in Bulgarian or other non-English languages - the example cited above is actually apparently in Bulgarian (I don't read that) and the title is "Битката при р. Ахелой (20. VIII. 917)"
- Other sources are also quite confused - if a Bibliography is given, then list all of the books there, including for example "Andreev, J. The Bulgarian Khans and Tsars (Balgarskite hanove i tsare, Българските ханове и царе), Veliko Tarnovo, 1996, ISBN 954-427-216-X", then Ref 2 would just be "Andreev, p. 111". See Joseph Priestley House for an example of this style
- Images are great, but should be set to thumb width per WP:MOS#Images to allow reader preferences to take over.
- The blue quoatation marks on quotes set apart make them look like pull quotes, but they are not - see WP:MOS#Quote
- Please use my examples as just that - these are not an exhaustive list and if one example is given, please check to make sure there are not other occurrences of the same problem.
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, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 19:50, 27 June 2008 (UTC)