Wikipedia:Peer review/Narcotics Anonymous/archive1

Narcotics Anonymous

This is an influencial 12-step organization that helps people recover from drug addiction. What does the article need? (There are a few short sections with {{expandsect}} in them, and I know those need more info.) Should it be reorganized? Is the tone encyclopedic? Are the images appropriate? Should the article be split up? Thanks, Sarah crane 15:39, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program. They may or may not be accurate for the article in question (due to possible javascript errors/uniqueness of articles). If the following suggestions are completely incorrect about the article, please drop a note on my talk page.

Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at WP:LEAD. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.
- Yeah, I'm waiting untill all sections are of proper length before taking on the lead (the hardest part!) Sarah crane 16:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

There are a few sections that are too short and that should be either expanded or merged.
- True dat. Working on it. Sarah crane 16:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:MOS#Headings, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example, ==The Biography== would be changed to ==Biography==.
- In this case, I think "The nature of addiction" is a better heading than "Nature of addiction". I'm more split on "The development of N.A. literature", but I think it reads better with "the". Any humans have opinions on this? Sarah crane 16:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please alphabetize the categories and interlanguage links.
- Done. Sarah crane 16:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.
- I'm considering it, but I'm not sure how. Any humans want to chime in with suggestions for this? Or is the TOC okay as it is? Sarah crane 16:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, thanks for the feedback. Andy _t 15:59, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
- No problem! Sarah crane 16:23, 16 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Greetings; I'm new here and am sure to aggravate you as I stumble through the protocols of wikipedia. This is a post I posted to discussion(?): FORMATS

The last paragraph in the section "Formats" cites the Basic Text inaccurately with:

"The message of Narcotics Anonymous is hope: that there is another way to live. The one promise of N.A. is that "an addict, any addict, can stop using, lose the desire to use, and learn a new way of life" (Basic Text)."

More accurately it is: "The message of Narcotics Anonymous is that, "an addict, any addict, can stop using drugs, lose the desire to use, and find a new way to live. Our message is hope and the promise of freedom from active addiction." (Basic Text, Tradition Five) Pedantpedia (talk) 14:04, 30 July 2008 (UTC) pediapendant Pedantpedia (talk) 14:10, 30 July 2008 (UTC)[reply]