Wikipedia:Peer review/Penis removal/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate this for featured article status in the future.
Thanks, Besu (talk) 23:51, 11 January 2010 (UTC)
- General Comments
- Three links lead to disambiguation pages (Ca Mau, Veracity, and Yuan); find the page you're trying to link to and change it so that the reader is directed there.
- Looks like you've got at least four dead links. Those will need to be replaced or repaired.
- Most of the references look like they need some sort of formatting. It'll take some time to do considering the number that are present, but it needs to be done if you intend to nominate for FAC. Try using the templates available on WP:CITET; they are fairly easy to use. Remember that you'll need the link (all currently present), the title, the source, the date, the author (if mentioned), and the accessdate.
- Some links in the prose need formatting so that they appear in the references section (ex. [15] in documented cases).
- There are a couple of {{citation needed}} tags in the article that need sources added.
- Is there an applicable infobox that could be added?
- The automated peer reviewer tip box suggests some examples of weasel-wording and inconsistent use of either British or American english. Take a look through the article and ask somebody to copyedit if need be.
- I'd suggest some work done on the sections; perhaps as follows:
- ==Reasons for removal==
- ===Medicine and psychology===
- ===Assault===
- I don't think that you need all of those examples that are currently present; it comes across as being very listy and ultimately doesn't add a lot to the article to have so many examples. I'd recommend merging it from bulleted points to prose and eliminate the majority of what is there. Keep some of the more notable examples such as Napolean, Grigori Rasputin (citation needed), and the first successful penis replantation (citation needed). Better yet, merge those examples into the appropriate sections above to help illustrate the medicinal/assault cases. As for what's left, I'd suggest to either get rid of them or merge them into an article called "List of cases of penis removal" (or some such thing) and then place that list under the "See also" section. The former would probably be the better option though. Almost all of these cases are from the last 20 years; I'd like to see some more historical examples added to the prose to give the article more balance and depth.
- The lead should be a general overview of the entire article. I'd recommend bumping what you have down into a new section (say "History") and then re-write the lead from scratch.
- Cut down on what's presently in the "See also" section; that should only detail related articles that aren't already linked in the text, so pages such as Lorena Bobbit should be removed.
- I'm not sure whether those external links are needed or not, but I'm inclined to think not; they might fail WP:ELNO. The first should be removed since it adds no worthwhile information to the topic at hand, and the third seems to be more about some person's sex life than anything that's really relevant to the article. I think only the IMDb link could potentially stay.
- As for whether an image is needed... I'll let other editors decide on that one (I'm a bit too squeamish to try hunting around for one that could be used)!
- I'd recommend going through the good article nomination process first and building on their comments before heading towards FA.
I hope that this helps, MelicansMatkin (talk, contributions) 00:36, 13 January 2010 (UTC)