Wikipedia:Peer review/Schramm's model of communication/archive1
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion is closed. |
I just finished writing this article and I wanted to get some general suggestions on how it might be improved. I was hoping to get it ready for a GAN with the help of this feedback. Thanks, Phlsph7 (talk) 14:01, 30 October 2022 (UTC)
Comments from Z1720
[edit]Some comments after a quick skim:
- No concerns with a GA nom.
- Ensure that the refs are in numerical order
- Ensure that all books have ISBNs, and they all either have hyphens for the ISBNs or do not.
- Suggest adding alt text to the images, per MOS:ALT
- "Most theorists identify Schramm's model with his 1954 book The process and effects of mass communication and present it as a reaction to earlier models developed in the late 1940s.[2][3][12][1][10]" Are this many references necessary? Consider removing unnecessary citations or WP:CITEBUNDLE
- Is ref 9 a book? Should it have page numbers?
I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 01:17, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- Hello Z1720 and thanks for your feedback. I went ahead and followed all your suggestions. One question about the numerical order of references: is this a general guideline or practice? Or are there also exception, for example, to put the better references first, like secondary sources before primary sources? Phlsph7 (talk) 10:30, 1 November 2022 (UTC)
- As far as I know, there isn't a policy or guideline about ref order. However, this is a frequent comment at FAC and if you choose not to do it, I suggest having a really good reason. AFAIK, most readers do not know why the refs are in a certain order, but they find it more pleasant to have the refs in numerical order, which is why that is prefered. In my opinion, the only exception to having refs in numerical order is to put a ref for a direct quote first, but others might be able to think of better reasons. Z1720 (talk) 12:44, 1 November 2022 (UTC)