Wikipedia:Peer review/Vancouver Area Network of Drug Users/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 April 2009.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
This is my first page on wikipedia -- I've edited other articles for a while but have never taken a stab at creating one from scratch. This is topic I'm very passionate about. I've tried very hard to cite sources correctly, and I've added information, but I really just need guidance on where to take the article next. I love feedback on my written work (I'm an English major, so I love when people read my work) and I love to review other work, so I will review other articles as recommended to get some feedback on this one.
Specifically, I want to know how it feels stylistically, and what the reader feels like they want to know more of after reading but the article is lacking. I'm more than willing to put in the work on this article and other articles in the future related to harm reduction, etc., as I work in the field and have a lot of access to information.
Cheers! AC (talk) 04:54, 14 April 2009 (UTC)
- llywrch comments
Just a few minor points:
- You have broken this article into too many sections. Its actually better on comprehension -- & the eyes -- if you try to make sections no shorter than 2-3 paragraphs; you have only one section that is longer than a single paragraph.
- It would greatly improve the article if more examples of what they have done to advocate their goals were provided. Do they give lectures or offer other forms of education -- or are their activities limited to political statements? And when was the 100 crosses put in Oppenheimer Park? (BTW, which Portland is the Portland Hotel Society based in? Portland, Oregon?)
- The formatting for the external links in the footnotes is broken somehow. I'm not familiar with the template you use here, otherwise I'd fix one to show you how to do it.
Good luck with the article. -- llywrch (talk) 17:17, 16 April 2009 (UTC)