Wikipedia:Peer review/Waldo R. Tobler/archive1

Waldo R. Tobler

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because after putting a significant amount of time chasing down sources and expanding the article, I think that it needs a fresh set of eyes and perspectives. Waldo Tobler is widely regarded as one of the most significant geographers of the past century (cited in the article), and I wanted the page to reflect that. Now that he has passed, there is a lot more content on him in peer-reviewed journal memorial articles, so there is a lot of material we can work with to make the article better. Copy editing, formatting suggestions, and content suggestions would be great. If there is anything else you think the article needs, please mention or add it directly. The article should have adequate citations if anyone feels ambitious to dive into adding content from them.

Ideally, after review, I would like to work to get this article nominated for either Good Article or Featured Article status. I am not familiar with that process, and this would be the first one I've worked to do that on. Any advice on this process would also be appreciated, and if anyone wants to help nominate after this review closes, I'd appreciate it.

Thanks, GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 04:35, 11 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

I suggest that you nominate the article for GA status before FA. The GA criteria is lower and a step towards bringing an article to FA status. If you want your article reviewed more quickly, I suggest that you review articles at WP:GAN and WP:FAC to build goodwill and help teach the criteria. Here are some thoughts after a quick skim:

"He also invented a method for smooth two-dimensional mass-preserving areal data redistribution." Needs a citation.
There are a lot of small, one-paragraph sections. Per WP:OVERSECTION I suggest that you merge some of these together or expand upon them.

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 15:42, 15 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the suggestion and feedback. I'm trying to learn how to get involved with those processes behind the scenes a bit more, and will try to build some goodwill by getting involved. I will work on both of your suggestions. The subsections are a great idea, and generally all have room for expansion. I'll see how I can reformat them. I'll leave this posted for a few weeks to see if any more feedback comes in and then consider prepping for a GA nomination. GeogSage ^{(⚔Chat?⚔)} 01:41, 17 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]