Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… because I have nominated this article for FL-status which was not promoted and I would like a complete review of what needs to be done so I can renominate it again.
Thanks, – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 21:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
At this point, I would say that the biggest issue is still the lack of referencing mentioned in both the banner at the top of the page and multiple times in the FLC. Per The Rambling Man ( talk · contribs) at the FLC, "I would expect to see references for each of the events in this timeline." This referencing has not happened, and so you still have many spots where opinion, facts, speculation and other material is not referenced. Other issues:
Overall, I think it's a good start, but I think that the referencing needs to be taken care of before another FLC is even considered. Once references are found and the potential comprehensiveness issues are addressed, the rest of the issues should be fairly easy to iron out. Dana boomer ( talk) 19:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank-you for reviewing it. I know that the article is very poor citation-wise and I would like to have a review apart from the referencing problem. – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 21:02, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… because I have nominated this article for FL-status which was not promoted and I would like a complete review of what needs to be done so I can renominate it again.
Thanks, – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 21:39, 31 October 2011 (UTC)
At this point, I would say that the biggest issue is still the lack of referencing mentioned in both the banner at the top of the page and multiple times in the FLC. Per The Rambling Man ( talk · contribs) at the FLC, "I would expect to see references for each of the events in this timeline." This referencing has not happened, and so you still have many spots where opinion, facts, speculation and other material is not referenced. Other issues:
Overall, I think it's a good start, but I think that the referencing needs to be taken care of before another FLC is even considered. Once references are found and the potential comprehensiveness issues are addressed, the rest of the issues should be fairly easy to iron out. Dana boomer ( talk) 19:46, 10 November 2011 (UTC)
Thank-you for reviewing it. I know that the article is very poor citation-wise and I would like to have a review apart from the referencing problem. – Plarem ( User talk contribs) 21:02, 10 November 2011 (UTC)