The article appears to be detailed enough for
Wikipedia:Featured_articles; this peer review would be to prepare the article for nomination.
Cwolfsheep 14:00, 14 August 2005 (UTC)reply
This is one of many examples of a great collaborative effort to cover a current event. I would say its main problem is that it is somewhat too long and detailed. Some judicious cutting would improve the article. There are too many subsections, some of them with very little content (such as the one on Massachusetts). Other than that the
lead needs to be somewhat longer and there needs to be a references section before it could become a FA. -
SimonP 20:42, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
I second the comment about it needed a referance section. --
ZeWrestlerTalk 14:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)reply
The article appears to be detailed enough for
Wikipedia:Featured_articles; this peer review would be to prepare the article for nomination.
Cwolfsheep 14:00, 14 August 2005 (UTC)reply
This is one of many examples of a great collaborative effort to cover a current event. I would say its main problem is that it is somewhat too long and detailed. Some judicious cutting would improve the article. There are too many subsections, some of them with very little content (such as the one on Massachusetts). Other than that the
lead needs to be somewhat longer and there needs to be a references section before it could become a FA. -
SimonP 20:42, August 14, 2005 (UTC)
I second the comment about it needed a referance section. --
ZeWrestlerTalk 14:53, 15 August 2005 (UTC)reply