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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because we'd like some feedback about our work.

Thanks, ABrundage, Texas A&M University ( talk) 02:14, 2 April 2008 (UTC) reply

• Tone of the article needs to be more encyclopaedic. It currently sounds like a career counselling page. It should have more Reliable sources. Shyamal ( talk) 02:33, 4 April 2008 (UTC) reply

Ruhrfisch comments: A lot of work has been done here, but much more needs to be done to clean this up to meet Wikipedia's Manual of Style. Here are some suggestions:

• I agree completely with Shyamal's comments.
• Read about reliable sources - they need to be published, so interviews and lectures do not count
• Expand the lead per WP:LEAD to summarize the whole article. For an article this long the lead should be 2-3 paragraphs long
• Avoid lists (Tools section), convert to prose instead.
• Article needs many more citations - every quote, every attribution, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and any thing likely to be challenged needs cited. In general every paragraph needs at least one ref
• Avoid needless repetition - Dr. Jeffrey Tomberlin is described at least twice. Also is he an an Assistant Professor or a Professor (called both - there is a big difference).
• Get rid of the conclusion section, it is not encyclopedic.
• The tone needs to be encylcopedic - this is not a term paper, and people found in the hallways that you could ask about this profession are no substitute for library work and relaible published sources.

Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 12:14, 6 April 2008 (UTC) reply