Wikipedia:Peer review/Anna Politkovskaya/archive1

Anna Politkovskaya[edit]

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

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 August 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… it's better than wp:ga standards but could use some comments and minor cleanup. someone (preferably sb who has worked on it) shld nominate it for wp:fac eventually

Thanks, Solenodon (talk) 04:09, 12 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: I respectfully disagree that this is already at GA class. Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.

Biggest problem I see is that the article needs more references, for example there are many direct quotes that do not give a ref and some whole sections such as A Russian Diary. There are many citation needed tags. Fix them. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article - nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
Article is oddly organized - I would give the basics of her biography first from birth to death, then go into more detail on specific topics. As it is the article skips around. FOr example her poisoning is referred to three times after the lead BEFORE we finally get to the section on it. Avoid needless repetition. There are many Biography FAs that would be useful models for ideas and examples to follow.
There a some one or two sentence paragraphs and (worse) sections - these should be combined with others or expanded if possible.

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 15:56, 16 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]