Wikipedia:Peer review/Cirque du Soleil/archive1

Cirque du Soleil[edit]

After doing a complete rewrite of this article a month ago, it has received good article status and I intend to list it as a nominee for FA status here in the near future. I would appreciate any constructive input anyone has to make the process run as smoothly as possible.

Thanks,

Trusilver 16:25, 1 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It is a very good article. One glaring inconsistency -- the article generally uses Montreal and Quebec, but occasionally refers to Montréal and Québec. All references should be changed to Montreal and Quebec, consistent with the place name articles themselves, guidelines and the consensus reached in many many discusions. Skeezix1000 12:53, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

A couple of other comments: the section on LOVE reads like an advert, and the section on Arena touring shows needs to be beefed up or eliminated. Hope that helps. Skeezix1000 13:03, 7 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I made the above-noted spelling change. Skeezix1000 16:09, 14 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]

review[edit]

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.

Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.^[?]
Per Wikipedia:Context and Wikipedia:Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.^[?]
As per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (dates), dates shouldn't use ^th; for example, instead of using January 30^th was a great day, use January 30 was a great day.^[?]
Per Wikipedia:Manual of Style (headings), headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading ==Magellan's journey==, use ==Journey==.^[?]
Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) may be too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per Wikipedia:Summary style.^[?]
The script has spotted the following contractions: didn't, won't, if these are outside of quotations, they should be expanded.
Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.^[?]

You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. Thanks, DTGardner 22:47, 10 September 2007 (UTC)[reply]