Talk:Sherlock Holmes/GA1

GA Review
The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.''

Reviewer: SNUGGUMS (talk · contribs) 17:36, 10 November 2014 (UTC)

This article unfortunately has been nominated prematurely for GA. There are multiple completely unsourced sections, which is an automatic fail, as well as a great deal of other unreferenced statements. The following sections are completely missing citations:


 * "Retirement"
 * "Finances"
 * "Irene Adler"
 * "Riding crop"
 * "Boxing"
 * "Physical strength"
 * "The detective story"

As a general rule of thumb, end each paragraph with at least one citation. If multiple sources are needed to support all of a paragraph's content, use more references as needed.

For the references currently used:
 * There should be no HARVref errors (I found one with 'You Know My Method': A Juxtaposition of Charles S. Peirce and Sherlock Holmes by Thomas Sebeok and Jean Umiker-Sebeok)
 * Starpulse is not reliable, and I'm skeptical about "Techdirt"
 * Names of sources should not end in suffixes like ".com" or ".org" unless that is part of the work's name (i.e. Amazon.com)
 * "LA Times" should read Los Angeles Times
 * "Daily Telegraph" should read The Daily Telegraph
 * Make sure each reference has accessdates, authors (if known), publish dates (if known), and names of works/publishers.
 * Check for dead links

Outside of referencing, this does seem to be somewhat cluttered with images. I don't see the need to have photos of guns Holmes uses or the microscope. Try alternating the left/right alignment of the images as well rather than sticking most to one side. "Inspiration for the character" also seems rather short compared to other sections, so try adding more to that. Using the term "eccentric" is not exactly a neutral description when not in quotation marks.

Best of luck getting this up to GA in the future, but this is going to need extensive work before it is ready.