Wikipedia:Peer review/ACT (examination)/archive1

ACT (examination)
I am Looking to improve the article to achieve GA status towards the ultimate goal of being a featured article. I no it is not their yet but I do not know where to go from here.Zginder 21:14, 12 June 2007 (UTC)

Review by Anomie
Here are a few comments to get you started: Hope this helps! Anomie 20:08, 13 June 2007 (UTC)
 * Most sections could use expansion; compare to similar sections in SAT. Look for secondary sources discussing various aspects of the test.
 * If there are official composite statistics, those should generally be used instead of the 2006 statistics.
 * The text gets squished between the two images in Use. I would move the graph down to Score percentiles, along with the second paragraph of the section.
 * In the Format summary chart, the information in the Content column could better be described in the prose.
 * Inline links should be turned into &lt;ref&gt; tags, and should be after punctuation ("foo.[1]" rather than "foo[1]."). Also, you should either use the citation templates or format the references in similar style.
 * Swap the order of Taking the tests and Score Percentiles, to put Score Percentiles next to Score comparison with SAT.
 * I might rename Taking the tests to something like "Test availability".
 * A Criticism section could be interesting, if you can find good sources.

I have incorporated some of you edits. what do you mean on your second point.Zginder 12:15, 14 June 2007 (UTC)
 * If ACT or some reliable source publishes statistics that average over the past few years, those might be more helpful than 2006 statistics. If not, the 2006 statistics are fine. Anomie 12:31, 14 June 2007 (UTC)

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question. You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas.
 * Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at Lead. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
 * Per What is a featured article?, Images should have concise captions.[?]
 * There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Biography, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
 * Per Wikipedia:Context and Build the web, years with full dates should be linked; for example, link January 15, 2006.[?]
 * Please reorder/rename the last few sections to follow guidelines at Guide to layout.[?]
 * Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
 * Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “ All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
 * As done in WP:FOOTNOTE, footnotes usually are located right after a punctuation mark (as recommended by the CMS, but not mandatory), such that there is no space in between. For example, the sun is larger than the moon [2]. is usually written as the sun is larger than the moon.[2][?]
 * Please provide citations for all of the s.[?]
 * 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.[?]