Wikipedia:Peer review/Adam Levine/archive1

Adam Levine

 * 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 March 2009.
 * 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 March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I think it is in the home stretch to becoming a GA, but it is not there yet.

Thanks, Esprit15d • talk • contribs 11:23, 28 March 2009 (UTC)
 * Comments by


 * I'm looking at this from the point of view of a GAC reviewer, as you requested.
 * Well, the lead section certainly needs expansion, to begin with. Read WP:LEAD for more criteria; the lead needs to adequately summarise the whole article. As noted in LEAD, big facts shouldn't overwhelm the lead, yet shouldn't be overlooked either.
 * Maybe merge "early life" with the next sectin to make "early life and career"...? I don't know. They seem to be very short on their own.
 * There cannot be any tags in a GA.
 * Redlinks need to be removed/replaced with bluelinks.
 * MySpace is not a good thing to link to.
 * The "personal life" section seems very bitty; try go get it more flowing.
 * The second part of the article in particular [Maroon 5 and mainstream success onward] is very well written; but the article needs a bit of work to get to GA standard. Queenie 17:10, 1 April 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: I have a few suggestions for improvement.

Lead
 * I agree with User:Queenie about the lead.

Kara's Flowers
 * The text in this section makes no mention of Kara's Flowers. That seems a bit odd.

External videos
 * These belong in the External links section rather than in the main text sections.

Sources
 * I agree with User:Queenie about the citation-needed tags. In addition, parts of the article that are untagged lack sources. A good rule of thumb is to source every paragraph, every unusual claim, every set of statistics, and every direct quote. Two paragraphs in "Early career" are unsourced as is one in "Other work".

Short paragraphs
 * Paragraphs of only one or two sentences are generally frowned upon, especially if an article has a lot of them. Two solutions are possible: merge or expand.

Copyediting
 * I see small errors in the article that a copyeditor or proofreader would probably catch and fix. For example, NY should be spelled out as New York in the sentence about Hancock, New York. In the references, "MAROON 5 SOUNDS OFF" should be in title case rather than all caps, thus: "Maroon 5 Sounds Off", per the Manual of Style.

I hope these few suggestions prove helpful. Good luck with the article. Finetooth (talk) 04:31, 2 April 2009 (UTC)