Wikipedia:Peer review/Alkane/archive1

Alkane
I think this article could be considered good, but some parts may be a bit technical. The intro could use some work, and we need a good image at the top. The article is very extensive, and with a bit of work, could get up to FA quality. It explains many of the aspects of this type of hydrocarbon. TheKillerAngel 19:26, 20 May 2006 (UTC)
 * It looks like the content is there for it to be featured but two things jump out at needing attention.
 * 1) Format: the TOC is really long (a screen and a half on my browser). Work on reducing the number of sub-sections (and especially sub-sub-sections). Consider how the information is presented to the reader. I think the Isomerism section is an odd way to start the body. I would go with either Properties or Nomenclature...something that establishes the context of what this thing is and preferably has some good images (like what it looks like). Look at some similar articles to see how they are laid out. Also, you may want to notify some of the participants at WikiProject Chemistry or WikiProject Chemicals that this is up for review as they would probably have valuable input.
 * 2) References: there is currently only one reference. Where can all this information be fact-checked? Can a few general organic chem textbooks be listed? any online general chem websites? Peer Review 05:40, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * Some comments:
 * Per WP:WIAFA, this article's table of contents (ToC) maybe too long- consider shrinking it down by merging short sections or using a proper system of daughter pages as per WP:SS.
 * Please alphabetize the categories and interlanguage links.
 * The article will need references. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information.
 * See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.
 * Images need proper image copyright tags and source information.
 * Thanks, AndyZ t 13:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)
 * Thanks, AndyZ t 13:03, 21 May 2006 (UTC)


 * I was reviewing this for WP:GAN and although I did like it generally, I hesitated to promote it because there is only one reference, and that's for a very specific aspect. If WP:FAC is also being considered, I think it would need more specific refs on things like alkanes in nature, etc.  Some parts were apparently translated from the German featured article - could the translator also include the relevant refs from that (there are six), preferably as inline refs (unlike the de page)?  I don't feel comfortable adding these, as I didn't write the article.  Walkerma 03:02, 28 May 2006 (UTC)