Wikipedia:Peer review/Bali Nine/archive1

Bali Nine
I've put in some time keeping the article up to date of late with the best coverage I can on this very recent event. Many other editors have also contributed to bring this article to a fine standard. Of course it will never be complete until the legal processes are exhausted, and even then, perhaps never will. I think this article comes close to covering most aspects of the Bali Nine saga up until now. I welcome your feedback. -- Longhair 11:20, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I really enjoyed reading the article. It's well written and extensive (I even checked for a FA star when I was half way through). I like the way the sections exist, it complements the subject matter. Maybe it could use the new citation system, Cite/Cite.php.--Commander Keane 12:35, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I'm in the process of converting references to use the new cite format. I got myself confused earlier when I made an attempt but it's underway now. Thanks for the input. -- Longhair 13:10, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Longhair, I used that cite format on the Tourette syndrome article, if you want to see an example. I could help out if you need it?  Sandy 19:13, 20 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Thanks for your offer of help. I took another look at cite.php and got it working. I'll give it another shot to complete the changes. Thanks for the recommendations. -- Longhair 23:45, 20 February 2006 (UTC)
 * I took a tip from your page, and reduced the font size on the TS references. Thanks!  Sandy 14:22, 23 February 2006 (UTC)

The paragraph "Some commentators suggested ... they must have had accomplices at Kingsford Smith International Airport" could do with an inline citation. Andjam 02:18, 25 February 2006 (UTC)


 * I've left a note on the talk page of the editor who contributed that content, who is a regular contributor. If a source cannot be provided I'll happily remove the unsourced information in a day or so. -- Longhair 03:52, 27 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The editor deleted my comment without reply therefore I've removed that quote from the article. -- Longhair 02:30, 2 March 2006 (UTC)