Wikipedia:Peer review/Big Brother (U.S.)/archive1

Big Brother (U.S.)
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to see this article at least make A-Class or GA-Class. Not many Big Brother articles have achieved a high class and I would like to change that.

Thanks,  ♪♫Al ucard   16♫♪  04:58, 19 August 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: The article looks reasonably comprehensive, given the number of existing articles on individual series or other aspects of Big Brother. However, I believe much work is needed to bring the article to a standard approaching GA, particularly on the prose. Note: I have not read through every section with the same attention to detail.
 * Lead: The lead should be a summary of the whole article, rather than a brief introduction to the subject. See WP:LEAD for more information. In the brief lead you have, the prose presents numerous problems:-
 * No punctuation in first sentence
 * "based on" repeated in first and second sentences
 * "24" would be preferable to "twenty-four", per MOS
 * "under constant surveillance with no privacy" is a tautology
 * "130 different people" - "different" is redundant
 * Likewise, "so far" at the sentence end seems unnecessary
 * "The HouseGuests compete for the chance to win..." Surely, they compete for the prize, not for "the chance to win"?
 * "Ungrammatical: "...until the last HouseGuest remains at the end of the season that can claim the $500,000 grand prize."
 * It is also unnecessary to twice spell out the prize details in full; the second reference could be to "the prize"
 * "Respectively", at the paragraph end, is redundant.
 * Main series
 * "eviction night" mentioned without any prior explanation of what this means
 * "This led fans to dub her "the Chenbot," - to what does "this" refer?
 * "moniker" is slang, unencyclopedic.
 * "Tha announcer" should be specified as the program's announcer. I notice that in this brief paragraph the word "announcer" occurs six times. Such over-repetition needs to be avoided by rephasing. For example the last sentence: "The current announcer is Clayton Halsey and has been the announcer since season seven." (which is ungrammatical anyway) could be simplified to "Clayton Halsey has been the announcer since season seven."
 * Other points: I think I have pointed out enough to indicate that the prose generally needs thorough revision. Other matters needing attention:-
 * Section titles should not be linked
 * Section titles should have text, not merely links to other articles
 * Whose choices determined the content of the "Controversy" section? In other words, why have these incidents been selected and not others? I would say, also, that some of the narratives for these incidents are anecdotal rather than encyclopedic, and have a strong POV feel.

I hope these comments will help the process of improving the article. Brianboulton (talk) 15:16, 25 August 2009 (UTC)