Wikipedia:Peer review/Bigipedia/archive1

Bigipedia
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I hope to get it promoted to featured article status in time for April Fool's Day. I am not sure which parts of this article need to be improved, so I would be glad of any help.

Thanks, ISD (talk) 07:15, 9 November 2009 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is interesting and amusing and might indeed make a good April Fool's Day article. Here are my suggestions.

General
 * Is the show still running, or did it end forever on Aug. 13? Words like "new" in the phrase "and critics have given the new show favourable comparisons with its predecessor" give the impression that more episodes are forthcoming. If it ended, why?
 * Would it be possible to add any listener statistics? How many people typically listen to BBC Radio 4, and was this show better or worse than average in terms of audience? (Maybe nobody knows, but advertisers care about these stats, though the makers of Chianto undoubtedly do not. :-)
 * Do listeners send letters of praise and complaint to BBC Radio 4 that could be quoted for audience reaction?
 * Would it be possible to include a snippet of a sound track from the show? Clickable sound files are often added to Wikipedia music articles. Perhaps a bit of a Chianto ad, licensed as fair-use, would be fun to hear. I have never tried adding a sound file to anything, so I'm not sure if this is a practical suggestion for a radio show, but it might be.

Lead
 * Bigipedia is described by the BBC Press Office as, "a unique experiment in 'broadwebcasting' ". - Flip to active voice?
 * Bigipedia has been given positive reviews from critics. - Flip to active voice; i.e., Critics have given Bigipedia positive reviews?

Plot
 * "Among the similarities include articles, discussion pages, disambiguation pages, featured articles... " - "are" rather than "include"?
 * "a news section and a "Did you know?" style section for new articles" - Delete "style"?

Production
 * "Tyler went on to both produce and direct Bigipedia." - Delete "both"?
 * The show has been described by Doody and Kirshen as "writing-heavy". - Active is usually snappier than passive, and here's another one that would be easy to flip: "Doody and Kirshen describe the show as "writing-heavy".

Reception
 * "The programme's only failing was that on occasion it was a little to reminiscent of the real internet... " - This should be "too" rather than "to". If it's "to" in the source, I'd add [sic] after "to" to make that clear. Also, did the source use "ie" or "i.e."?

Other
 * The image needs alt text, meant for readers who can't see the images. Please see WP:ALT for an explanation. Alt text is required in FA articles.
 * The dabfinder tool at the top of this review page finds one link that goes to a disambiguation page rather than its intended target.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog. That is where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 20:27, 19 November 2009 (UTC)