Wikipedia:Peer review/Brian May/archive1

Brian May

 * 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 April 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 April 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get this to GA, or failing that, at least improve it. I know that it lacks refs, but want to identify its other weaknesses. I will work on the lead, refs and general style of the article.

Thanks, Queenie  14:01, 3 April 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments


 * The most obvious shortcoming of the article at present is the lack of citations. Virtually nothing is cited after the first two short sections, and there are numerous "fact" tags in place.
 * Many of the references that you do have are not properly formatted: title, publisher and last access date are in each case the minimum information required.
 * The featured quote at the beginning of the "As a musician" section should be cited in the same way as other inline citations
 * The lead is a hotchpotch of odd facts, rather than a concise summary of the whole article.
 * Likewise, the Biography section lacks coherence - bits and pieces of information about school, smoking and depression do not constitute a reasonable biography. Also, you don't "graduate" from school in England – the term is reserved for colleges and universities.
 * Prose: generally not bad, but the tendency to write in very short paragraphs gives it a disjointed feel. At times the writing has an informal, non-encyclopedic tone, such as when Mercury becomes "Freddie". When the major issues relating to sourcing and citation have been dealt with it might be a good idea to let another editor take a general look at the prose.

The subject is interesting and of significance, and the article is definitely worth working on. Brianboulton (talk) 11:48, 10 April 2009 (UTC)