Wikipedia:Peer review/CE-HTML/archive1

CE-HTML

 * 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 it was rated B in the computing category class, and needs to be peer-reviewed for advancement. It is deemed complete for the casual reader to get an understanding of what CE-HTML is.

Thanks, Thrill59 (talk) 10:55, 17 April 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Good start and clear that a lot of work has been put into the article, but this has a very long way to go before I think it would be seen as a good article (which would have to go through WP:GAN, not just WP:PR). So here are some suggestions for improvement, with an eye to GAN. Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 21:27, 27 April 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Refs are not needed in the lead unless it is a direct quote or an extraoridnary claim (although it is OK to have refs in the lead)
 * Because it is a summary of the whole article, nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself but Web4CE is only in the lead. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase so fix things like DOM level 2.0 (Core [8], Style [9], Events [10], HTML [11])
 * Article needs more references, for example almost all of the History section is uncited. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * Provide context for the reader - for example the history section does not give any dates, when did all the developments occur? ANother place is the code section - all that is there to explain it is Typical CE-HTML code looks like this [13]: but then no explanation for the code that follows is provided. See WP:PCR
 * Article is very list-y and much of it could be converted to prose for better flow
 * Another thing to improve flow is to avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs by combining them with others or perhaps expanding them.
 * Spell out abbreviations before first use so that their menaing is clearer to the casual reader - this is done nicely expaining what CE is CE-HTML[1] is a language for creating user interface pages for Consumer Electronics (CE) devices such as televisions. but HTML is not explained. See WP:JARGON too.