Wikipedia:Peer review/Del City, Oklahoma/archive1

Del City, Oklahoma
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because this article has had more work done on it in the last few months, and I would like to began to get it ready for Good Article status. Anything that can be pointed out would be greatly welcomed.

Thanks, Steam  Iron  20:29, 23 December 2010 (UTC)

Finetooth comments: This is a good start but needs lots of work before it'll be ready for WP:GAN. Here are some suggestions for improvement:


 * The lead should be an inviting summary of the whole article. My rule of thumb for leads is to try to include at least a mention of each main text section and not to include anything in the lead that is not covered in the main text. The existing lead briefly covers demographics, geography, and the name origin but does not summarize any of the other sections such as climate, the big tornado, history, or culture.


 * Telegraphic heads are the norm for Wikipedia articles. I would shorten "May 3, 1999, Tornado" to "Tornado".
 * -- Steam Iron  05:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * WP:MOS suggests writing in regular prose paragraphs rather than making lists, whenever feasible. The list in the "Education" section could be transformed into a single sentence that names the college, the academy, and the high schools and combines the other as "two middle schools and three elementary schools". Alternatively, you could name them all in a single sentence. Just merge this sentence with the rest of the prose paragraph. Likewise, the list of notables would be easy to render in straight prose.
 * -- Steam Iron  05:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Some of the paragraphs in the article lack sources. The second and third paragraphs of the "Tornado" section are examples. My rule of thumb is to provide a source for every paragraph as well as every set of statistics, every unusual claim, and every direct quotation.


 * Some paragraphs in the article have sources somewhere in the middle, but the later sentences are not sourced. The second and third sentences of the first paragraph of the "Education" section are examples. They include information that is not common knowledge, yet they are not supported by a citation to a reliable source or sources. They thus appear to be based on personal research, a no-no. WP:NOR has details.
 * -- Steam Iron  05:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * The citations in the article are generally incomplete or malformed. Citations to Internet sources should include author, title, publisher, date of publication, url, and date of most recent access, if all of those are known or can be found. You can enter all of these without using templates, and some editors prefer to do it that way. I find it easier to use the "cite" family of citation templates found at WP:CIT. If you use these, don't mix them with other citation styles such as the "Citation" family of templates also found at WP:CIT. You can practice with templates in your sandbox, and you can see how they work by looking at other articles in edit mode. See Davenport, Iowa, for example.


 * It's often helpful to look at featured articles about similar topics to see what other editors have done. You can find a list of featured articles about cities at WP:FA.


 * The "See also" section should not include anything that is already linked in the main text.
 * -- Steam Iron  05:44, 11 January 2011 (UTC)
 * Make sure that your sources meet the guidelines of WP:RS. What makes the Star Spangled Salute website (citation 6) reliable, for example?


 * What happened in the Del City region before 1946? Who lived there before non-indigenous people arrived? When did the first non-indigenous people arrive?


 * What about sports and recreation in Del City? Parks? Museums? Music halls? Theatres? Transportation? Utilities?


 * WikiProject Cities/US Guideline has a lot of good tips about U.S. city articles.


 * The article could use proofing to find and fix things like missing italics for newspaper names.

I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the PR backlog at WP:PR; that is where I found this one. I don't usually watch the PR archives or check corrections or changes. If my comments are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 03:13, 28 December 2010 (UTC)
 * Thanks for the review.-- Steam Iron  21:48, 9 January 2011 (UTC)