Wikipedia:Peer review/Dependency injection/archive1

Dependency injection
I would like to move the article past Start-Class quality, a status that it's had for a while. Several improvements have been made by myself and others. Would like some guidance.

Thanks, Galhalee (talk) 05:31, 9 August 2015 (UTC)


 * Comments from Calvin999
 * One dead link
 * Why have you included quote boxes in the lead? I've never seen that before and structurally it looks really out of place and imbalances the article.
 * There shouldn't be citations in the lead, as it's supposed to be a summary of the sourced prose in subsequent sections in the main body of writing.
 * to external code → to an external code (?)
 * There is serious repetition of 'the client' in the lead, especially the second paragraph.
 * The second paragraph reads like a list of hard facts. Short, stubby sentences that don't provide any flow. It's a bit boring to read.
 * It works the same → It works in the same
 * Referring to "parameter passing" as an injection carries the added implication that it's being done to isolate the client from details.

An injection is also about what is in control of the passing (never the client) and is independent of how the passing is accomplished, whether by passing a reference or a pointer.

Dependency injection involves four roles:

the service object(s) to be used the client object that is depending on the services it uses the interfaces that define how the client may use the services the injector, which is responsible for constructing the services and injecting them into the client Any object that may be used can be considered a service. Any object that uses other objects can be considered a client. The names have nothing to do with what the objects are for and everything to do with the role the objects play in any one injection. → None of this is attributed to a any citations or sources.
 * So far, there are several instances of one line sentences/paragraphs. These should be kept to an absolute minimum.
 * Are you supposed to bold words like that in the prose if it's not the title of the article and in the first sentence of the lead?
 * This is significant if the client and services are published separately. This unfortunate coupling is one that dependency injection cannot resolve. → This is not engaging prose. Both short sentences, both connected to each other but separated by a full stop, both start of "This is"
 * may connect together → Remove "together". 'Connect' already indicates that they are indeed together.
 * on a DI framework → What is DI? Is it different to DIP?
 * Put simply IoC → Comma after 'simply'
 * Here polymorphism → Remove 'here'
 * The Frameworks section consists of a sole sentence. Is it necessary for it to have it's own section or can it be merged elsewhere?
 * The first three bullet points of Advantages are not sourced.
 * Again, using the first bullet point as an example: Dependency injection allows a client the flexibility of being configurable. Only the client's behavior is fixed. The client may act on anything that supports the intrinsic interface the client expects. - Three really short sentences which could be quite easily connected by uses of punctuation that allow flow and not a full stop.
 * Likewise, the first three bullet points of Disadvantages are not sourced.
 * like Java and C# [23] → Link Jaza and should there be a full stop after the # instead of just a space?
 * Do the bullet points in Three types of dependency injection need to have italic words?
 * For the references, use so they aren't just in one long list.
 * Ref 2 has a Url showing?
 * Ref 3 is missing a publisher.

It's probably because this article is science/engineering related, but I don't really understand it. I find it quite confusing, but someone who has an interest in the subject probable makes complete sense to them! Hope my comments help you. Ping me if you have questions. — Calvin999 20:10, 28 August 2015 (UTC)