Wikipedia:Peer review/Dol Guldur/archive1

Dol Guldur

 * 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 June 2008.
 * 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 June 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because…

I feel the article is shaping up, I've constantly edited this article to reach the standards of the Wikiproject and the I believe the headings should stay where they are as per "location" section of WikiProject Middle-earth/Standards.

Things of concern:


 * I need someone to consider if this article meets criteria of not being in-universe
 * I need advice to contact a user who can copy edit this. I don't know if there is a project on that.
 * The article is looking good I need someone to give me advice generally.
 * All in all I need advice on how I can improve it as a whole.

Thanks, LOTRrules (talk) 18:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Nice article although I think that it needs some work to get to GA and more work to reach FA. Here are some suggestions for improvement: 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; 03:39, 5 June 2008 (UTC)
 * A model article is useful for ideas on style, structure, refs, etc. I reviewed Saruman recently and thought it did a great job on keeping an out of universe perspective and think it might be useful to help with that aspect of this article. I also note that WikiProject_Middle-earth lists several FA and GA articles that may be useful models.
 * I think this needs work to be consistently written from an out of universe perspective. If you have not already read WP:IN-U, please do so. I think more references to Tolkien would help (there are already refs to the novels) and perhaps some changes in structure would help too. I also note that the article on Saruman starts with Concept and creation, which emphasizes how Tolkien came to create the character. Looking at the lead (more on that later) the last two sentences give no indication this is a fictional place.
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article - please see WP:LEAD. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way - for example Politics or Adaptations do not appear in the lead. The lead should also be expanded to 2 to 3 paragraphs for the length of the article.
 * Typically the lead does not need refs since it is a summary of the article, which should be cited. Direct quotes and extraordinary claims should still be cited even in the lead.
 * Provide context for the reader - see WP:PCR For example, not all readers will know what Sindarin is, so instead ojust linking it, say something like in Tolkien's fictional Elf language Sindarin ...
 * Etymology does a good job being out of universe, while Geography is written almost entirely from an in universe perspective.
 * Article needs more references, for example the first paragraph of Geography has no refs or the first two paragraphs in Culture are also without cites. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * Refs are not complete - for example internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. See Ref 22 which is a bare link, or ref 28 is for an album and should indicate that. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful.
 * Some of the refs are not properly done or do not seem to meet WP:RS. Ref 2 See detailed map is not sufficient - since the map is Tolkien's own, the ref should cite that. Or what makes http://www.tuckborough.net/fortress.html a reliable source?
 * There is a lot of scholarship and even popular books on Tolkien and his works and these should be cited for a third party perspective.
 * Languages section - per WP:Summary style there should be a summary of the article referenced here. I must admit I don't see how this ties in to Dol Guldur - how does this differ from te Etymology section?
 * Adaptations - surely Dol Guldur is portrayed in some way in one of the animated films? Or is it at least mentioned in the recent LOTR films? How about the Borthers Hildbrandt calendars or even a ref to artwork in the infobox?
 * Avoid short (one or two sentence) paragraphs - expand them or combine with others. As is, they break up the flow of the article.
 * Agree this needs a copyedit - ask a volunteer at WP:PRV or leave a message on the talk page of one of the users lsted at WP:LOCE
 * I think what is there is generally good, just needs some polish, perhaps some restructuring.


 * Thank you for the information you provided. Structure is said to have been laid out that way, that's why it's there on the standards page, however to get it to GA or FA I agree that some sections are irrelevent, some need polish and some need work. LOTRrules (talk) 20:38, 6 June 2008 (UTC)


 * A late comment, but one that applies to all fiction-related subjects: is it possible to discuss the author's (Tolkien in this case) relationship with his creation? An example of what I am trying to indicate here is nicely illustrated with Tom Bombadill, whose creation was inspired by a Dutch doll owned by Tolkien's children, & whose nature Tolkien admitted that he left unexplained because he felt some parts of a literary work ought to be mysterious -- even to its own creator. In the case of Dol Guldur, an example could be whether Tolkien originally created it to be the Necromancer's/Sauron's base of operations, but grew dissatisfied with it as his vision developed & in the end replaced it with Barad Dur. Obviously, the information may not be available in a usable form -- but I would hope a FA would cover this matter if it is.-- llywrch (talk) 23:18, 18 June 2008 (UTC)


 * I've already started to research this. Although I can't anything so far. WIthout this would it reach FA? ANd is the article coming along nicely? In your eyes? LOTRrules (talk) 22:04, 22 June 2008 (UTC)