Wikipedia:Peer review/Firefox/archive1

Firefox
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I believe the article needs serious work. It is in bad shape, and I need to know how to improve it specifically. Thanks,  ҭᴙᴇᴡ ӌӌ   01:02, 25 April 2012 (UTC)
 * Hello Trewyy. You might want to take a look at the introduction to the Peer Review page. The article should already be at a high level of quality before undergoing PR scrutiny. Regards, RJH (talk) 20:15, 25 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Comments from Dana Boomer

As you have stated, this article needs a serious amount of work. The first thing I would suggest doing is addressing all of the tags on the article:
 * Update all information that you can in the sections tagged with outdated information banners, make sure everything is accurate, and then remove the tags.
 * Find references and make any prose tweaks necessary for the spots in System requirements and Older operating systems tagged with "citation needed"/"clarification needed".
 * Fix the dead links that are tagged, as well as the other untagged ones that can be found listed here.

Then, there are quite a few other things that need work:
 * There are a lot of references to Mozilla itself, which is not an independent source. If you're aiming for GA/FA most/many of these should be replaced - I would suggest with references from the several books provided in the Further reading section.
 * Check for unreliable sources. Blogs and self-published websites are generally not reliable, unless written by an established expert in the field.
 * Web references should include a publisher and access date at the very least - if author, publication date or other information is available, it should also be included.
 * Dab links to Ubuntu and DOM should be fixed.
 * There are a lot of really short, choppy sections which look unappealing. Several of these could be combined with other sections, which would also serve to shorten the (very long) table of contents.

Overall - fix the tags and clean up the references, and you will be a lot closer to having a good article. Please let me know if you have any questions, Dana boomer (talk) 17:47, 30 April 2012 (UTC)


 * Thank you very much for your response. I didn't realize that I would receive a response here (I thought it was on the Talk page for Firefox), so I just realized it is here now. I have added these suggestions to the to-do list, and I hope to have these fixed by end of June. Thanks!  ҭᴙᴇᴡ ӌӌ   15:31, 16 May 2012 (UTC)