Wikipedia:Peer review/GNOME/archive2

GNOME
This peer review discussion has been closed. WP:LINUX wishes to take this article to FA quality. I copyedited the article recently but received no attention at Talk:GNOME. I just finished rearranging the sections in order to convey a stronger article structure and I would like some outside input on the scope and depth of coverage in this article. I think it is sourced fairly well, but I do not know what all is expected of an FA-class article in terms of what is already present in this article and what else should be added. A quick glance at current FAs would lead me to believe this one is short.
 * Previous peer review

Many thanks, –Paul M. Nguyen (chat&#124;blame) 02:49, 10 November 2010 (UTC) Shii (tock) 00:20, 13 November 2010 (UTC)
 * What is the GPL and why is it important? (Yes, I know the answer to this)
 * The third paragraph of the History section is actually about KDE and appears to be taken from an article about KDE or desktops
 * I don't think having a gallery in the body of the text is stylistically acceptable
 * The "Future developments" section appears vestigial and extraneous.
 * The "GNOME 3.0" section does not explain why this is an important version that deserves inclusion in the article, considering the main History header is only 3 paragraphs. Remove it?
 * The article should not be primarily constructed around primary sources. Please find outside sources such as Ars Technica or reliable Linux news sites, and fix fact tags
 * Too many lists in the "Project structure" section
 * Too many one-sentence paragraphs
 * Screenshots are too squinty and could be improved
 * Thank you! I'll be going over all of that and any dangling issues from the previous PR on my way to FA. Thanks, again! –Paul M. Nguyen (chat&#124;blame) 02:43, 13 November 2010 (UTC)

I think it would be useful to explain what KDE is in the start of the History section. The text presupposes a knowledge of these projects. Maury Markowitz (talk) 02:51, 26 November 2010 (UTC)