Wikipedia:Peer review/George Tsimbidaros-Fteris/archive1

George Tsimbidaros-Fteris
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because it was rated as a "start class article," and many people wanted me to write it, so I want to meet their expectations.

Thanks, Iliada  13:43, 11 September 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article - While it is clear that a lot of work has been put into it, some more is needed to improve it further. 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). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 01:37, 16 September 2009 (UTC)
 * The rating as Start class seems very reasonable to me - please see here which says that a Start class article is An article that is developing, but which is quite incomplete and, most notably, lacks adequate reliable sources. The article has a usable amount of good content, but it is weak in many areas, usually in referencing. Quality of the prose may be distinctly unencyclopedic, and MoS compliance non-existent; but the article should satisfy fundamental content policies such as notability and BLP, and provide enough sources to establish verifiability.
 * Article needs more references, for example the Early life and Family sections have zero refs and the whole article has only four sources. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * The lead is currently only one sentence and needs to be expanded. It should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. Nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
 * I would list his books in a bibliography section
 * The song needs a fair use rationale - see WP:FAIR USE
 * The images might need better information or licenses - for example the bust is a work of art and it might be copyrighted (not sure if Greece has freedom of panorama or not). IF so, then it needs a fair use rationale too. The historic black and white photos might need an WP:OTRS ticket (the claim to have been released by the family, but the may need an email from the family saying this.)
 * The article has many short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that should be combined with others or perhaps expanded