Wikipedia:Peer review/H.R. Gray/archive1

H.R. Gray
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I have made some neccessary changes to the article and haven't received any feedback as of yet. I would appreciate the help on this - thank you in advance!!

Thanks, Wendyfables (talk) 16:02, 26 April 2010 (UTC)

Brianboulton comments: I apologise for the delay in posting these notes. I believe this is your first wikipedia article? Getting started can be tough and we all make lots of mistakes at this stage, so don't be depressed if this review sounds pretty negative. I am trying to help, even if I sound critical.
 * One problem with the article, and the reason that it reads like promotional literature, is that a main source is the company's own website. Half of your citations are to this site. Your text needs to be based on more neutral sources – magazine articles about the company, news reports, etc. You have used these, but not sufficiently to overcome the decidedly non-neutral feel. The emphasis needs to move away from what the company says about itself, and towards what others say about it.
 * The structure of the article is not adequate at present. Sections could be added as follows:-
 * Lead, summarising the general content of the article
 * History, dealing with the foundation of the company and its development
 * Profile of the company as it is today; summary of current activities
 * Future prospects

You don't have structure the article this way exactly, but it may help you to develop the article in an orderly way.
 * Prose issues
 * Bullet points should be avoided except in the case of simple lists.
 * The general style should be summary. Some of the information, particularly in the "Significant projects" section, is overdetailed for a general encyclopedia article. Example: "This project also included the installation of five (5) access shafts/manholes structures and the installation of tangential inlet drop structure and associated Deaeration chamber and Appurtenances."
 * The prose needs to flow more easily. At present there are too many short sentences and paragraphs
 * References
 * Online sources should be properly formatted, minimally with title, publisher and most recent access date.
 * Citations should not be placed against section headings
 * If the H.R. Gray website is a source it should not be listed with External links
 * Minor points
 * Wikipedia style limits the use of capitals in section headings to the first letter (except for proper names). Thus "Industries served", "Significant projects" etc
 * The purpose of the "Associations" section is unclear. If these are associations to which the company belongs, this should be stated.

I hope these comments will help you to rethink the article and to pull it into better shape. Brianboulton (talk) 00:18, 6 May 2010 (UTC)