Wikipedia:Peer review/Halo: The Cole Protocol/archive1

Halo: The Cole Protocol

 * 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 August 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 August 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. This article is an unreleased Halo novel that needs to be reviewed for an upcoming Halo Media featured topic. It doesn't have too much content yet, so it should be simple to review, just check for prose, gaps information, and fair use issues. Thanks much! Judgesurreal777 (talk) 17:30, 6 August 2008 (UTC)


 * Comments by Sillyfolkboy
 * I would change the first link of the article to Halo_series#Books instead of plain Halo_series
 * Any source that this is the final novel of the contract?
 * "Set to be written" - has he started working on it or is it just his intention? This seems a bit forward as it is.
 * Any source for the November release date? If so then surely it must be in production now.
 * Should this and other articles really include an external link to "Halopedia"?
 * Similar to New Halo Project - Not much to comment on really, all information seems good and present. Do not expand more on rumours/speculation about the development as information tends to be completely useless/irrelevant a few months later. As more info is announced (official no rumour) add that to the article.
 * Once real reviews are made available I would reduce what is currently in critical reception to the first sentence followed by the citations of the rest of the material.
 * Do not attempt to add this article or New Halo Project to a featured Halo topic until they are brought up to at least GA standard (nigh on impossible until the book is released). Try making Halo (series) a featured article and SPARTAN Project a Good article first.

'If you found this peer review helpful please consider doing one yourself. Choose one from the backlog, where i found this article or take a look at WP:Peer Review.'

Cheers. Sillyfolkboy (talk) 15:13, 12 August 2008 (UTC)
 * Again, thanks for the review, but these articles need to be in the featured topic, and obviously cannot be made GA or FA yet, so they must be peer reviewed. Judgesurreal777 (talk) 19:29, 12 August 2008 (UTC)