Wikipedia:Peer review/Hermann Detzner/archive1

Hermann Detzner

 * 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 June 2009.
 * 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 June 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like feedback on how to improve it. I'd like to bring up to a B rating or GA status.

Thanks, Auntieruth55 (talk) 21:55, 26 June 2009 (UTC)

Comments by Firestorm


 * The lede needs to be redone to conform to WP:LEDE. In particular, it should be two or three paragraphs for an article of its size. The information there is fine, but you can break it up a bit so it looks nicer. The language can also be changed to make it more consice and give the same information in a more efficient way. In particular, pay close attention to the first sentence and how it should be structured.
 * Grammar could be improved. Most of it is fine, but it has some awkward phrases that could be tightened up. Things like "In the interim between these trips" could be trimmed to "Between these trips."
 * In the section entitled "Adventures in New Guinea", you have a For more information on this topic and a see also. In general, you only want to have one of these in a section. I would suggest keeping the World War 1 one and turning the expeditionary force link into a wikilink somewhere in the article.
 * The article says that he was "well into the interior and refused to surrender." Yet, later on you say that he received news of the war's end and then offered his surrender. Could you clarify this point?
 * Scandal is a word you should probably avoid. Please see WP:WTA for more information on which words you should stay away from.
 * Criticism sections, while not against policy, are frowned upon. You could probably keep most of the information in the article, but just give it a better name. Something along the lines of "Falsification controversy" or another title.
 * For clarity, I would suggest calling the section with your reflist References, and the section with the book names Bibliography. In addition, your External Links section should be reformatted. The current convention is to have the link with a brief (only a few words) description following it.
 * I think the non-free use rationale for File:Postcard from New Guinea.jpg is probably not strong enough. It doesn't add anything to the article that words can't, except a bit of colour. I'm not an expert on images, but chances are it'll have to go.

Assessment: Your biggest problem is going to be grammar. As is often the case when articles are translated from another language, the language needs to be tightened up so that it is less awkward. Most of the other concerns are just superficial. It seems to be verifiable, sufficiently broad, neutral, stable, and has images that work for the article. Good luck! Firestorm Talk 01:04, 30 June 2009 (UTC)