Wikipedia:Peer review/In Your House 1/archive1

In Your House 1
I've listed this article for peer review as it recently failed FA, see here. My main goal is to attempt to get this article up to FA status. Comments appreciated. Cheers,  Dav  nel  03   09:28, 21 December 2007 (UTC)


 * A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 01:12, 22 December 2007 (UTC)

I don't have a lot of time right now, so I'll just give you a couple of suggestions and come back later with some more. That's all for now. I'll be back probably tomorrow. Nikki 311  05:13, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * I went ahead and fixed some small things myself, like expanding the PPV abbreviation to pay-per-view and some minor grammar problems.
 * Thanks! Cheers, Dav  nel  03  Sign It, Junior!  14:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Make sure the citation numbers are in order in the article. Instead of being [25][12][24], they should be in numerical order. This is a problem throughout.
 * Done. Cheers, Dav  nel  03  Sign It, Junior!  14:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Nobody is a bigger advocate of keeping the articles out of universe than me, but if you go too far with the wrestling jargon, you are isolating the non-wrestling readers and putting the article right back in-universe (just in the opposite manner). Sentences like "The selling feud of the pay-per-view was between then-WWF Champion Diesel and Sycho Sid" should read more like "The most prominent feud leading up to the event was the feud between then-WWF Champion Diesel and his storyline rival Sycho Sid." Just look over the article, and if there is a sentence that you think may be confusing to a non-fan, the best bet is to reword it.
 * I'm guessing your just talking about mainly the first feud? You may of noticed that that sounds different to the remainder of the article. Those edits were done by me, but then the language was dramatically changed here by Screwball23 (who then created a rant at WP:PW. Should I revert back to the first paragraph version before that? Cheers, Dav  nel  03  Sign It, Junior!  14:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)
 * This is a small grammatical thing that nobody ever notices but me and a few other grammar nerds, but "however" should never be put at the beginning of a sentence in formal writing. "However, in the interim, the creative team decided to diffuse direct confrontations between the two on-screen..." should read "In the interim, however, the creative team decided to diffuse direct confrontations between the two on-screen...". In the end, it'll read better that way.
 * See above point (quotation again comes from first feud I believe). Cheers, Dav  nel  03  Sign It, Junior!  14:43, 26 December 2007 (UTC)

After looking through the article history, I'd say you should probably revert the first paragraph to its previous version. While I believe Screwball was acting in good faith, he added a lot of POV and weaselly words that really shouldn't be there. Actually, I'll go ahead and do it since it really doesn't take much effort. Nikki 311  00:17, 28 December 2007 (UTC)

I just went through and cleaned up the article. Here are a few things I wasn't sure about: That's all I've got. Hopefully, somebody (with fresh eyes) comes along and makes some suggestions. Nikki 311  01:07, 28 December 2007 (UTC)
 * Sometimes you have move names in italics and sometimes they aren't. I'm not sure which it should be, but it should be uniform throughout. Specifically, the Razor's Edge is written with and without italics.
 * In the Hakushi vs. Hart match description, it says that after the match "he" jumped down and appeared to injure his knee. Is the "he" Bret Hart? I think it should be made clear who it was, and I wasn't 100% sure. That's why I didn't change it myself. Nevermind. It is made clear later in the article, so I changed the wording myself.
 * Sometimes, it is better to combine short sentences to make more complex sentences. It reads as less choppy. I tried to fix this as I went through the article. I'd say a general rule would be to combine any short/simple sentences when there are three or more in a row.