Wikipedia:Peer review/James Whitcomb Riley/archive1

James Whitcomb Riley
This peer review discussion has been closed.

I was hoping to get some constructive criticism on this article from another set of eyes.

Thanks, &mdash;Charles Edward (Talk 17:46, 7 April 2011 (UTC)

Jezhotwells (talk) 18:13, 28 April 2011 (UTC)
 * Prose:
 * His children's poems where compiled into a book. "where"? I think you mean "were"
 *  Riley achieved a level of fame during his own lifetime that has remained unmatched by other American poets during their own lifetimes. This is a WP:WEASEL pharse id unattributred.
 * He was honored with annual Riley Day celebrations in parts of the United States and was regularly called on to perform readings at national civic events. Which parts?
 * Although popular in his day, modern critics rate Riley as a minor poet... Which "modern critics"?
 * Riley remained living in his parents' home until he was twenty-one. Simpler to say "lived in his parent's home"
 * His childhood introduced him to many people who later influenced his poetry. No - something like "He was introduced in his childhood to many people who later influenced his poetry." But you need to say who those people were.
 * She was very superstitious, a belief she passed on to Riley.  REphrase.
 * This is not well written and needs copy-editing.
 * Good suggestions are made at User:Tony1/How to improve your writing and the linked articles. I would suggest that you read through this thoroughly, practice the suggested exercises and look for other experienced editors in the fields that you work in regularly who may be able to offer pointers.  Use plain English also has good advice.  Writing "reasonably good prose" is a skill that takes time to develop and considerable effort. Reading George Orwell's 1946 essay Politics and the English Language is also highly recommended.  Although written over fifty years ago, the points raised in this essay are still very true today.
 * For some starting points, you may wish to run the automated tips peer reviewer in the box at the top right of this page. Treat the results with caution, but it usually throws up some valid points. Hope this helps. It may seem like a lot of stuff, but developing writing skills does take some time. There are really no short-cuts.
 * Well referenced, images OK. Potentially this could become a good article, but the prose is below par. Jezhotwells (talk) 20:58, 20 April 2011 (UTC)