Wikipedia:Peer review/Knots Landing/archive2

Knots Landing
I submitted a previous peer review request for this article where I was advised to add more paragraph breaks. Then I went FAC and they said it wasn't wikified so I took care of that. What else, in your valued opinion, needs to be done, my fellow Wikipedians? Juppiter 03:15, 15 March 2006 (UTC)

Let's see... At first sight, all of these definitely needs solving before the article has a chance for FAC status. Circeus 17:30, 15 March 2006 (UTC)
 * No discussion of critical reception, TV ratings, or potential stylistic evolution through the series.
 * For something that went through 14 seasons, I think most main characters can go for articles of their owns. After all, many single-season Anime characters have articles.
 * More use of Summary style (for example, by splitting off individual seasons and summarizing the entire plot to a single section)
 * Sources are badly organized, and would be better put as footnotes.
 * Images at the end of a previous section is poor layout.
 * The "who lived where" section sounds like cruft, at least cut off the subsections (a table would probably fit the bill well)


 * To help get to featured status:
 * convert those external links in the body (see "Behind the scenes" section) into footnotes with the ext. link at the bottom of the page,
 * format the "Sources" according to Citing sources/example style,
 * Condense the season summaries (fourteen is a lot to wade through) using more concise and factual language,
 * merge the "Trivia" section into the article (trivia sections are often objected to as not being brilliant prose and that the section is redundant - either the info is trivial and should not be included or it is not trivial and should be discussed in the article),
 * for example "Gary went to get charcoal for the fire, when another car pulled up. To his surprise, Abby got out of it! She informed Mack, Karen, Gary, and Valene that she’d bought Claudia’s house"
 * do not use contractions in article writing
 * go for more of a synopsis rather than a story-like description.
 * ---maclean 25 09:21, 19 March 2006 (UTC)