Wikipedia:Peer review/Landless Workers' Movement/archive1

Landless Workers' Movement
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because…

The article deals with multiple issues and has grown in a somewhat haphazardly fashion; it must be divided into sections that make reading easier and informations must be throughly redistributed into the relevant sections

Thanks, Cerme (talk) 20:13, 16 April 2011 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for your work on this. This has two cleanup tags, so it could be denied a peer review, but here are the obvious things to be cleaned up I noticed on a quick look at the article.
 * The External Link checker finds 6 or 7 dead links that need to be fixed - see here
 * The disambiguation link checker also finds some problems - see here
 * The lead is not a summary of the whole article - it should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and nothing important should be in the lead only - since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself.
 * My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way but there are several sections that do not seem to be in the lead. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Per WP:CITE references come AFTER punctuation, and are usually at the end of a sentence or phrase
 * Article needs more references, for example there are whole sections without refs (like Organizational structure and 2005 March for Agrarian Reform)
 * My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * There are quite a few direct external links right in the article - these should be converted to inline citations.
 * Make sure the External links follow WP:EL
 * Watch WP:OVERLINKing and WP:NPOV
 * THis could also use a copy edit and the issues in the clean up tags at top need to be addressed and resolved.
 * Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in all peer reviews, in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)

Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). I do not watch peer reviews, so if you have questions or comments, please contact me on my talk page. Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 03:58, 27 April 2011 (UTC)