Wikipedia:Peer review/Light-emitting diode/archive1

Light-emitting diode

 * 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 February 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 February 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. The article has a lot of information in some areas, almost to the point of overload. While other perspectives are maybe not detailed enough. LEDs are becoming more and more important in every day life. I believe the subject should be covered at least by a good article.

Thanks, Thorseth (talk) 22:00, 4 February 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article and while it is clear it has had a lot of work, much more is needed before it meets WP:WIAGA. Here are some suggestions for improvement. 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). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 04:40, 12 February 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead needs to be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and should be expanded to four paragraphs for the length of article. 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. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Per WP:HEAD the section headers should not repeat the name of the article, so things like "Miniature LEDs" and "Advantages of using LEDs" should just be "Miniature" and "Advantages" (we already know this is about LEDs). The article may need fewer sections / headers too.
 * Article has numerous fact tags and needs many more refs - much of it has no citations. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful.
 * Article has many short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections that should be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
 * Avoid bullet point lists to improve the article flow - convert to prose in most cases.
 * Article overuses bold - see WP:ITALIC
 * See also generally does not link to articles already linked in the article, like LED lamp
 * Avoid sandwiching text between images per WP:MOS
 * Thank you very much, your effort is much appreciated --Thorseth (talk) 21:21, 13 February 2009 (UTC)