Wikipedia:Peer review/Lightning/archive1

Lightning
Seems to meet the criteria for a featured article. Just putting it in peer review for due diligence before the FAC list. David Bergan 19:19, 24 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Some of the sections and subsections are very small. Right or wrong, I got several objects about that when I put something up for FAC. -- SCZenz 07:12, 25 October 2005 (UTC)

This needs a few improvements:
 * A longer lead section (at least two healthy paragraphs, briefly covering the contents of the article)
 * One and two sentence paragraphs should be expanded or merged
 * Table of contents is too large&mdash;short sections (only one short paragraph) should be expanded or merged
 * In-line citations are needed (see format at an article I'm working on, gas tungsten arc welding)
 * External links need to be reduced to about 4-6 extremely relevant (and preferably noncommercial) links, and links referenced in the article need to be put under references. --Spangineeres (háblame)  03:14, 26 October 2005 (UTC)


 * Great article, very comprehensive. I have taken the liberty of changing the layout of the article, combining some section, and turning all those third level headings into bullet points. Seabhcán 09:06, 26 October 2005 (UTC)


 * I agree with all the points made by Spangineer. Some other things need tidying up there are lots of unconnected sentences that should be incorporated into paragraphs. The Facts and trivia section is odd, surely the facts should be incorporated with the rest of the factual information and the trivials details included in a section called lightning in popular culture or something similar.--nixie 06:02, 31 October 2005 (UTC)