Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Detroit Red Wings draft picks/archive2

List of Detroit Red Wings draft picks
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to nominate it for Featured List status. Please review the article and provide input as to how it can become good enough to be a Featured List. I would like to believe the article is complete and ready for FL but I am sure others will find issues to address.
 * Previous peer review

Thank you, Rejectwater (talk) 19:21, 11 May 2013 (UTC)

Overall, nice work so far. Thank you for your efforts in this quality improvement project, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 06:09, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Comments by Cirt
 * 1) Per WP:LEAD, the lede intro sect is not supposed to introduce its own sourced info, but rather have no citations and be a summary of the rest of the sourced page. Perhaps fix this by adding a Background sect, and moving the cites from the lede intro sect there?
 * 2) The lead has been separated out into a lead and a History section. All sources are in the History section.  Both the lead and History require expansion.  Rejectwater (talk) 11:49, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 3) Done. Perhaps some feedback on the quality of the lead and the History section?  Rejectwater (talk) 15:52, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 4) After having reviewed this further I am not sure it is absolutely necessary to do this.  See, for instance, List of Atlanta Thrashers draft picks.  Also, WP:LEAD does not require that the lead be unsourced: "it should ideally contain no more than four paragraphs and be carefully sourced as appropriate." Rejectwater (talk) 16:57, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 5) There are a total of twenty-one (21) images used on the page. That will presumably require an image review to make sure all the images check out alright.
 * 6) I am not familiar with the process of image review. Rejectwater (talk) 11:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 7) I will go ahead and call the images done as all but one have been deleted by another user due to their getting in the way of the table. Agreed.  Rejectwater (talk) 10:35, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 8) Table. There is a huge table with no inline cites. Not clear to the reader where that information is sourced to? Appears to fail WP:V, at least at present time? Usually with these lists there is a column for "Notes" or "References" with an inline cite to confirm info. All six (6) cites are in the lede intro sect, which is a bit of a problem, both per WP:LEAD and per WP:V for the information in the table.
 * 9) I will address the Lead in responses to comment one, and the References in responses to comment five.  Rejectwater (talk) 11:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 10) Table is done.Rejectwater (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 11) Table is now more done as it has no empty cells.  Rejectwater (talk) 11:12, 19 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 12) Portals. Consider adding portals to the bottom of the page, using Portal bar ?
 * 13) Done. Rejectwater (talk) 11:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 14) References. General. Perhaps if we could see more clearly which references are confirming what info in the table, that would be more helpful for the reader. Maybe adding them as part of the legend at the top, with set initials, and a column denoting which one was used?
 * 15) This has been partially addressed, although still at the bottom.  A new column will need to be added for goaltenders with statistics as each will require an inline citation. Rejectwater (talk) 11:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 16) The format for this is complete. I found that all players with NHL experience will need inline cites to verify the information in the table that goes beyond what is found in the general references such as "Played entire career with Red Wings", etc. Dionne and Yzerman are extra special and have been fully sourced, a few others are sourced, it's just a matter of adding the links for the rest. Rejectwater (talk) 11:00, 16 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 17) Done. Rejectwater (talk) 13:36, 18 May 2013 (UTC)
 * 18) Formatting. I really like the uniformity and standardization of the formatting throughout, including the tabular design.
 * 19) Thank you. Rejectwater (talk) 11:39, 15 May 2013 (UTC)


 * Thank you, Cirt, for your kind words and your input. I will be looking into your suggestions shortly.  Rejectwater (talk) 10:28, 14 May 2013 (UTC)
 * Okay, sounds great, keep us posted here. Good luck with the quality improvement project, &mdash; Cirt (talk) 16:45, 14 May 2013 (UTC)