Wikipedia:Peer review/Malaysia/archive1

Malaysia
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because… I want to nominate it for Good Article status and would like feedback/suggestions on how to get the article up to GA standard.

Thanks, Bejinhan  Talk   06:01, 21 June 2010 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Thanks for working on this article - good to see work being done an such an imprtant topic. I think the article needs some work before it will be ready to pass GAN, so here are some suggestions for improvement.
 * Biggest problem I see with the article as it currently stands is a lack of references. For example the Natural resources section has six paragraphs, only one of which has any references that I could see. Or the Melaka section has five paragreaphs, only one of which has refs. Many places need more refs.


 * Some fact (citation needed) tags are present and need to be addressed too
 * 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.
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article and needs to be expanded per WP:LEAD. 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
 * What do you mean by that?
 * Sorry to be unclear. Look at the Table of Contents - if somethings is a header, it is in the TOC. But there is no mention in the lead of Melaka or spaceflight (just to name two examples) that I can see. It does not have to be a whole sentence, it can be just a phrase or a word, but if it is important enough to have its own section (and header), it should be mentioned in the lead someway. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 12:15, 7 July 2010 (UTC)


 * Per WP:MOS, text should not be sandwiched between images, but this is done in several places in the article.
 * ✅ I found 1 image that has text sandwiched in between. Have corrected that.


 * The article has a fair number of short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that need to be either combined with others or perhaps expanded to imrove the flow of the article
 * Per WP:See also, the See also section is for links not otherwise included in the article


 * The dab finder in the Toolbox here finds one disambiguation link that should be fixed

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; 02:09, 30 June 2010 (UTC)
 * Seems like it is pretty comprehensive to me, and the language is decent.
 * The lead should be no more than four paragraphs per WP:LEAD - looksl ike it icurrently five.


 * Watch out for short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that break up the flow of the article. If possible, combine these with others or perhaps expand them. Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 13:06, 6 July 2010 (UTC)