Wikipedia:Peer review/Neuro-linguistic programming/archive2

Neuro-linguistic programming
The recommendations from the previous peer review have been implemented. The editors of this article would really like some comments on how to bring closer to Feature Article status. --Comaze 10:56, 25 December 2006 (UTC)

From SG
To be blunt, the editors have a long ways to go to get this article up to GA status, without even thinking of FA. A quick glance through the Table of Contents reveals a rambling, unfocused article. For basics, please see WP:LAYOUT, WP:FN, WP:MOS and WP:MSH to get the basic structure of the article into shape. Next, pls see WP:EL and WP:NOT - external links could use pruning. Also, See also is massively out of control and needs attetion. See also (like External links) should be minimal - important links should be incorporated into the article, and those already in the article should not be listed in See also. The vanity mention of individual researchers and research institutions should be eliminated - it doesn't matter who studied what or said what when those people aren't necessarily notable or relevant to an encyclopedic entry - the conclusions of the studies is what matters, and all of those red-linked names are distracting. Obviously the article has POV and undue weight issues, and won't get by GA or FA in the state it's in - please source all statements, and review WP:WTA and WP:AWW. Journal-published research should include PMIDs, all footnotes on books should include page numbers, and I don't even know what "Most cited books is" - perhaps that intends to be Further reading (see WP:GTL). Sandy (Talk) 20:25, 28 December 2006 (UTC)