Wikipedia:Peer review/Olaf the Peacock/archive1

Olaf the Peacock

 * 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 September 2008.
 * 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 September 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because it recently made GA status and I am looking for suggestions to advance it to FA and A-class status.

Thanks, Briangotts (Talk) (Contrib) 01:56, 25 September 2008 (UTC)

This is an interesting article and could become more interesting with a few modifications. Here are suggestions for improvement:


 * Something like 25 of the 32 citations are to the Magnusson translation of the Laxdaela Saga. I imagine the critical studies of the saga might be a thin pile, but if you can find some and work them in, it might greatly improve the article. For example, it would be interesting to know how reliable as history the Laxdaela Saga is thought to be and whether any controversies have ever arisen about its content or interpretation. You refer to Olaf as a "character" in the saga, and this suggests fiction rather than non-fiction. It's not clear to what extent Olaf is real and to what extent he is invented. If critics have discussed this question, it would be good to include that information.


 * A section with background material would be most helpful to a general reader. This might include basic information about Iceland's relationship with Norway at the time and its relationship with Ireland. A bit of Iceland history would be helpful. Inhabited by whom? For how long? What attracted them? What threatened them? How many people lived there? What did they do for a living? A brief explanation of concepts like the Althing might go into this section. Ditto for blood-feud and family honor. Help the reader get his/her bearings a bit, in other words. Don't assume that the reader knows anything about 10th-century Iceland or will always click on the wikilinks to find out.


 * The lead should be a summary or abstract of the main text. The existing lead consists of a single paragraph that introduces the subject but doesn't summarize the main text. A good rule of thumb is to include at least a mention of the content of each of the main text sections and not to include material in the lead that is not mentioned elsewhere. Please see WP:LEAD.
 * I'd recommend a copyedit. I don't see a lot of big problems, but I see quite a few small ones involving punctuation. For example, in constructions such as "his mother Melkorka" it's important to separate two names for the same thing with a comma; i.e., "his mother, Melkorka". Otherwise, the phrase implies that he has at least one other mother. Another example of the same problem is "Olaf's alleged grandfather Myrkjartan", which should be "Olaf's alleged grandfather, Myrkjartan..." unless he has more than one alleged grandfather.


 * The image of Egil Skallagrimsson would work better if placed on the right so that Egil's eyes look into the page instead of out. The reader's eyes will follow Egil's eyes.


 * It's not immediately clear from the image caption of Jarl Haakon Sigurdsson that he is the same person referred to in the text as Haakon Jarl. You could use the same name in both places or use both names serially in the main text: Haakon Jarl (Jarl Haakon Sigurdsson) if you think that's better.

If you find these comments helpful, please consider reviewing another article, especially one from the backlog. That's where I found this one. Finetooth (talk) 00:59, 29 September 2008 (UTC)

Comments from
 * You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC. The sourcing looks good.
 * Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 13:51, 7 October 2008 (UTC)