Wikipedia:Peer review/Shake 'n' Vac/archive1

Shake 'n' Vac
This peer review discussion has been closed. I've decided to list this article for peer review as it needs a lot of help and support to help it to be ajusted to good article status, plus I do not know much on copyediting, style, so I would like some help on how that can be improved on the article.

Thanks, AndreNatas (talk) 22:04, 23 March 2008 (UTC)

Comments from
Okay, a few basic pointers... That may help. Good luck! The Rambling Man (talk) 08:19, 26 March 2008 (UTC)
 * Image:JennyLoganshakenvac.jpg needs a fair use rationale, you can't just rely on the template.
 * Caption under the screengrab is a sentence fragment so no full stop needed.
 * You link to air freshener, which I'm not convinced is appropriate...
 * " hoovering" - this is a tradename (Hoover) so stick with vacuum cleaning.
 * "The product becoming well known" became well known....
 * In the infobox you have Shake 'n' vac (small v) - it needs to be consistent with the other mentions of Vac.
 * " 1980's" - 1980s (no apostrophe).
 * "The product, still available as of today" - this will age quickly, bound it to As of March 2008...
 * The two paragraphs of the lead are basically saying the same thing - they need to be copyedited really...
 * "TV advert" - television advertisement.
 * Avoid "ad" - use advertisement.
 * Explain ITV before using the acronym.
 * 1950's - 1950s
 * "History of the product and advert" section heading, split this into two sections called "Product history" and "Advertisment history" and expand them both.
 * "hoovering it up" as above - avoid the tradename.
 * Second half of controversy has no citation.

Comments from
That's all I have for now. Let me know if you want a re-review or any clarification. -- ṃ• α• Ł• ṭ• ʰ• Ə• Щ•  @ 16:52, 29 March, 2008
 * I found this listing at WikiProject Television, and therefore assume it is more about the commercial than the product, therefore a page move to Shake n' Vac (commercial) would be appropriate, with a rework of the lead.
 * Condense the two paragraphs to one, they're basically the same.
 * Have one paragraph discuss the commercial, and one discuss the product
 * Replace "hoovering" with "vacuum cleaning"
 * Expand TV to television on first usage
 * Expand "ad" to "advertisment", or at worst "advert"
 * Some of the info in the infobox is incorrect. The agency should be the people who create the ad, not the people who manufacture the product. "1950's rock and roll style" shouldnt be under "Music by" either
 * "johnson" in Ref 1 needs capitalising
 * IMDB isn't considered a reliable source
 * I'm not sure of the reliability of DVDfever either, even though I have much respect for Dom
 * Blogs are not considered reliable sources
 * Use cite episode instead of referencing IMDB for This Morning
 * the reference for Choiceful.com needs finishing, using works= or publisher= fields
 * Remove the linking of stand-alone years, per WP:MOSNUM
 * The "History of the product and advert" is only a history of the advert, include some history of the product.. why was it introduced to the market? Were there any competitor products at the time?
 * I don't think what's under "Controversy" is a controversy, rather disagreements over the release of the commercial. A controversy would be if the powder left burn marks in the carpet, for example
 * Is there a wikilink for ITV's 1979 strike action?
 * Citation needed for "The early claim that the advert was originally broadcast in 1979 was disputed."
 * Don't start a sentence with "However"
 * Remove According to the book Box of Delights (ISBN 0333518128)," and turn the book into a reference at the end of the sentence.