Wikipedia:Peer review/Stages of growth model/archive1

Stages of growth model

 * 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 July 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 July 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because our group is expending this article as a school project, and our grades depend on the achieving a “good article” status. Any help is welcomed and appreciated. -- Thanks, Group I —Preceding unsigned comment added by Vucko84 (talk • contribs)


 * Hello. I'm glad to hear you're working on Wikipedia for a school project. I did the same thing myself a couple of times. For GA|Good article status, you're going to have to first expand this article quite a bit: I did some significant restructuring to suggest a large-scale format of the article. You might use the sections I defined to help guide your efforts for expansion. For instance, you should definitely have a lot of information on how Nolan came up with this model; this information can go in the section that I called "Development". Also you might take your sentence "However, many agree that this does not take away from his innovative look into the realm of computing development." (which I put under the heading "Legacy") as a point from which to start discussing how  the model was seen as innovative.
 * You have made a decent start discussing criticism of Nolan's model, but you're going to have to use more than 2 secondary sources for this matter. The reader needs to know not only what King and Kraemer think, but lots of other people. Look at some current GAs and see how many secondary and tertiary sources are cited. Aim for that!
 * Also, in the lede, try to introduce the topic better. I, the reader, should have an idea of what this thing is after reading only the first sentence. I tried to do this for you, but I probably failed, because I don't know much about the subject... Definitely read WP:LEDE.
 * Mention other growth models, such as Rostovian take-off model. Compare (minding WP:NPOV).
 * Try and be consistent with your formatting and capitalization. Try, where you can, to follow the Manual of Style. This isn't as important as adding more information; but it's necessary to pass GAC.
 * If you need any further help or have any questions, message me on my talk page, or respond below. -- Rmrfstar (talk) 12:17, 27 July 2008 (UTC)

Comments from Lazulilasher Hey there. As noted above, good job overall. The article does a decent job of introducing the topic, however more information will be required to pass GA.
 * The lead. This was mentioned above, and I agree. The lead section should be expanded to provide a cursory overview of the subject and hit on the major points contained within the article. As well, the lead should be written in a style that engages the reader and encourages him/her to continue reading the rest of the article. For an article of this size, a two paragraph lead would be good.
 * Style. The style of the article reminds me of a text book. Try and link the ideas together. Also, WP tends to frown on the use of long lists. Instead, attempt to integrate the lists into the main text.
 * Application. This was my main question whilst reading the article -- in what way does the "stages of growth model" apply within a broader context? What were the effects and applications of this model?
 * MOS Most of the manual of style issues were raised above, however I would also urge you to take a look at the MOS (I have been active on Wikipedia for a long time and still rely on the MOS), as it will help bring your article within standards.

Ok, I hope this helps get you to GA. Best of luck with your schooling and I hope you stick around Wikipedia even after you complete your course.

Feel free to approach me with any concerns on my talk page. Regards, Lazulilasher (talk) 17:43, 27 July 2008 (UTC)