Wikipedia:Peer review/The Mercat Shopping Centre/archive1

The Mercat Shopping Centre

 * 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 October 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 October 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because i would like to know what mark it would recieve at this stage.

Thanks, Kilnburn (talk) 12:40, 28 October 2008 (UTC)


 * First off, read the bot suggestions, and follow them through. All refs need to come straight after punctuation, with no spaces. It needs quite a bit of expansion, on all the current secions. More images would be nice. What shops are there? What kind of statistics of shoppers are there? Anything interesting ever happen there? I'm not sure what kind of "mark" you're looking for here, but it needs quite a bit of work to get even to C class. Best wishes, – How do you turn this on (talk) 18:04, 6 November 2008 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: I agree with the above comments - interesting article. So very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. 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). Yours, Ruhrfisch &gt;&lt;&gt; &deg; &deg; 02:47, 8 November 2008 (UTC)
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. 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, butthe owners seem only to be in the lead. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Internet refs like ref 2 need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. cite web and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
 * The lead says the construction was bewteen 1972 and 1981-1983 (which itself makes no sense - between usually implies one beginning date and one ending date), then the article itself says building began in 1971 (not 1972).
 * Provide dates for statements like  A prospal to extend the shopping centre for a third phase is pending. (add "as of 2008" or "as of November 2008") - in a few years it may not be pending (done or abandoned)