Wikipedia:Peer review/Treveri/archive1

Treveri

 * 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 March 2009.
 * 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 March 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like input, criticism, and additions from other editors. I did a fair bit of work on the article about a year ago, and there have been few changes of substance since then. If there are any editors who can make use of German-language sources, I'm sure it would be highly useful. (After peer review, I intend to expand the French article using this article as a starting-point.)

Thanks, Q·L·1968 ☿ 14:10, 6 March 2009 (UTC)


 * Hello! There should only be footnoted references, i.e. all those {p. 2) citations that precede the footnotes should be incorporated into the footnotes.  We should not use both parenthetical citations and footnotes.  Also, when we get down to the Treveri section, a couple of claims are uncited.  I tried some Google Books searches for those claims and while I may not be using the best search strings (I tried such combinations as "German Treveri third or second century BCE", but have not had much luck.  If you have a source for these, it would be immensely helpful here.  Anyway, I hope these suggestion helps.  Best, --A NobodyMy talk 03:02, 10 March 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article, nice illustrations for the most part. I agree with the above comments on mixing reference styles, which is a non-non. 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; 21:03, 13 March 2009 (UTC)
 * The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. The current one sentence lead needs to be expanded to 2 or 3 paragraphs. Please see WP:LEAD
 * Make sure to provide context for the reader - as one example, the lead does not give a time scale and the first indication we get is the mention of Caesar in etymology.
 * The map of tribes in Gaul is pretty hard to read - could the caption describe about there the Treveri were? Perhaps something like "Map of Roman Gaul showing tribes; the Treveri lived in the northeast corner of Celtica, near the territories of Belgica and Germania"
 * There are several short (one or two sentence) paragraphs that should be combined with others or perhaps expanded to improve the flow of the article in most cases.
 * Article needs more references, for example "After the Roman conquest, Latin was used extensively by the Treveri for public and official purposes." or the fact tags. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
 * Internet refs 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
 * Isn't the Latin name for Trier (Augusta Treverorum) and the current French name (Trèves) derived from the name Treveri? Should this be in the Etymology?