Wikipedia:Peer review/Vaalputs, Northern Cape/archive1

Vaalputs, Northern Cape

 * 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 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 July 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed. I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to know where to improve. This is an important topic for the South African Nuclear industry. Any comments are welcome.

Thanks,  Lourie Pieterse  09:05, 6 July 2009 (UTC)

Ruhrfisch comments: Peer review is usually reserved for articles that are much more developed - getting ready for WP:GAN or WP:FAC. This is a start class at best, but here are some suggestions for improvement.
 * Since the official name seems to be Vaalputs Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility, I would move the article to that name (ask on my talk page if you do not know how to do this). There should at least be a redirect to the article from that name.
 * SPell out abbreviations on first use, so instead of Vaalputs is the only South African radioactive waste-disposal facility, called the Vaalputs Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility, operated [by] NECSA.[1] it should be something like The Vaalputs Radioactive Waste Disposal Facility is the only South African radioactive waste-disposal facility, and is operated by the South African Nuclear Energy Corporation (NECSA),.[1]
 * Per the WP:MOS, both metric and English units should be used - the convert template is very useful for doing this.
 * Very odd word choice - smothered?? in Vaalputs lies smothered between ... WHy not just Vaalputs lies between ...? Article has several places that need a copyedit
 * Per WP:See also links that are already in the article should not generally be repeted, so I am not sure the link to NECSA needs to be here again. I am also not sure why Koeberg Alert is linked as a see also - I just read that article and it does not seem to mention Vaalputs.
 * The external links look as if they would be better used as refs for expanding the article

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; 15:38, 20 July 2009 (UTC)