Wikipedia:WikiProject Military history/Peer review/Webley Revolver

Webley Revolver
I've been expanding this article quite a bit over the last few weeks, and whilst I think it's well on the way to being a FAC, I'd like to get some feedback and suggestions on it (I'll be adding some footnotes over the next few days, as time permits!) --Commander Zulu 13:56, 27 July 2006 (UTC)


 * I've taken all the suggestions on board (including the addition of citations), as well as added some new material and generally improved the article, so I'd again like to ask for feedback and re-assessment of the article. --Commander Zulu 11:23, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Suggestions have been noted and implemented... can I get some more thoughts? I'm pretty happy with it now, but there may still be some things I'm missing. --Commander Zulu 07:08, 31 July 2006 (UTC)

I don't suppose anyone's had a chance to duck by and give the article another look-over, have they? It would be greatly appreciated... --Commander Zulu 02:31, 2 August 2006 (UTC)

Grafikm
First and foremost, here goes the results of the automated PR script:

The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question. {{#if:{{{1|}}}|*The article has a few or too many inline external links, which hamper the readability of the article. Please convert them to footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA.|*This article needs footnotes, preferably in the cite.php format recommended by WP:WIAFA. Simply, enclose inline citations, with WP:CITE or WP:CITE/ES information, with. At the bottom of the article, in a section named "References" or "Footnotes", add {{tlx|reflist}}
 * The lead of this article may be too long, or may contain too many paragraphs. Please follow guidelines at WP:LEAD; be aware that the lead should adequately summarize the article.
 * The lead is for summarizing the rest of the article, and should not introduce new topics not discussed in the rest of the article, as per WP:LEAD. Please ensure that the lead adequately summarizes the article.
 * Per WP:CONTEXT and WP:MOSDATE, months and days of the week generally should not be linked. Years, decades, and centuries can be linked if they provide context for the article.
 * Per WP:WIAFA, Images should have concise captions.
 * Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space -  between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 18mm, use 18 mm, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 18&amp;nbsp;mm.
 * When writing standard abbreviations, the abbreviations should not have a 's' to demark plurality (change kms to km and lbs to lb).
 * Per WP:MOS, headings generally do not start with the word "The". For example,  ==The Biography==  would be changed to  ==Biography== .
 * Per WP:MOS, headings generally should not repeat the title of the article. For example, if the article was Ferdinand Magellan, instead of using the heading  ==Magellan's journey== , use  ==Journey== .
 * Watch for redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's redundancy exercises.)
 * While additive terms like "also", "in addition", "additionally", "moreover", and "furthermore" may sometimes be useful, overusing them when they aren't necessary can instead detract from the brilliancy of the article. This article has 9 additive terms, a bit too much.

Now, my own complement:
 * Two weapon infoboxes is kinda strange to see in an article. Maybe they could be merged.
 * Inline citations are a must.
 * The list should be converted into prose
 * There are too much one-sentence paragraphs, they should be merged.

Overall, it is a great start but the article still has a long journey awaiting him... :)

Grafikm (AutoGRAF)  21:18, 27 July 2006 (UTC)

{{reflist}}

Kirill Lokshin
I'll second (third?) the remark that inline citations are absolutely critical. A few more suggestions:
 * I don't think there's anything particularly problematic about multiple infoboxes, provided they don't overwhelm the text.
 * On that note, the Boer War and WWI sections are really small, and should be expanded if they're to remain as distinct sections.
 * The mess of templates at the bottom is rather unpleasant from an aesthetic standpoint. We should probably work on getting some sort of standard layout for these so the sizes don't jump so much; but that's probably a broader issue rather than one tied specifically to this article. Kirill Lokshin 01:41, 28 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Comments after changes:
 * The "Military service .455 Webley revolver marks and models" section is just a list.
 * The "References" section should be bulleted.
 * The two left-hand images in the "The Webley Mk IV .38/200 Service Revolver" section are too close together, and will cause problems on higher-resolution monitors.
 * The "Webley Revolvers in Popular Culture" section is full of weasel-wording (e.g. "perhaps most famous") and uncited opinion (e.g. "Webley Mk IV 'looks right' for the period in which the film is set").
 * Overall, though, this is much improved. Kirill Lokshin 14:20, 30 July 2006 (UTC)


 * Looks good now; it's probably ready to be sent to FAC. Kirill Lokshin 02:34, 2 August 2006 (UTC)