| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to receive a broader perspective on how this article may be improved before I submit for a GA review. Over all getting this article GA status is the ultimate goal but I would like to see if any problems will prevent it from doing so.
Thanks, Serialjoepsycho (talk) 22:38, 19 March 2011 (UTC)
Brianboulton comments:
- The article is not ready for a full peer review which, as the WP:PR page makes clear, is "intended for high-quality articles that have already undergone extensive work." The nominator has come to the article fairly recently, and has begun the task of improving it, but a great deal still needs to be done before a peer review is justified. Here are the main problem areas:-
- Images: Sizing, location within article, captions length, licencing. The fair use rationale for the Carter image is inadequate, and seems to imagine that Jimmy Carter is dead. I don't think so. I can see no justification for the free use of this copyrighted image.
- Article structure: at present the article's structure is very rudimentary. Compare this with the detailed structures of well-developed "peoples" articles such as Tamil people, Azerbaijani people and Taiwanese aborigines. These are the kinds of structures that need to be developed if the article is to aspire to GA or FA status.
- Sources: very few sources appear to have been used, yet there are numerous texts listed under "Further reading". A range of high-quality sources should be used to construct the article, incorporating the best recent scholarship.
- Lead does not conform to the requirements of WP:LEAD, in that it is a short introductory statement and not a summary of the main text of the article.
- Referencing: as the cleanup banner indicates, referencing at present is rudimentary. The general rules-of-thumb to be followed are these: (a) every significant fact, and every direct quotation, needs to be cited, (b) every paragraph should have at least one citation, and (c) every paragraph should end with a citation.
- The "See also" section is for links to other WP articles. Links to portals, navboxes etc should be at the end of the article.
- MOS issues, e.g. reference formats - see Wikipedia:Citing sources/example style.
I hope that you have the patience and interest to continue to build up this article, since the subject is interesting and would, when developed, make a fine addition to the encyclopedia. As I am not able to watch individual peer reviews, please use my talkpage if you have any questions arising from this review. Brianboulton (talk) 16:35, 2 April 2011 (UTC)