| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…
- I've never asked for a PR before and need the experience of implementing suggestions rather than my own plan.
- It is labeled as Start class and that seems low to me. But I really can't tell what to reassess it as.
- I did not write this page but I see so much potential in it that I want to make it as good as possible.
Seeking suggestions and comments of all types. Thanks, Awg1010 (talk) 23:58, 21 May 2011 (UTC)
Finetooth comments: This is an interesting undertaking, and I hope my comments are helpful.
- The article needs a more clear focus. It's partly an extended definition of the term America's Backyard, but it deals mainly with Latin America. One problem with this is that at least one other Wikipedia article deals specifically with U.S. – Latin American relations. Would it make sense to convert this article to an extended definition and to merge most of the Latin American material with Latin America – United States relations? That would make this a much shorter article but one with a clear focus. (The other article needs a lot of work and could use your help.)
- Many claims in the existing article are not supported by inline citations to reliable sources per WP:RS and thus fail to meet WP:V. For example, the claim that Latin America is the "most unequal" area in the world is extraordinary. It needs an inline citation to a reliable source. It would be good to support the claim with an unbiased statistical study, if possible.
- "These aggressive strides – to develop and maintain beneficial relations and substantial control – implemented by the U.S. on their backyard neighbors are seemingly endless." - This is another example of a claim that needs a reliable source. Who says so? Judgments like this can't come from Wikipedia. To whom do they seem endless?
- "The course of history leads to the overall inquiry of whether the US should be perceived as a good neighbor or a big bad wolf." - Who says so?
- Even if you can support claims such as the two I mention above, you will need to include counterclaims and sources for areas of disagreement. Who says the United States is a good neighbor? Who says it is a big bad wolf? Who says it is something else?
- My rule of thumb in meeting WP:V is to include inline citations for every set of statistics, every claim that is apt to be questioned or is unusual, every direct quote, and every paragraph.
- I see some Manual of Style (MoS) problems as well as the larger issues mentioned above. For example, Wikipedia articles should avoid repeating the main words of the article title in the heads and subheads. Thus "Latin America as America's backyard" would be better if truncated to "Latin America". Also, "The Monroe Doctrine" would be better as the more telegraphic "Monroe Doctrine", per WP:MOS.
- "America's Backyard" appears as "America's backyard" in some places in the article. Decide which is correct and stick with it throughout.
- Newspaper names take italics.
- Common words like "neighborhood" and "concept" do not need to be linked.
- Has Canada ever been considered by anyone to be "America's backyard"? How about the eastern Pacific, Bikini Atoll, for example? Would the definition include U.S. bases in other countries? An extended definition might (or might not) include these places.
- Please make sure that the existing text includes no copyright violations, plagiarism, or close paraphrasing. For more information on this please see Wikipedia:Wikipedia_Signpost/2009-04-13/Dispatches. (This is a general warning given in view of previous problems that have risen over copyvios.)
I hope these suggestions prove helpful. If so, please consider commenting on any other article at WP:PR. I don't usually watch the PR archives or make follow-up comments. If my suggestions are unclear, please ping me on my talk page. Finetooth (talk) 18:29, 26 May 2011 (UTC)