| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article -D.P. Thomson - for peer review because…
This is my first article, moved live after comment from a Teahouse host, who suggested that ...
a) ... the text might not sound wholly objective in places So I've tried to reword but comments would be welcome.
b) ... that citing essentially self-published works by the subject of the article might be questionable. I've tried to substantiate most statements from third-party published works, though it seems to me that, when saying that so-and-so wrote on x-y-and-z topics, to reference those book/pamphlets (and which copyright library has them) offers not opinion but verifiable fact - but then I'm new to this ...
c) I don’t think I've formatted the 'Categories' section correctly. I see that unlike the others, which tend to work by surnames, this article comes under ‘D’ - D.P. Thomson - and not ‘T’.
d) There may be other formatting issues I've missed.
e) I'm not wholly sure about the content I've gone for: especially the 'theology' and 'significance' paragraphs which are intended to address 'notability' and why DPT was thought 'a leader ...' as his denomination's General Assembly said. However if a more factual approach would be better, a chronological list of (major) campaigns and/or a list of his 100-ish publications in the National Library of Scotland could be provided.
Reviews welcome...
Thanks, Ian Badenoch (talk) 19:36, 29 August 2014 (UTC)