Wikipedia

Wikipedia:Peer review/Infiniti G20/archive1

< Wikipedia:Peer review | Infiniti G20

Infiniti G20

edit

I would like a bit of general cleanup as well as a review to help the Infiniti G20 entry to be considered a Good Article. Thanks. Zolielo 21:11, 24 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

  • The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and may or may not be accurate for the article in question (due to possible javascript errors/uniqueness of articles).
  • 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.
Need help, as I do not want to take away from others by over editing. Zoli Elo 19:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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.
Done Zoli Elo 19:15, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • See if possible if there is a free use image that can go on the top right corner of this article.
Done already, I believe this was a script error or bug.
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, there should be a non-breaking space - &nbsp; 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&nbsp;mm.
Done Zoli Elo 19:27, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:MOSNUM, please spell out source units of measurements in text; for example, "the Moon is 380,000 kilometres (240,000 mi) from Earth.
Needs work; non-SI units with SI units. Zoli Elo 19:37, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • Per WP:MOS#Headings, 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==.
Done Zoli Elo 19:43, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I do not feel that this is best is there an altnerate format? Zoli Elo 19:47, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • 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 <ref>THE FOOTNOTE</ref>. At the bottom of the article, in a section named “References” or “Footnotes”, add <div class="references-small"><references/></div>.
    • To assist you with this, add {{subst:js|User:AndyZ/monobook.js/footnotehelper.js}} to your monobook.js file (mine is located at User:AndyZ/monobook.js) and then bypass your browser's cache by pressing: Mozilla/Safari/Konqueror: hold down Shift while clicking Reload (or press Ctrl-Shift-R), Internet Explorer: press Ctrl-F5, Opera: press F5. In editing mode, click on the "Footnote creater" tab that appears.
  • The article will need references. See WP:CITE and WP:V for more information.
Much of the information is homebrew in nature and will be dificult to ref. Zoli Elo 19:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Such copy editing is beyond me, bit of help. Zoli Elo 19:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • You may wish to browse through User:AndyZ/Suggestions (and the javascript checklist; see the last paragraph in the lead) for further ideas.
Done, neat. Zoli Elo 19:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
No thank you. Zoli Elo 19:52, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]


It's great to have somebody really involved and interest in the vehicle to develop an article like that, I also appreciate your reaching out for outside opinion! OK, so here I go:

  1. I have trimmed down the summary section - it was far too long and contained a hodgepodge of info better dealt with within dedicated sections of the article. Still, I don't think the optional packages belong there, but perhaps you know better where to put them.
  • Thanks, I think that I was too close to the article and did not want to break down the intro - you did a great job. I also moved the optional packages to a new section, specs and trim, which I will be adding to later. (Hopefully someone else will add too.) Zoli Elo 21:54, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Cut the spec and trim, it just does not fit currently as a section. Zoli Elo 22:13, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. I am afraid the style of writing in this article is not to the best of WP's standards. There is a lot of info stuffed into the article within brackets and enormously elongated sentences, while in some other cases wording is quite ambigious and not easily understandable for a person not familiar with the topic (remember that most WP users are not that familiar with automotive matters as such in general)
  2. There is quite a lot of technical stuff without proper explanations or not wikilinked. For example "MY94 also saw the AC converted from R12 to R134a, a change to OBD-II" - I am really into cars, but I don't really know what the latter part of the sentence is about, and again remember that many Wikipedia users are pretty much laymen on the subjects they look into (which is why they look into them)
  1. Watch out for weasel words and similar indefinitive terms, like when you say "Very often members of this community partake in a group buy". If you could provide some data like "76% of G20 tuners surveyed by Whatever Entity say they partake in group buys" or something, it would be OK. Otherwise, I'd leave such statements out completely.
Corrected that Zoli Elo 02:13, 26 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. The Paint Codes do not really belong in an encyclopedia article at all. Sure this might be useful info, but if somebody wanted to delve that deep into G20s technicalities, they've got the external links.
  • People from the external link send people to the wiki entry just for that. I do not like it there but do feel that it is useful information that others might want included. Zoli Elo 22:33, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  1. Sales numbers could be presented in a neater way as a table.
  1. "Used car trouble spots" would better belong in a consumer magazine, especially that they are unsourced. I'd do away with this section.
  1. SOURCES are what WP is about, whether you like it or not. EVERY article should contain appropriate references to reliable sources, otherwise it is not worth much, as there is not assurance whether it's right or not. References also help distinguish between some musings put on Wikipedia by people who have no better things to do and (f)actual information.
    I understand you find it hard to think of references for this article, but this might not be that hard actually. First of all, all manufacturer material, websites (try the Wayback Machine to gain access historic web material), publicity stuff etc. are superb references for technical and marketing information. Car magazines and websites can also come in handy. There are sometimes even books devoted to certain models or brands, in case you don't know of any, check with the fan community. See also Wikipedia:Citing sources.
  1. In general, look at Good and Featured Articles on cars to find out how they are stuctured, what kind of info they include and how it is presented. You can find them in the "Transportation" sections.

I also have some more detailed comments, but I guess that's a whole lot already. I'd be glad to discuss them with you later to give you more food for thought, after you further improve the article, which I see you are constantly working on. Have fun and keep on the good work!

Thanks for the help, Bravada. Those are great comments which I will try to work on point for point to bring this article to GA level. A few topics of contention that you have brought up, I also have. However, other wiki users or random people from G20.net the main online forum for this car adore sections such as color codes and used car trouble. I think that this is the case for it is a resource to send new and potential G20 owners - to get them up to speed. I have actually made additional wiki entries (mainly stubs) to try to counter some of the jargon, but I can see what you mean. Zoli Elo 22:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Yikes my edits to reply are messing up your #s. Zoli Elo 22:34, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I use #s rather than *s to ease answering to my comments, but I guess it was counterproductive in this case ;) Anyway, concerning paint codes and "Used Car Trouble Spots", if you will nominate this article for GA and FA, you will be told to get rid of that over and over again. I am suprised the themed sites don't list that information, but if so, they should. WP is no place for that, and certainly not for EVERYTHING on a topic. Time for some people to get as serious about their sites as you are about your article, I guess.
Creating entries for topics you reference to in the article is the way to go, absolutely! This is one of the primary ways the WP is expanded! Bravada, talk - 22:46, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
The one that suprised me the most and worked out the best was Underdrive pulleys. I will work on the other problems you have noted. Thanks Zoli Elo 23:12, 25 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
  • It can be improved by reducing links to solitary years. A monobook tool allows this to be done with one click on a 'dates' tab in edit mode. You can then accept or reject the changes offered and/or do more editing before pressing 'Save'. Simply copy the entire contents of User:Bobblewik/monobook.js to your own monobook. Then follow the instructions in your monobook to clear the cache (i.e. press Ctrl-Shift-R in Firefox, or Ctrl-F5 in IE) before it will work. Hope that helps. bobblewik 19:22, 28 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Wikipedia:Peer_review/Infiniti_G20/archive1&oldid=1248860865"