Wikipedia:Peer review/Mormons/archive1

Mormons

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I have recently added a number of sections to this article. I am mainly looking for ideas here. Is there something left out of the article that deserves a new section, or are there things that need to be cut back? Is the article neutral enough?

Thanks for any and all input, -- Adjwilley (talk) 05:19, 14 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments: I have not carried out a detailed prose check, or copyedited, but have in the main looked at general issues that affect the article:-

I am not entirely clear as to the purpose of this article, given that Mormonism exists, along with several articles dealing with the movement's history and beliefs. What information is given here that is not already in, or could easily be included in, existing articles?
- I think that Mormons vs. Mormonism could be compared to Jews vs. Judaism or Muslim vs. Islam. One article is about the people, their culture, demographics, etc., while the other is about the religion. -- Adjwilley (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A gallery of celebrity Mormons is not really the most appropriate way of heading an encyclopedia article. Joseph Smith and Brigham Young can be justified because of their historical significance, but Marie Osmond? Glenn Beck??! This sort of montage would be more suitable for a popular magazine article.
- I'm not great with templates, but I managed to take out two of the political figures (Huntsman and Beck) and replace them with Jane Manning (an early black convert who lived in Joseph Smith's household and was the first black pioneer to come to Utah) and Dieter Uchtdorf, (a German Aviator and LDS General Authority). Though I'm sure it could be improved more, this increased the number of non-Americans in the montage (from 0 to 1), increases the number of women (from 2 to 3), and increases the number of non-white people (from 0 to 1). -- Adjwilley (talk) 00:23, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
The fact that all your celebs are Americans is indicative of a somewhat US-centric bias within the article. Another aspect of this is that there is scarecly any mention of Europe. Individual European countries may not have large Mormon populations (around 200,000 in te UK I believe) but collectively in Europe the total may well be significant.
- I have added a German to the celebs, but I know this is not enough. I'll try to find ways to improve it further, but I can't think of anything right now. I've read that the spread of Mormonism follows some sort of a contact-diffusion model, so the places closest to the US have the most Mormons. Central America and South America are big, followed by the Pacific Islands. Then you get Western Europe, West Africa, and East Asia (Japan, S. Korea, etc.) If you have ideas of how to work some of these places into the text, I would very much appreciate suggestions. -- Adjwilley (talk) 20:15, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
From my speed-reading of the prose I think you have generally kept a neutral tone. No glaring POV statements leapt out, though this sentence in the lead: "Mormons have developed a unique culture and a strong sense of communality that stems from their doctrine and history" reads too much like editorial opinion and would benefit from the removal of the words "a unique culture and".
- I have removed "a unique culture and" from the Lead. -- Adjwilley (talk) 17:23, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
"See also" links should not be incorporated within the text. Best include them as "Further information" hatnotes at the starts of the relevant sections
- Done. -- Adjwilley (talk) 20:54, 11 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
There are lots of uncited statements in the article, e.g, Beginnings, para 1, Pioneer era, para 4, Culture and practices throughout the section. There are a couple of citation tags in place, but there could be many more.
- I have added many more citations to the article. -- Adjwilley (talk) 00:56, 17 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
I've not looked closely at the text, but contractions in text (aren't, don't) should be avoided.
- I removed all 3 contractions that appeared in the text, as well as an incorrectly formatted date (August 28th -> August 28) -- Adjwilley (talk) 22:28, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]
You should get an image expert to check out the licencing of the images you are using. I am unconvinced by the licence for File:Mormon Pioneer handcart statue.jpg The copyright status of photographs of 3D works of art is a difficult area
I would advise that you list detailed footnotes separarely from short citations. Some citations, e.g. 85, 86, 1 etc are incompletely formatted.
- I fixed the formatting on a large number of citations, adding the Cite web template to all but links to scriptural verses. I'm not sure how to list detailed footnotes separately from short citations though. -- Adjwilley (talk) 22:18, 14 November 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I hope you find these comments useful. If you have anything you wish to raise concerning this review, please feel free to contact my talkpage. Brianboulton (talk) 15:09, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for your thoughtful review. I did find it very helpful, and I appreciate the time you spent on this. I will work over your recommendations one by one, and if you don't mind, ask your opinion again. -- Adjwilley (talk) 18:21, 27 October 2011 (UTC)[reply]