Wikipedia:Peer review/Quark/archive1

"This article was externally reviewed on 14 December 2005 by Nature. No significant errors or major omissions were found." So content is pretty good. What about style? Do you think it's good enough for FAC?--Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus ^Talk 01:45, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]

1> It needs to be dumbed down by explaining what those linked terms mean: Quarks are one of the two basic constituents of matter in the Standard Model of particle physics. Greek and Latin to non-science students. 2. Photographs/diagrams if possible 3. Problems with uneven sections. Reduce unnecessary heading or balance sections. =Nichalp «Talk»= 10:08, 24 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]
This article is dying for some inline citations. -- Rune Welsh | ταλκ | Esperanza 00:41, 25 December 2005 (UTC)[reply]