Toolbox |
---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because the article has just passed a GA nomination, and I'm looking for flaws within the article prior to a FA candidacy.
Thanks, --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 03:29, 18 August 2012 (UTC)
Comments. Hi, a few comments: - Dank (push to talk) 14:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- "with a significant addition of software features, expanded hardware, and a redesigned physique.": with additional software features, ...
- "In particular,": Don't need that, I think.
- "the design group concentrated on the consumer's desire for comfort and well-being,": Sounds like something a public relations guy would say, so even if it's accurate, axe it.
- "a constant duplication of effort as they had to repeat": There's some duplication and repetition here too!
- "The prototypes, photos of which were forbidden": Well, it would be "taking photos of which were forbidden", but that's a mouthful; reword.
- "the task of transporting them was performed by the company's employees": the company's employees transported them
- In general, this will need more copyediting before FAC, and I generally stick to history articles, myself. Best of luck. - Dank (push to talk) 14:09, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- All done , except number four. The phrase prior to as is a claim, whereas the explanation of that duplication comes afterwards. I can't think of an alternative. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 21:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)
- Looks good. - Dank (push to talk) 03:26, 21 August 2012 (UTC)
- All done , except number four. The phrase prior to as is a claim, whereas the explanation of that duplication comes afterwards. I can't think of an alternative. --Sp33dyphil ©hatontributions 21:30, 19 August 2012 (UTC)