| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I have completed significant work on this article in preparation for nomination for Featured Article status. It currently is a Good Article and could use a good eye to see where improvements can be done.
Thanks, --Lord Roem (talk) 05:41, 9 November 2012 (UTC)
- Suggestions and recommendations
- The lede/intro is a bit short, I'd suggest expanding it a tad bit more, perhaps with the Analysis and commentary section.
- Analysis and commentary section = This section could certainly be expanded upon a bit more.
- Uncited sentence at end of first paragraph in sect, Analysis and commentary.
- Uncited sentence at end of Washington's trial sect.
- Keep an eye on one-sentence or two-sentence-long paragraphs throughout, I'd strongly suggest to either expand or merge these.
— Cirt (talk) 03:51, 10 November 2012 (UTC)
- Thank you Cirt for your suggestions. I'll work with them later this week. Best, Lord Roem (talk) 23:02, 11 November 2012 (UTC)
- Cirt, besides the areas of expansion, are there any things of style or wording that can be improved? I've been trying to write in less legalese so the content is more clearly understood. Lord Roem (talk) 03:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
- While the article is certainly starting to look a lot better, I would strongly suggest putting it up at WP:GOCE, and also this might help: User:Tony1/Writing exercise box. — Cirt (talk) 18:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
- I've put it up on the list at GOCE. Thanks for the tip. Best, Lord Roem (talk) 19:33, 16 November 2012 (UTC)
- While the article is certainly starting to look a lot better, I would strongly suggest putting it up at WP:GOCE, and also this might help: User:Tony1/Writing exercise box. — Cirt (talk) 18:57, 15 November 2012 (UTC)
- Cirt, besides the areas of expansion, are there any things of style or wording that can be improved? I've been trying to write in less legalese so the content is more clearly understood. Lord Roem (talk) 03:41, 15 November 2012 (UTC)