Wikipedia:Peer review/Xanadu House/archive3

Xanadu House

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

A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for May 2008.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
This was my first Wikipedia article, written in 2005. It became featured in December 2005, and was on the Main Page in January 2006. Since then I've let it 'decay', and so the prose is poor, and the referencing isn't up to notch (though, I have already improved this a little bit). I'm looking for any other feedback apart from the obvious. Thanks — Wackymacs (talk ~ edits) 16:48, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Comments A few quick points:

The article seems to be about Xanadu Houses but is named Xanadu House. It seems that the article should be named Xanadu Houses with a redirect from Xanadu House, instead of the other way around. An admin would have to make this fix, i think.
There is a reference tag calling for use of in-line citations in lieu of general references, and I see you have responded by inserting in-line citations for use of the first general reference. However, the 3 other general references ( Corn; O'Neill; and Harb ) are not cited by any in-line references. It would improve the article if those sources could be revisited and used to support some specific statements within the article.
Hmm, maybe the last point falls in the "obvious" category that you might prefer not to have stated? Well, whatever is obvious should be fixed before peer review, else you will probably get the obvious comments. It is hard to know what you think is really obvious, vs. what someone else will think.
About the lead to the article: it is really up in the air about whose architectural project it is that the Xanadu Houses are part or all of. Is it a disconnected, coincidental set of houses, or is it a conscious project developed by one person or one entity in a coherent way? It comes across, in the intro at least, almost as if the houses just arose by themselves. Probably this is clarified in the rest of the article; this comment is about the lead.

Hope this helps a little bit. doncram (talk) 21:57, 28 May 2008 (UTC)[reply]