| Toolbox |
|---|
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because…
1. It is a translation from a french wikipedia article. I need a proofreader to go through it.
2. Also, I need that it be reviewed for acceptability in wikipedia english articles.
Thanks, Emekadavid (talk) 19:35, 19 January 2014 (UTC)
- I have been editing this to make it a bit less verbose. French is a bit verbose, but it makes good sense when mapped to English. However it can be shrunken somewhat by saying things in a different way. Also the style using "we" or "one" or "notice" is not appropriate here, so I have gradually been removing this language. One issue is the excessive detail discussing each measurement. In fact this is more like a review article than an encyclopedia entry. For a measurement on one of the states myself I would pick the most likely value and mention it along with the reference, rather than presenting a table of every measurement, along with a discussion about what is good. This discussion about which measurements are in or out of consideration is really original research, unless it comes from some other author. It looks here as if the writer has been the originator of the ideas in the discussion. Graeme Bartlett (talk) 09:50, 4 February 2014 (UTC)