This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because, I completely rewrote the entire article and added sources where needed.
Thanks, Rvk41 (talk) 14:30, 23 May 2008 (UTC)
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR t 01:28, 24 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments
- Several citations need formatting properly using a {{Citation}} or {{Cite web}} template (please use either one, not a combination of both types of template throughout the article).
- Specifically, current refs 1, 2, 31 are missing full information and need access dates.
- Also, what makes current ref 33 reliable? It is a GeoCities website. Please see Wikipedia:Verifiability.
- There doesn't seem to be any information on his early life, childhood and education.
- There are lots of short stubby sub-sections under the professional career section, is it possible to merge any of these to improve overall flow?
- Add citations to the infobox.
- I have noticed an inline URL in the Personal life section, which is not formatted using the <ref> tags.
- Looks good overall, except for those things. I do recommend a full copyedit by an editor new to the text, please see Wikipedia:Peer review/volunteers and Wikipedia:WikiProject League of Copyeditors/Members for lists of people who can help.