Wikipedia:Peer review/Harry and the Potters discography/archive4
Harry and the Potters discography[edit]
- 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 July 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I recieved only one short review from three previous peer reviews. The list has also failed featured list status twice and I would like to know how I can improve the article, so that it follows the criteria. It arguably it is not "a timeline of important events on a notable topic" and therefore I wonder if using further third-party sources make it one. I am looking for any suggestions about improving the article, meeting the criteria or directly editing the article. Thanks! Hpfan9374 (talk) 09:27, 26 July 2008 (UTC)
Ruhfisch comments:
- The references seem to me to be the biggest problem here. For FLC the refs have to meet WP:RS but most do not seem to.
- For example, ref 13 is to photobucket.com and appears to be a link to a copyrighted image. This is not allowed.
- Or what makes illusiontv.com a RS?
- Also links to Blogs definitley do not meet WP:RS, but TotesUmbrellas seems to be a blog.
- Of the more reliable sources, some seem to be closely related to the band, i.e. the record label's own site or to the publisher of their e-albums (Internet Archive) or wizardrock. Where possible, the references should be to independent third party sources like the Boston and Dallas newspaper articles.
- It is possible to write a FL about things which are not notable in and of themselves - I am the main author of one - see List of tributaries of Larrys Creek.
- Second paragraph of the lead has no refs and needs them.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 04:29, 29 July 2008 (UTC)