Wikipedia:Peer review/Donald Trump (Last Week Tonight)/archive1
Donald Trump (Last Week Tonight)[edit]
| Toolbox |
|---|
 | This peer review discussion has been closed. |
I've listed this article for peer review because I want to be sure everything is OK and up-to-date with policy before I nominate this article for featured status. It is already a good article and a did you know article, but even with two independent reviews, I just want to see if anything else needs to be cleaned up before a featured article nomination.
Thanks, Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium, now featuring BB-8 (talk) 19:03, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Comments from Jonesey95[edit]
- Citations need attention. Inquistr and Daily Beast and Boston Globe citations are missing authors. Author name format is inconsistent.
- Some MOS work needs to be done before FAC. I straightened curly quotation marks. Initials for people should have a space after the period (e.g. S.I. Rosenbaum).
- The "Name change" section could be tightened up. Right now, it looks like something that was written by many people over a period of time. It should read as one coherent whole.
- When you haven't mentioned dates for a while, provide some context, e.g. instead of "March 14", write "March 14, two weeks after the segment first aired". – Jonesey95 (talk) 19:53, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Jonesey95: Thanks for the feedback. I'll fix these shortly. Kylo, Rey, & Finn Consortium, now featuring BB-8 (talk) 21:00, 5 July 2016 (UTC)
Comments from Caeciliusinhorto[edit]
- In the lead, we read "The segment, which is the show's most popular to date,[3] popularized the term Donald Drumpf..." Can this be rephrased to avoid repeating "popular... popularized"?
- "Within one week of the original broadcast, the YouTube video of the segment had surpassed 20 million views, making it Oliver's most watched segment." Except that "John Oliver Sells Out of ‘Make Donald Drumpf Again’ Caps" says eight days and 19m+ views, and "Forget ‘Donald Drumpf.’ This new John Oliver segment is well worth a few minutes of your time." says nearly 20m views in a week.
- If you're going to take this to FAC, your citation formats really need to be consistent. Some of your articles cited are undated, some have the dates in parentheses after the name of the author, and some have the date after the name of the website the article appeared on. Some don't appear to have author names.
Hope these help. Caeciliusinhorto (talk) 16:22, 7 July 2016 (UTC)
Comment: Seems reference formatting is an issue here. I've formatted the references in the "Description" section (including the "Make Donald Drumpf Again" subsection) and will try to help with the remainder of the article when I have time. ---Another Believer (Talk) 15:01, 8 July 2016 (UTC)
- @Caeciliusinhorto: I've tackled points 1 and 2. I think Another Believer has already done #3. Thanks for your feedback. Kylo Ren (talk) 00:55, 11 July 2016 (UTC)
- Just to clarify, #3 is partly done. :) ---Another Believer (Talk) 02:24, 11 July 2016 (UTC)