Wikipedia:Peer review/Petitcodiac River/archive1

Petitcodiac River

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I'm getting this article ready for an FAC, and as a result, I would highly appreciate a peer review to iron out the kinks. A copy edit has been requested as well, but I anticipate it to be complete before the PRand has been completed. Anyhow, thanks in advance, and I'll take any advice I can get! _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 00:49, 16 August 2010 (UTC)

References

• When short-citing, please divide in General and Specific content, makes it easier to see where the repetitive references are from.
  • Better?
    • Works cited comes before notes. Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 06:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
      • Done. I'm also going to add anchor links to the footnotes in a few.

Lead

• The lead should not have any references in them. If anything is not references later it should then be repeated in main.
  • This has been under debate. WP:LEADCITE gives (what I find to be) a vague explanation to proceed, and there have been recent discussions ([1], [2]) on reforming the current rules. I do not want to remove everything I've done if it is later decided to be a bad move, so I'll take it to FAC with citations; unless I'm misunderstanding the concept of the guideline.
• tributaries, wl
  • I'm not familiar with PR lingo, but I assume it meant wiki-link. Done.
• % -> percent
  • Eliminated a few instances, left for numerals > 10.

Lists

• Why do we need to know where all the crossings are? Seems irrelevant.
  • Just following the example of Aliso Creek (Orange County).
    • IS it a FA and was the subject brought up in the FAC?
      • It is an FA, and I don't see any mention at the nomination. WP:RIVER also recommends the list.

Cultural references

• These section are not encouraged, could it be deleted?
  • Done.

Extra

• Petitcodiac River Causeway - cd this article be deleted as your summary is much better or do you plan on expanding it?
  • WP:ATD -> Done.

Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 14:19, 24 August 2010 (UTC)

• Seems good. By the way it is considered rude to strike the reviewers comments, I do not mind but don't do it at the FAC :) Sandman888 (talk) ^{Latest PR} 06:15, 25 August 2010 (UTC)
  • Oh, I never really thought it would be considered rude. Thanks, and thanks for the review! _EricLeb⁰¹ (Page | Talk) 15:55, 25 August 2010 (UTC)