Talk:Lucid dream/GA1

GA Reassessment

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
This article has been reviewed as part of Wikipedia:WikiProject Good articles/Project quality task force in an effort to ensure all listed Good articles continue to meet the Good article criteria. In reviewing the article, I have found there are some issues that may need to be addressed, listed below. I will check back in seven days. If these issues are addressed, the article will remain listed as a Good article. Otherwise, it may be delisted (such a decision may be challenged through WP:GAR). If improved after it has been delisted, it may be nominated at WP:GAN. Feel free to drop a message on my talk page if you have any questions, and many thanks for all the hard work that has gone into this article thus far.

There are five requests for citation, dating back to June 2007.

Some sections are inadequately cited, or even uncited, such as Sleep paralysis, Dream signs, Cycle adjustment technique (CAT), and Mnemonic induction of lucid dreams (MILD).

All online links should include the date they were last accessed.

The lists, particular the one in Reality testing should be converted to prose.

The Reality testing section is written like an instruction manual, which wikipedia is not.

There are four dead links.[1]

Should this article not be called Lucid dreaming instead of Lucid dream?

"A well-known dream-induction device is the NovaDreamer, designed in 1993 by experienced lucid dreamer." Apart from being ungrammatical, much of the Lucid dream induction devices (LDID) section in which this sentence appears reads like an advertorial.

"The makers of induction devices such as the NovaDreamer and the REM Dreamer recommend doing a reality check every time you awake so that when a false awakening occurs you will become lucid." Should avoid the use of "you" in an encyclopedia article.

External links should only appear in the External links section, not in the body of the article. Linking to commercial sites like this is in any event inappropriate.

The lead is too short to adequately summarise this article.

--Malleus Fatuorum 19:17, 18 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

As these issues remain unaddressed these article has now been delisted. --Malleus Fatuorum 15:20, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The discussion above is closed. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page. No further edits should be made to this discussion.