Talk:Nigh-No-Place
 | This article is rated Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||
| ||||||||
 | This article was the subject of an educational assignment that ended on July 30, 2019. |
"Peer review from a friendly classmate."
[edit]- The lead is solid and has enough information to do the intended job. There is enough content on the page to show the "importance" of the article. The content seems to be balanced to the best of the writers ability and has more information in "more" important places than other places that might be considered "less" important or has less coverage for references.
- To do: Add a cite for The Book Title. You seem to explain everything, but you don't show where you gathered the information from.
There could be a few more wikilinks scattered to things that are written on wikipedia. This might just be a me thing, but the paragraphs seem to be pretty long and could possibly be split up just a little bit to "make things easier to read". Add some reviews to it.
- The parts of the articles are very well researched, there are solid references and plenty of them for the amount of content that is listed. It's balanced and neutral with no deviation off the topic. The style follows somewhat close to other already published about poetry which is always a good choice.
-Personally, I feel like I could come to this and get a solid idea about the book and some facts about it. It's non biased enough that I would be able to form my own opinions without being influenced by "leading" words.
10/10 good things are happening here — Preceding unsigned comment added by Cjefferys (talk • contribs)
Note
[edit]OK--good stuff. Now, clean it up. Retitle that first section--not "Book title" but "Content", and then you can explain the title in there. The bit about the three sections, which is now under "Style", and what's in them, should be under "Content".
Stick in some wikilinks, for the Shetland Islands etc. (not for countries--we all know where Scotland is). I think the most important thing is to rethink what content goes under what sections, and then to reorganize that, and the paragraphs: that one big paragraph is too big. And generate more content! Where's the critical reception? Dr Aaij (talk) 01:44, 28 June 2019 (UTC)