Wikipedia:Peer review/Driving in Madagascar/archive1

Driving in Madagascar

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch • Watch peer review

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get this up to Featured Article status. The article is a new GA that went through a fairly rigorous GA review, and I'd like to see what sorts of things need improvement before diving into the FA process. This would be my first FAC, so please feel free to provide general tips and/or point out any common mistakes in the article.

Thank you! — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 18:03, 20 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

STANDARD NOTE: I have added this PR to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar to get quicker and more responses. When this PR is closed, please remove it from the list. Also, consider adding the sidebar to your userpage to help others discover pre-FAC PRs, and please review other articles in that template. And, since you are still seeking your first successful FAC, I suggest seeking a FA mentor and start reviewing FACs now to build goodwill among the FAC regulars. Z1720 (talk) 02:15, 23 February 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: This has been posted for over a month without comment. Are you still interested in getting comments? Z1720 (talk) 19:57, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Yes. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 23:55, 31 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: I suggest posting requests for people to review this at Wikiprojects attached to this article, or review other articles in the hopes that someone will return the favour and review yours. Z1720 (talk) 00:31, 1 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

John M Wolfson

Reserving my spot here. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:18, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Some thoughts:

Rephrase the opening sentence to be something to the effect of "The road network of Madagascar, comprising about 4,500 unique roads spanning 31,640 km (19,660 mi), is centered on roads to and from the capital Antananarivo."
Remove the footnote reference to Wiktionary.
Remove the footnotes to the French singulars unless they differ from either Standard French or, as in the first note, common English usage.
Separate the history stuff into a dedicated history section.
Remove the caption reference to Commons, instead using {{Commons-cat}} in the "References" section.
If you're referencing a book or multi-page source, split off the references to incorporate page numbers; use {{sfn}} for footnotes, and separate the long forms (the actual book citations) into a separate "Works cited" section. This particular issue sunk my first ever FAC way back in early 2019.
Good job on having alt texts.

– John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 20:32, 29 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the feedback. I've modified the first sentence, removed the footnote to wiktionary, removed the footnotes to French singulars, and moved the commons interwikilink to the references section. With respect to Separate the history stuff into a dedicated history section, I'll take a crack at doing that today.

With respect to If you're referencing a book or multi-page source, split off the references to incorporate page numbers; use {{sfn}} for footnotes, the article currently uses {{rp}} in line with WP:IBID. It's my preferred citation style and that's fine per WP:WHENINROME, and it doesn't cause issues with the visual editor (sfn does cause problems), so I'm a bit confused as to why this would constitute a problem. Do FAs have to use sfn instead of any other citation style? Alternatively, am I missing page numbers for certain citations where one would expect them? — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 17:54, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I did not notice the RP, that is also acceptable. I have not performed a thorough source review, but I trust the sourcing is adequate. – John M Wolfson (talk • contribs) 18:01, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Johnson524

Hello @Red-tailed hawk: I added three 'as of' templates to the page where I think they would be good, but as for the wording of the article itself, it looks good to me! I am also working on my first FAC, so my review will not be the most helpful compared to other editors here, but I wanted still help out where I could. Best of luck on your first FAC and becoming an administrator on Commons. Cheers! Johnson524 (Talk!) 19:55, 30 April 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Query from Z1720

@Red-tailed hawk: It has been a month since the above was posted. Are you still interested in receiving comments or can this be closed? Z1720 (talk) 01:37, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Ideally, yes. I'm not sure there's much more to say, though, except to evaluate against the suggestions above. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 13:28, 1 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: This has been open for another month without comment. Can this be closed? Z1720 (talk) 19:28, 7 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sure. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 00:16, 8 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Z1720: Do you happen to have a link to the page containing the instructions on how to archive a peer review handy? I'm not able to find it. — Red-tailed hawk _(nest) 20:21, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Red-tailed hawk: WP:PRG has instructions, and I recommend using the closure script. Z1720 (talk) 20:29, 11 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]