Wikipedia:Peer review/List of Polish flags/archive1
Appearance
I've listed this article for peer review because I recently expanded it and I intend to make it a WP:FLC soon. Here's what the automatic peer review says:
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
- Avoid including galleries in articles, as per Wikipedia:Galleries. Common solutions to this problem include moving the gallery to wikicommons or integrating images with the text.[?]
- There's no way to integrate the images with the text since the article consists motly of tables. I don't think a small gallery hurts in this case. Please let me know, if you disagree. — Kpalion(talk) 01:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- There may be an applicable infobox for this article. For example, see Template:Infobox Person, Template:Infobox School, or Template:Infobox City.[?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
- No infobox for this article (Infobox National flag is already used in Flag of Poland). — Kpalion(talk) 01:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- Please ensure that the article has gone through a thorough copyediting so that it exemplifies some of Wikipedia's best work. See also User:Tony1/How to satisfy Criterion 1a.[?]
- I'll be glad, if you could help me with copyediting. — Kpalion(talk) 01:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
Thanks,
— Kpalion(talk) 01:37, 17 October 2007 (UTC)
- I think you should clarify in the lead if these are only flags currently in use (which is what I would guess) or if obsolete flags are included. The intro under "Rank flags used in all branches of the Armed Forces" is great. Try and add information like that about legislation etc. to every section or else say nothing at all. Don't have a single sentence of Flags used by the Polish Land Forces. --BirgitteSB 18:04, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- I added the word "current" into the first sentence of the lead to make it clear that the list does not include obsolete designs. I hope that's enough. The reason why I put those single sentences in some sections was to have links to Polish Land Forces, Polish Navy and Polish Air Force, and at the same time to avoid links in the section headings, which is discouraged by MoS. I'll be glad to know, if you have an idea how to achieve both results in a different way. — Kpalion(talk) 19:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- Find more information to add or else put the link in the list proper (i.e. Flag of the Land Forces)--BirgitteSB 19:45, 29 October 2007 (UTC)
- I added the word "current" into the first sentence of the lead to make it clear that the list does not include obsolete designs. I hope that's enough. The reason why I put those single sentences in some sections was to have links to Polish Land Forces, Polish Navy and Polish Air Force, and at the same time to avoid links in the section headings, which is discouraged by MoS. I'll be glad to know, if you have an idea how to achieve both results in a different way. — Kpalion(talk) 19:16, 29 October 2007 (UTC)