Wikipedia:Peer review/Sybian/archive1
Ok, I know this is an odd topic which I want to become Featured, but I want to see what yall will say. I am going to add pictures, once another user takes them. I still have more to add to the article, especially about specific devices that can be attached, how to attach them, pros/cons, sources, similiar devices, use in the porn industry. I have a lot I need to do, so any help will be good. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 5 July 2005 02:28 (UTC)
- Hmm. Hmmmmm. Oh well. First, try to get read of copyedit/cleanup tags. Try to find some references. Move elinks from mainbody to elink/reference section via footnotes. Usually I would say article needs more pictures then one but in this case I will not :D This should definetly be interesting when...or if... you manage to get this to FAC. --Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus Talk 6 July 2005 23:24 (UTC)
- It's going to FAC, but I cannot answer when. I did the spell check, but I will try to see what grammar I screwed up. I am taking care of the footnotes later, since I am trying to find sources now (but most websites have the same information). I am going to add about two - four more photos, but I need the copyright stuff cleared up. I want to add a picture of the attachments, the vibration/rotation scheme, and the internal organs of this machine. I will not, sadly, add a picture of a female using the machine. Though, I wish I can give out a website link to show women using the machine, but I do not know if it will be appropriate. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 7 July 2005 00:17 (UTC)
- I got the References set up, using the footnote template method Piotrus mentioned. I am trying to see how I can make the article flow well in English, trying to sound less like a promotion (which, to be fair, I am working with the webmaster of a website I mentioned in the article, toyslove.com). I need to see what else I can do before I get everyone's seal of approvial. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 7 July 2005 02:30 (UTC)
- It's going to FAC, but I cannot answer when. I did the spell check, but I will try to see what grammar I screwed up. I am taking care of the footnotes later, since I am trying to find sources now (but most websites have the same information). I am going to add about two - four more photos, but I need the copyright stuff cleared up. I want to add a picture of the attachments, the vibration/rotation scheme, and the internal organs of this machine. I will not, sadly, add a picture of a female using the machine. Though, I wish I can give out a website link to show women using the machine, but I do not know if it will be appropriate. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 7 July 2005 00:17 (UTC)
- If it hits FAC, people are bound to ask for a reference section. Other than that, looks pretty good to my eyes. More pictures would be nice, but stricktly speaking not critical. WegianWarrior 7 July 2005 01:36 (UTC)
- I am working on the sources. Though I have 6-7 cited text, about 4 external links, and two photos, I am still planning to add more. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 7 July 2005 02:05 (UTC)
I will not add any more photos, since I think four is good enough. I will try to cleanup the section on the similiar devices, since that section sounded like a promo when I first looked at it. I will not discuss much about the Lovemaster, since it does not exist yet. I still need more sources, but I think only 6 sources (some used more than once) is probably not enough. Though, I do not know how many sources I need. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 7 July 2005 06:18 (UTC)
- As a rule of thumb, you need enought sources to cover what the article says. If that means one source or twenty don't matter. I must say the article has improved since last time I looked it over. WegianWarrior 8 July 2005 03:38 (UTC)
- I still need a few more sentences, and a little bit more thinking, then I will say it could be ready for FAC. Though, yes it will be short, but the same thing was said about my article, Order of Canada. Thanks. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 8 July 2005 03:40 (UTC)
- As a rule of thumb, you need enought sources to cover what the article says. If that means one source or twenty don't matter. I must say the article has improved since last time I looked it over. WegianWarrior 8 July 2005 03:38 (UTC)
With great thanks to User:Yoasif, the article has been copyedited. Can I remove the tags now? Zscout370 (Sound Off) 23:06, 10 July 2005 (UTC) I sent this page to WP:FAC - Wikipedia:Featured article candidates/Sybian/archive1. This can be closed now. Thanks yall. Zscout370 (Sound Off) 02:20, 13 July 2005 (UTC)
I am nominating this article for peer review because it has undergone a major editing spree which is now complete (so far as I can tell), and I think it may eventually become a candidate for featured status. Falcon 01:08, 27 Jun 2005 (UTC)
- Any chance of fitting images being included? - Mgm|(talk) June 28, 2005 07:20 (UTC)
- Some person added a picture of a cosplayer, but it didn't really work very well and was not relevant in any case. If you have any ideas for an image, let me know. Falcon June 28, 2005 18:18 (UTC)
- Don't really know too much about the genre but the article is quite informative and rather non-partial for something, uh, so interesting. As someone who probably wouldn't read this article unless it came up on a random page search or a Featured article, I would also start off with Types and variations and lead into Identifying Characteristics...that opening is a little strong and the rest of the chapters don't follow through, i would recommend building up to it, then close with Food sources and Criticism. I would be also be partial to a little more discussion on the vampire roleplayers and vampire fans who dress up as vampires but don't actually go around drinking blood (the people i normally think of when i thing of "vampire lifestyle"). it might help steer the article into the mainstream and not scare away potential viewers right off the bat. -Seasee 29 June 2005 06:58 (UTC)
- I have added a section about those who are pretending to be members. Some cites would be nice, if anyone wants. Falcon June 29, 2005 23:37 (UTC)
- Don't really know too much about the genre but the article is quite informative and rather non-partial for something, uh, so interesting. As someone who probably wouldn't read this article unless it came up on a random page search or a Featured article, I would also start off with Types and variations and lead into Identifying Characteristics...that opening is a little strong and the rest of the chapters don't follow through, i would recommend building up to it, then close with Food sources and Criticism. I would be also be partial to a little more discussion on the vampire roleplayers and vampire fans who dress up as vampires but don't actually go around drinking blood (the people i normally think of when i thing of "vampire lifestyle"). it might help steer the article into the mainstream and not scare away potential viewers right off the bat. -Seasee 29 June 2005 06:58 (UTC)
- Some person added a picture of a cosplayer, but it didn't really work very well and was not relevant in any case. If you have any ideas for an image, let me know. Falcon June 28, 2005 18:18 (UTC)
- Update: it has been proposed that the lifestyle section in Vampire be merged into this article. Falcon July 5, 2005 05:42 (UTC)
- I am moving this to WP:FA now. Falcon 05:41, July 13, 2005 (UTC)