Candace Parker edit
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for September 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get it to GA status. It has sources but i think it needs more. Could you guys give ideas to improve the article
Thanks, BlueRed 05:13, 4 September 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. If you want more comments, please ask here.
- Article needs more references, for example the High school, Personal, and Pop culture reference sections are all uncited. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
- Internet refs need URL, title, author if known, publisher and date accessed. {{cite web}} and other cite templates may be helpful. See WP:CITE and WP:V
- The lead should be an accessible and inviting overview of the whole article, so nothing important should be in the lead only. Since it is a summary, it should all be repeated in the body of the article itself but her brother is only in the lead. My rule of thumb is to include every header in the lead in some way. Please see WP:LEAD
- Watch out for possible peacock language like "uniquly versatile player" - if this is a direct quote, put it in quotes, cite it and use it. See WP:PEACOCK
- Article has several short (one or two sentence) paragraphs and sections that should wither be combined with others or perhaps expanded.
- Personal reads like a trivia section - to be avoided. Make it prose (not a list) and see WP:TRIVIA
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 10:19, 11 September 2008 (UTC)