Starrcade (1983) 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 May 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to receive feedback on the quality of the article so further improvements could be made and possibilities on promoting the article to a higher class could be considered. Thanks, 13 of Diamonds (talk) 09:49, 29 May 2008 (UTC)
Comments from Nikki
I'm really glad you are working on the important NWA pay-per-views, and this article looks pretty good. I've gone through and fixed some comma problems. In most cases, only add a comma between two clauses if they can stand independently of one another. There are a few more comments I want to make, but I don't have a lot of time right now. I'll be back with them later tonight. Nikki311 22:54, 1 June 2008 (UTC)
Here's some more specific things:
- The lead needs to mention something from the aftermath.
- The lead is supposed to summarize the information in the article, not provide new information...so, I think the information about the development of the event needs to be explained elsewhere in the article (maybe the background?) and briefly mentioned in the lead.
Other than those small issues, it looks really good. Nikki311 23:28, 2 June 2008 (UTC)