Wikipedia:Peer review/YMCA Camp Fitch on Lake Erie/archive1

YMCA Camp Fitch on Lake Erie edit

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to polish this article's contents. The article has reached the point where the information has been relatively stable since I first created it. I would eventually like to make the article of "Feature Article" quality, but I know it still has a ways to go. Any help for suggestions would be most appreciated.

Thanks, Cpkondas (talk) 03:13, 31 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Comments initially I think a peer review is a good idea, and then set your sights on good article nominations.

Lead is too short, per WP:LEAD. I'd expect two shortish paragraphs that completely summarise the article. Right now it reads more like an advert for the camp rather than a summary of the whole page.
Lead image caption doesn't need a full stop and what does "Tent Picture" mean?
Link YMCA in the lead.
"copperheads" is a dab link.
Serious lack of in-line references. This is not crucial at GA but essential at FA.
Try to avoid squashing text between two images.
Captions don't tend to need "Photo of..." or whatever, that's normally self-evident.
9-11, 12-14... not nice in prose, but if you insist on using this approach, use an en-dash per WP:DASH to separate the numbers.
"The Cabent" per WP:HEAD we normally avoid "The....".
"A Modern Cabent (Summer 2003)" seems to me to be no reason to capitalise modern or cabent.
"Specialty camps" section is a little over-the-top for me. You must strive to avoid making it sound like an advert for the camp, which right now, it does. An encyclopaedic article wouldn't go into all that minutia.
Three refs but seven external links?! As I said before, you need many more in-line references from reliable (3rd party) sources.
There is a Category:YMCA Summer Camps category which is more refined than simply "YMCA" if you felt it more appropriate?

The Rambling Man (talk) 16:17, 11 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks Thank you for all of the comments. I especially agree with your comment on the specialty camps and lack of references. I have begun work on clearing up those issues and then begin work on revising the page's lead and overall advert vibe that some of the article sections seem to portray.

Cpkondas (talk) 17:43, 18 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]