Wikipedia:Peer review/Chris Rock–Will Smith slapping incident/archive1: Difference between revisions

Browse history interactively

← Previous edit

Content deleted Content added

VisualWikitext

Inline

Latest revision as of 18:10, 20 September 2023

Will Smith–Chris Rock slapping incident

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

This peer review discussion is closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I think it is close to GA status, but would like to know what can be improved before starting a GAN.

Thanks, Skyshifter ^talk 10:40, 15 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720

Comments after a quick skim:

"Reactions from celebrities were divided." Needs a citation
- Removed. Skyshifter ^talk 00:16, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
Web sources should have access dates
Suggest archiving sources with IABot
- Done. Skyshifter ^talk 22:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
"Segal, Edward." Per WP:FORBESCON this is not considered a reliable source.
- Removed. Skyshifter ^talk 00:16, 3 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]
YouTube sources should include who posted the video.
- Done. Skyshifter ^talk 22:46, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 15:39, 22 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Sorry, I saw your message just now. I'll review the suggestions soon. Skyshifter ^talk 17:32, 30 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from TechnoSquirrel69

I'm not sure the [sic] in "Keep my wife's name out your [sic] fucking mouth!" is warranted. Many varieties of English — including African-American English — feature the removal of of after prepositions. Off the top of my head, two common ones that I can think of are after out (obviously), and off, the way I used it at the beginning of this sentence! Alternatively, "Get off (of) my lawn!" is a memorable example. —TechnoSquirrel69 (sigh) 10:36, 20 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Removed. Skyshifter ^talk 22:25, 24 July 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@@ Line 4: / Line 4: @@
 <noinclude>[[Category:June 2023 peer reviews]]</noinclude>
 <!-- Please add all peer review discussions below this comment, and do not alter what is above. So that the review can be kept within a single section, please do not use level 2 or 3 headers (==...== and ===...===) below to break up the review. Use level 4 (====...====) and so on.-->
-{{Peer review page|topic=socsci}}
+{{Closed peer review page}}
 I've listed this article for peer review because I think it is close to GA status, but would like to know what can be improved before starting a GAN.