Wikipedia:Peer review/Michigan State University Group/archive1
- 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 June 2008.
I've listed this article for peer review because… I want to polish it up for possible Featured Article status.
Thanks, Kevin Forsyth (talk) 01:13, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Comment by Doncram Fascinating! I knew nothing of this before, I read it all the way through. Great story, well told, no obvious grammar or low-level errors that i might have noticed. I wonder, though, is it possible to use a different title. Michigan State University Group is bland, non-descriptive. "MSUG and Vietnam"? "Michigan State University Group's program in Vietnam"? "History of the MSUG and Vietnam"? But I don't know what the options would be. doncram (talk) 08:07, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- I agree it's non-descriptive. Another option, "Michigan State University Vietnam Advisory Group" is a little more descriptive (it's currently a redirect). As far as I can tell, that name was used early on, but was shortened to "Michigan State University Group" by the time the contract was initiated. "MSUG" was always the in-use acronym. As you said, though: bland. Kevin Forsyth (talk) 12:34, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
Comments from Ealdgyth (talk · contribs)
- You said you wanted to know what to work on before taking to FAC, so I looked at the sourcing and referencing with that in mind. I reviewed the article's sources as I would at FAC.
- What makes http://kevinforsyth.net/books/fateful.htm a reliable source?
- Hope this helps. Please note that I don't watchlist Peer Reviews I've done. If you have a question about something, you'll have to drop a note on my talk page to get my attention. (My watchlist is already WAY too long, adding peer reviews would make things much worse.) 14:02, 16 June 2008 (UTC)
- I only used that because I liked the phrasing of those two sentences, which I stole from myself. Both are based on information from Ernst (1998). (I must admit on further scrutiny that both read better if I leave the quotes out, and call it fair use.) Kevin Forsyth (talk) 14:37, 16 June 2008 (UTC)