Wikipedia:Version 1.0 Editorial Team/Biography articles by quality/23

Well, exactly as the description of the rating says: This article has lots of good content, but it is completely confusing for an entire lack of structure or any headings whatsoever. Not knowing anything about Roach, I am unfortunately unable to contribute at the moment, but I would really like to see an improved article here. Maybe even a wikify-Tag would be in order. — Mütze 15:38, 11 August 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)

• Lead doesn't fully reflect the breadth of the article.
• There in no reference section to which refer to when in doubt (External links don't count as references, see WP:REF).
• As his father became emperor in 285, he was regarded as crown prince who would once follow his father on the throne. He seems not to have served in any important military or administrative position during Diocletian's and his father's reign, though. isn't sourced so it could stand as POV material.
• maybe Diocletianus also thought that he was not qualified for the military duties of the imperial office, why?
• This set the precedent for Maxentius' accession later in the same year. what was set?
• Apparently the conspirators turned to Maximian as well, who had retired to a palace in Lucania, but he declined to resume power for the time being. is too pov for apparently should be founded on someone's assumption.
• The prose is good, it could be better but it would stand as a GA had it more references and a better lead. Make sure you seek advice from the peer review project, good article project and the featured article project. Lincher 14:04, 24 August 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)

• Needs copy edit and wikification
• No photograph
• Lacks date of birth
• Publications list present, but lacks inline references
• Some information on research interests, but could be expanded
• Has some appropriate subheadings but more article organisation would be beneficial
• External links present which could be used to expand article (edit comment)

• The article needs an infobox
• The article needs references

kingboyk 00:05, 15 September 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)

I acknowledge these shortcomings, but does it really deserve "start"? I'm thinking B-Class is more suitable.

Hard for me to justify it with only 4 paragraphs of prose. There's also major gaps missing, i.e. critical reviews, reception, etc., and reliance on only one source. plange 01:59, 30 August 2006 (UTC)

Thanks for the explanation. Also, would you mind reviewing Emily Osment? Someone overrated the article quite a bit, and didn't leave any comments justifying their opinion. As I have worked on the article for some time, I did not want to do it in case of bias. bibliomaniac15 02:31, 30 August 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)

Class=Start for already containing plenty data but not complete information, lacks in structure and non-work related biographical data. Needs checking by native English speakers. Importance=Mid as Mr. Sakuraba is a commonly used reference point for both the Japanese Progressive Rock scene of the 1980s as well as the Japanese videogame music industry. -- 138.246.7.97 21:01, 19 August 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)

As a recent arrival to the world of WP editors, I can't be sure whether my creation of and contributions to this article are NPOV or not.

However, it does look as if it's shaping up. The only reason for it carrying a "Controversial" label is that the likes of me might go off and do something more worthwhile, in which case the vandals might get back in.

PalestineRemembered 22:35, 30 October 2006 (UTC)

The article needs to have its sources checked, but it should be rememebered not to confuse the POV of the editors with the POV of the subject. -- Avi 17:03, 31 October 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)

• lacks references, thus making most of the information unverifiable.
• numerous subheadings with no content.
• in need of copyediting.

--Inahet 00:42, 18 August 2006 (UTC) (edit comment)