Wikipedia:WikiProject Maritime Trades/Peer review/2007

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Contents

[edit] Andrew Furuseth

I'm nominating this article as a test of the system, and also because he was a really cool guy. Haus42 18:57, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JHMM13

As I stated in your other article up for peer review, a good article starts at the library. You need to start writing a lot more verifiable information regarding this person before we can really slice and dice the article. Please refer to the many featured articles on Wikipedia that are biographies. JHMM13 08:02, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for your time JHMM13. It wasn't clear to me that the project's peer review functionality put the page up for Wikipedia-wide peer review. Given this information, and with apologies, I withdraw this article from consideration. Haus42 11:57, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
No problem at all. It's not your fault. I hope to see this article on the "real" peer review soon on its way to GA or FA. That's a challenge ;-D JHMM13 19:53, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] Passage planning

This is a kind of small, out-of-the way article that I think is start-class and could make it to B-class pretty easily. It seems like a good choice to 1) get comfortable with the project's peer review tools, 2) do a useful, easy collaboration. Cheers. Haus42 21:15, 26 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] JHMM13

Good choice, Haus! It looks like it could be an interesting read that does need some work, though. There are some basic things that you could do to really get this article going that might be reall interesting for you as well:

  1. Head down to your local library and find a good bunch of books on the subject or if you're not feeling up for a drive, check out Amazon.com or BN.com for passage planning books or books on naval navigation. From there it's all obtaining knowledge and citing exactly where you got that knowledge.
  2. Keep separate Notes and References sections like you might find at the bottom of this page: Domenico Selvo.
  3. Put the images in places where they do not interfere with the text and provide maximum utility. Check out Wikipedia:Images, particularly the section of image choice and placement.
  4. Really cover the topic thoroughly, but keep it in accordance with the fact that this is an encyclopedia. It is not a secondary source that details precisely what one must do to plan passages, but it should give a moderate amount of detail that is summarized and cited for verifiability.
  5. Think about renaming the sections after you've gathered more information on the topic. Right now they're a bit vague and require a bit of explanation. Check out Wikipedia:Guide to layout.

When you're all finished and think it's ready for GA or something else, please submit it back here or at some other review area and we'll take another look at it! JHMM13 03:20, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks very much for your feedback! I wasn't aware that enabling the project's peer-review system actually submitted the article for Wikipedia-wide peer review. That said, your comments are very helpful. This (very new) project has over 100 articles and nothing particularly close to a GA. Hopefully, with feedback like this, we will be able to start moving articles from "start" to "b" more effectively. Haus42 14:11, 27 March 2007 (UTC)
I can't wait to read them :-). Cheers, JHMM13 19:55, 27 March 2007 (UTC)

[edit] 38.100.34.2

seems to me like a B-class article already. If you follow the suggestions above you may qualify as a good article! 21:13, 30 March 2007 (UTC)

Thanks for the encouragement! Haus42 21:17, 30 March 2007 (UTC)