Wikipedia:Peer review/MindVox/archive1
MindVox[edit]
Hello, wikipedians. I'd like to ask for peer review of this article on the controversial early ISP service MindVox. I was a big contributor, and someone came along and did some really terrific work on expanding and detailing it. A huge amount of misinformation exists about the service (a lot of it repeated in major publications) and it would be a great coup if wikipedia could be the definitive source for information. The article has a huge and extensive number of citations for its sources (47 at last count.) Please help! Sdedeo 00:07, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
- The article should say clearly in the first sentence what MindVox is. I was confused until I looked back at your above peerreview request. Seabhcán 11:40, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
- Woah, weird, I totally didn't even see that. Thanks, will fix! Sdedeo 13:06, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
A quick cursory glance, will have more later-
- the text in the external links section should be sameplace else and instead the links should be described one by one.
- Embedded links are bad for FA - use ref/note or something :)
- Paragraphs too short and there are one-sentence paragraphs
- Intro should probably be just slightly longer, like a sentence or two
Looks good! Take care! Ryan Norton T | @ | C 23:08, 29 September 2005 (UTC)
- Cheers, Ryan! These are very helpful pointers. Sdedeo 10:57, 30 September 2005 (UTC)
reopening peer review request[edit]
It has been over fourteen months since we made the request above. Ryan' and Seabhcan's comments were very helpful, but it would be helpful to receive more feedback on this article since it is sort of the "baby" of a few of us. Many thanks! Sdedeo (tips) 01:23, 2 January 2007 (UTC)
Um it's kinda vital that you use <ref></ref> tags instead of plain external links. It'll take a little while but it's vital in order to take the article to the next level. Seegoon 17:14, 2 January 2007 (UTC)