Wikipedia:Peer review/Melbourne International Comedy Festival/archive1

Melbourne International Comedy Festival[edit]

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

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 January 2009.

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because I've been doing a lot of work expanding, rewriting and referencing and am looking for more suggestions on how to improve it. I would eventually like to see it brought up to GA-standard.

Thanks so much! Shoemoney2night (talk) 09:57, 27 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Brianboulton comments:

My first thought after reading the article through was that it seemed very short for an article about the largest international comedy festival in the world. It is indeed light on detail; the so-called History section has very little history beyond a short account of the festival's origins. The section compares the size of the original festival with the present day's, but gives no indication as to how this growth occurred. The second part of the section is brief comments about the festival's character.

So, as a first step towards expanding the article, I would dispense with the History section title and replace it with three: Origins, Growth, and Character. I would expand each of these from the present rather thin material, so that we have a full account of the festival's origins, a full account of its growth from fairly modest beginnings to "the largest comedy festival in the world", followed by an expanded "character" section. This might provide the basis for a reasonably comprehensive article.

I have a number of fairly minor points picked up during my reading:-

You tend to overuse the word "typically", There are synonyms such as usually, normally, etc, so you can vary. The "typically" in the opening of the second lead paragraph, however, can simply be removed.
"John Pinder" needs commas on each side. This sentence meanders a bit; I suggest a full stop after 1980s, then "It was inspired..." etc
A comma is needed after "Last Laugh"
Slight rewording might avoid the repetition of "overseas"
"By his return" doesn't sound right. "After his return" sounds better.
"convinced it would work" is a common phrase that doesn't need to be in quotes, even if Pinder wrote or said it.
I think the Festival "was launched..." rather than just "launched"
"principal", not "principle"
You say its first year featured 56 separate shows, but we need a reminder that this happened in 1987.
The reference to $9.7 million – that would be Australian dollars? See WP:$ about formatting and possible conversion
Awards section: check your boldface use with WP:boldface. Also, the section would look better in prose that in bullet-point format.

I hope these remarks will help you decide how to develop the article. Brianboulton (talk) 19:18, 31 January 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for your review, you've given me a lot of ideas on how to start developing the article. Cheers! - Shoemoney2night (talk) 01:44, 1 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]