Wikipedia:Peer review/Europe/archive1

Europe

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've already done small amount of work on this article but it is rather long and I would like to get some suggestions for how to improve it further, with a view to getting it to GA or even FA status.

Thanks, Harland1 (^t/_c) 13:37, 17 February 2008 (UTC)

• A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style. If you would find such a review helpful, please click here. Thanks, APR _t 02:58, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I'm sorry I can't actually find the review. Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:16, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

I reran it and fixed the link - should work now, Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 20:29, 19 February 2008 (UTC)

Thanks, Harland1 (^t/_c) 10:42, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

I've gone through everything up to Geography, and have given detailed comments below. I'm not a historian nor a professional writer, so take everything I say as suggestion. Overall, I think it's a very good article, bound to get through GA and maybe FA without too much more work. --jwanders^Talk 21:55, 24 February 2008 (UTC)

Lead

Para 1: "Physically and geologically..." isn't this the same thing and redundant?

removed. Harland1 (^t/_c) 18:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Para 2:

• The lead image doesn't include Russia, but the text says Russia is Europe's largest country.

It includes the part of Russia generally considered to be in Europe but not the rest. Harland1 (^t/_c) 18:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• This para switches twice between discussing Europe compared to other countries and comparing the countries within Europe. There should only be one switch, and these could perhaps be separate paras.

Changed Harland1 (^t/_c) 18:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

Para 3:

• "...after the beginning of colonization" should specify which colonization is being referred to.

Changed but perhaps not enough

• This historical summary skips the North American fights for independence; perhaps this is notable enough to be included?

I would say not? This is just one episode of a colony fighting for freedom, we can't include them all so not just one. Harland1 (^t/_c) 18:33, 25 February 2008 (UTC)

• Nice linked map! I'll have to remember that and steal the tech sometime ;-)

Etymology

Para 2:

• The formatting of "...see Prithvi (Platia)" looks off. Consider adjusting the punctuation (no need for the semi-colon), or better, working the "Prithvi" wlink into a natural sentence.

Removed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• The majority view should be referenced, ideally to more than one source as it is the majority view.
• The last sentence does not read well. I think the problem is a combination of the unfamiliar names, unusual letters, and the quoted punctuation. Perhaps expanding to multiple phrases would help?
• I don't believe "see also X" is accepted wp:Manual of Style form. Again, try expanding into a full sentence including the appropriate wikilink, or at least put the "see also" in parentheses.

Removed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Para 3:

• Rephrase "A majority of major..."

 Done Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• Is "Turks" an accepted term for "The Turkish people"? It sounds unencyclopedic

Changed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• The last sentence says "for centuries" but doesn't indicate which centuries it's referring to. Is this still true today, or was it the case from 700-400 B.C.?

Removed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Prehistory

Para 2: The information on the roman empire seems out of place in this section.

Removed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Dark Ages

Para 1:

• "Isolated monastic communities in Ireland, Scotland and elsewhere" Be more specific than "elsewhere" or just say "Ireland and Scotland".

Removed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• "disappeared from European popular currency." I've heard the word "currency" used to refer to the value of ideas, but not to the ideas themselves. Are you sure this is proper usage?

Removed Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

Middle Ages

Para 2: In summary style, it's always hard to know how much detail to include, but I would suggest expanding this para on the Black Death to a few more sentences.

Done a bit

18th and 19th centuries

Para 3:

• No mention of N. America's independence from Europe? I'm not a historian, but it seems this might be worth a sentence.

Added a sentence will add more. Harland1 (^t/_c) 14:52, 26 February 2008 (UTC)

• Note about Karl Marx's manifesto seems out of step. Either expand it to show context and relation with the rest of the para, or remove it.

20th century to present

Para 2: This sentence is very hard to parse as it's main cause is modified both beforehand and afterwards: "Economic instability, caused in part by debts incurred from the First World War, brought about the worldwide Great Depression during the 1930s, precipitated by the Wall Street Crash of 1929."

Para 3: First sentence is too long, should be split into 2 or 3.