Wikipedia:Peer review/Madrid/archive1

Madrid[edit]

Editors of WikiProject Spain have selected the Madrid article for a Peer review request, with the hope of obtaining Good article status, and possible Featured article status.

All comments, suggestions and edits are requested regarding this Madrid article.Espana Viva 18:37, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Veesicle[edit]

General comment: There's a massive lack of inline citations throughout the article... that really needs to be fixed for it to be GA and FA.

See Wiktionary for the name of Madrid in various languages other than English and Spanish. - A link to Wiktionary shouldn't really be included in the text like that, especially not in the lead. It's already included in the infobox at the bottom, I think.

I would make other comments but the lack of citations makes it really hard to see if any of the information is verifiable, and if it's not verifiable it shouldn't be in the article. Veesicle (Talk) (Contribs) 19:56, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well, to be fair, I do see some 20 inline citations currently in the article, so I'm not sure that there really is a "massive lack." Can there be more, of course, but 20 is a good start! EspanaViva 21:58, 7 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

It's not about quantity but usage. The "History" section currently has just one reference, covering only the modern Olympics bullet point, and its main article is no better. Melchoir 06:29, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Hi there and thanks for the feedback. :-) We are aware of the lack of citations, and are working on it (especially on the History section). Are there any other comments about the article (structure, type of info that should/should not be included, prose...) you'd like to make? :-) Cheers Raystorm 09:52, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Well… the table of contents is awfully long, and some of the latter subsections are listy. It seems to me that both of these problems could be fixed by creating more summary-style daughter articles, which would internally contain more lists and subsections but present a cleaner face to the main article. Melchoir 20:24, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I think you're right. We'll see what we can do about it. Raystorm 16:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments by Dev920[edit]

I concur over the lack of citations. Other points I noticed:

The initial infobox is too wide, please cut it a bit.
The culture section is too listy, bitty and untidy.
Virtually all pictures are located on the right hand side, ideally they need to alternate.
The Universities section has too many short paragraphs. These need to be merged into coherent structured paragraphs. The number of redlinks too is a concern. The entire section would be better off being turned into a general education section and throwing in some more about secondary schools. See Ann_Arbor,_Michigan#Education.
I really do not think you need tables explaining every motorway in madrid!
You cannot use the Spanish Wikipedia as a reference! (ref 10)
Sister cities thing not needed. Use the space saved to put in some more see also.
You have absolutely nothing on how Madrid is governed.
For such a pivotal city in Spanish history, there's not much in its history section. Could do with some expanding.
Similarly for the modern economics section. Much more information could be added. See London#Economy for inspiration.
Would like to see religion stats in demographics.
I presume Madrid has some really good quality architecture, given it's place as the seat of the Spanish empire, either historical or modern? There should be a section on that. Hong_Kong#Architecture.

That's all I can think of at the mo. Go do that and I'll check back later. Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 21:42, 8 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks to Dev920 for these useful comments, and thanks to Raystorm for following up on many of them! EspanaViva 15:01, 9 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Yeah thanks Dev, we'll try to address all your concerns asap. Raystorm 16:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Neil[edit]

My thoughts:

The article is too many lists, not enough article. And it seems to only focus on the tourist areas. For example, the 'Popular neighbourhoods' section. Don't capitalise 'opera theatre'. If the district has an article (such as Gran Via, Retiro, AZCA and so on, it doesn't need a whole paragraph in the article, just use {{mainarticle}}. Also, it's subjective - why do only certain districts get mentioned as "well-known barrios"? On what are you basing this? Plaza Elliptica, Callao, Goya, etc for example, aren't mentioned. You need to cut and paste into a spell checker - "effectivey" isn't a word. I like the photo of Osito, no explanation as to why he's the emblem of Madrid, though. It is clear that the article has had a lot of contribution from non-native speakers of English, as it's very stileted in parts ("Through its programmes this new channel tries to advertise Madrid city."), and could really do with a good copy edit - I'd be happy to do this once all the information is on the page, let me know via my talk page. Neil (not Proto ►) 16:55, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I believe we can give more info on the districts you mention. And there is a legend about the osito and the tree, we need to find a ref for it. We'll try to address everything asap. Thanks for the copyedit offer, btw! :-D Raystorm 16:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Earlier comments from WikiProject Cities Assessment[edit]

Rated B Good coverage and well written. Excellent collection of images. Reasonable referencing of sources.

Resolve copyright issue with Image:New Coat of Madrid.svg or remove it.
Use Citation templates for all references.
Remove px sizing and left placement from thumbnail images to improve article readability.
Reduce usage of subsections by writing comprehensive paragraphs instead. (Eg. Culture)
Avoid usage of incomplete paragraphs.
Remove or create sub articles for lists such as City attractions.
Remove wikilink tagging of broken/red wikilinks.
Change URL references to footnote references as only one reference style should be used.

Copied from Madrid comment page EspanaViva 20:34, 10 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Comment from MJCdetroit[edit]

Some of the other editors above already said some of the things that I would have said but let me ask this:

Why isn't there a Geography section? I know as a little kid I learn that the rain in Spain falls mainly on the plain, but you'd think that there would be at least a few sentences worth saying on the geography of Madrid. —MJCdetroit 01:50, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your insights, we'll try to address them asap. :-) Funny rhyme, that one... Raystorm 16:17, 12 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

No more comments requested[edit]

Thank you to each of the reviewers, your comments are appreciated! At this point, we would like to request no more comments at this time until we have had a chance to implement the comments above. EspanaViva 16:31, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

You don't do a lot of these, do you? :) Just leave it open and get as many suggestions as you can - it'll drop off the bottom of the list soon, and the more feeback the better... Dev920 (Have a nice day!) 16:37, 13 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Some improvements have been made following Dev920's suggestions, such as the City Government, Transportation, Universities, general infobox, Television and Climate. --Maurice27 23:45, 20 March 2007 (UTC)[reply]