Wikipedia:Peer review/Kosovo/archive1

Kosovo

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

This peer review discussion has been closed.
For a while, this article has been a battleground for dozens of editors. Somehow, we managed to put it into a somehow stable NPOV state and now I think it's time to improve the content. Any comments are appreciated.

Thanks, Tone 20:37, 25 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Ruhrfisch comments: There is a lot of information here but it needs to be better written and organized to make it to higher standards like GA or someday FA. Here are some suggestions for improvment:

• It is always useful to find a model article and follow it for ideas on style, sturcture, etc. There are a fair number of country FAs - I note that Israel, which also has disputed territory and a long history, is one and may be a good model.
• Please make sure the lead follows
  WP:LEAD
  and is a summary of the whole article - my rule of thumb is that all of the section headers should be mentioned in the lead somehow - so Politics, Economy and Demographics as examples seem not to be in the lead.
• Also do the Albanian and Serbian names have to be given in the lead? If this is a style guideline, fine, but it seems excessive for the lead. WP:LEAD also states these should not just be in the lead, but repeated in the article (which they do not seem to be in the Name section at least)
• Spell out abbreviations the first time followed by the abbreviation in parentheses - for example, UNMIK in the lead
• Why is the western part called "Metohija" (Метохија) (Dukagjini in Albanian)?
• The three infoboxes lead to a huge amount of white space on my computer - there is the fist paragraph of history and then nothing in the text until after the last infobox.
• Calling code in the infobox is a broken link
• The intro to the History seems to suffer from
  WP:RECENTISM
  . Also the phrase the latter notably surrounding the Battle of Kosovo eponymous of the Kosovo region. is awkward and should be rewritten.
• I do not think "Main article: History of Kosovo" has to be given twice in 5 lines of text at the start of History.
• For its overall importance one sentence on the Battle of Kosovo seems a bit too little: In the 1389 Battle of Kosovo, Ottoman forces defeated a coalition led by Lazar Hrebeljanović.
• Explain Image:SAP Kosovo.png better in the caption - the dark red is current Kosovo and it and the bright red were the province, right?
• There are several very short sections, for example Foreign relations and Military, that should either be expanded or combined. Or the Districts section has no text besides a link and Municipalities and cities has one sentence and a link.
• Cinema and Media section makes no mention of Cinema.
• References are a mess and need to be consistent. Use of {{cite web}} and other cite templates may help. Internet refs need url, title, publisher, author if known, and date accessed, for example.
• Article needs a copyedit.
• Semi-automated review makes some more valid observations to help improve this.

Hope this helps, interesting read Ruhrfisch _><>°^° 19:57, 29 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]