Wikipedia:Peer review

Several terms redirect here. For other uses, see Wikipedia:FAQ/Article subjects, Wikipedia:Patrolled revisions, WP:PRSOURCE, Wikipedia:WikiProject Peerage and Baronetage, Wikipedia:Reviewing pending changes, and Wikipedia:New pages patrol.

MainUn­an­swe­redIn­struc­tionsDi­scus­sionToolsAr­chivePro­ject

Wikipedia's peer review process is a feature where an editor can receive feedback from others on how to improve an article they are working on, or receive advice about a specific issue queried by the editor. The process helps users find ways for improvement that they themselves didn't pick up on. Compared to the real-world peer review process, where experts themselves take part in reviewing the work of another, the majority of the volunteers here, like most editors in Wikipedia, lack expertise in the subject at hand. This is a good thing—it can make technically worded articles more accessible to the average reader. Those looking for expert input should consider contacting editors on the volunteers list, or contacting a relevant WikiProject.

To request a review, see the instructions page. Nominators are limited to one review at a time, and are encouraged to help reduce the backlog by commenting on other reviews. Any editor may comment on a review, and there is no requirement that any comment be acted on. Editors and nominators may both edit articles during the discussion.

You can find the list of all current peer reviews in different formats: a list with reviewers' comments included, a list without any reviewers' comments or a list by date.

Arts

Pusher Love Girl

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to take it to FAC in the future.

Thanks, RedShellMomentum 19:50, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Ömer the Tourist in Star Trek

I've listed this article for peer review because I have substantially expanded it and would like to get it to GA status. It would mean a lot to me as a new editor here. I am inexperienced in writing entire articles and would like some guidance.

Thanks, Wreaderick (talk) 11:41, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

16dvnk

First reading of the article:

Something that jumped out to me is that there are only four sources over the entire article. That raises serious doubts over if it is comprehensive, which is part of criterion 3a.. Ref 4 is a Youtube video. According to WP:YT, it says: Many YouTube videos of newscasts, shows, or other content of interest to Wikipedia's readers are copyright violations and should not be linked, either in the article or in citations.

I am unsure if the citation is a copy violation or not. Check if it is. If so, remove it.

Ref 3 is a blog, which Wikipedia prohibits.

With all the above, I conclude that we should not be going for GA yet. The article is not ready for WP:BCLASS in my opinion. We will work on B class before continuing to WP:GA.

Start of actual review

First, familiarize yourself with the B class criteria. (WP:BCLASS)

I will first focus on the first criteria. (The article is suitably referenced, with inline citations.)

As per the above, it does not seem to be suitably referenced. There are 4 citations, and 2 of them I find problematic. The peer reviewed source like Ref 2 is a very good one. Ref 1 should be the typical type of source you should include as peer reviewed articles are not directly relevant in this type of article. Read WP:BACKWARDS for a guide to find better sources. Remove all unsourced claims.

Entire sections are unsourced. For instance, the Complete cast section is unsourced.

Overall, the sourcing needs a lot more work.

Criteron 2 of B class:

The article reasonably covers the topic, and does not contain obvious omissions or inaccuracies.

Given the lack of sources, I doubt that it reasonably covers the topic. Follow WP:BACKWARDS as recommended, and expanding sources would make it cover the topic.

Criterion 3:

The article has a defined structure

No issues found.

Criterion 4:

The article is reasonably well-written.

The See also section seems redundant. Either add more relevent links or remove it.

The prose also has minor grammatical and prose/formatting issues. I recommend a copy edit request at WP:GOCE.

(character names and spellings taken from the film's credits)

That is not how to include that sentence. You should add a footnote at the end of the paragraph with the contents of that instead.

Criterion 5:

The article contains supporting materials where appropriate.

All the images are under free use, which is good. However, I do not see how Spak speaking directly to the camera of a seemingly random character is relevent. Is this the main character? It is. However, I do not see the relevance here.

Criteron 6:

The article presents its content in an appropriately understandable way.

Clear. I do not think that there are any major issues with this as this is not a technical article.

In short, this is more like a C (maybe even Start) class article that needs much more work to reach B class. Only when it gets B class shall we work on GA. The sourcing and coverage is the major bottleneck; MOS second. Thank you. 16dvnk (talk) 04:06, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

@Wreaderick pinging as in PR, for some reason replying does not get notified. 16dvnk (talk) 04:12, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

A decent idea of a B class article would be Knowledge cutoff, as it is the only solid B class article I wrote. 16dvnk (talk) 04:27, 19 September 2026 (UTC)

Blue Letter (EP)

Listing this article to look for feedback and improve it for good article status nomination. Any help is appreciated!

Thanks, Glitzae talk talk 03:17, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

AdaCiccone

I can't possibly do a spot-check (GA criterion 2) because most sources are in the language I don't speak. Here's some stuff that caught my attention. Anyway, here's some GA-level articles about extended plays that you probably want to read: The Love Club EP, Don't Smile at Me.

• Critical reception should be in the lead on an article like this. You can probably make room by reducing the contributors list (Enan, Sun Ahn, Savage House Gang, and Oshimaxx).
• For the opening sentence of Background, did the investigation conclude before or after his departure? Also, as far as my English capability go, I don't think allegations are usually cleared. People are normally "cleared of allegations" instead.
  • "In 2020" is repeated. Try varying it to "in the same year" or something.
  • Blue Letter is described as Wonho's second EP. But there are two preceding releases here, Love Synonym Pt.1: Right for Me and Love Synonym Pt.2: Right for Us. Some who regularly read popular music articles may understand that those two EPs constitute just one piece of artistic vision. But others may question why does this have two previous releases when it is described as the second EP?
  • Material in the second paragraph of Background fits more naturally in Release and promotion.
• Promotional activities for the EP clearly didn't begin on September 17, 2021 because On August 22, Wonho appeared on Idol's Online Music Talk Show on Melon Station, an original audio content service by streaming platform Melon, to promote Blue Letter.
• a scheduler revealing new content: What does scheduler mean here? It links to a general schedule term, nothing related to the topic.
• The physical release ... was separated in three numbered CD editions.: Could be reworded to something simpler, like "The EP was released in three numbered CD editions."
• on the Yes24 Live Hall: Should be "at the Yes24 Live Hall"
• After receiving medical attention on site, the concert resumed: This reads as the concert itself receving medical attention, a case of dangling modifier.
• "Come Over Tonight" features 808 and...: Better explain what 808 is.
• an acoustic song, which only features an acoustic guitar, and Wonho's vocals: Could be reworded to something simpler, like "a song featuring only acoustic guitar and Wonho's vocals."
• The music-show itinerary is too much. There are exact dates, broadcaster names, song combinations etc. This is only repeating the same information that Wonho performed the same songs on another programme. Reduce it but keep essential information about the campaign.
• Does "6 pm KST" have some kind of significance for the music video? I'd remove it if it didn't have any.

Hope this helps. Other editors might add a few more. AdaCiccone (talk) 10:30, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Thank you so much! This was very helpful and I have made the respective changes based on your review. Thanks again! Glitzae talk talk 19:18, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Misneach

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 12 September 2026, 14:24 UTC

Last edit: 16 September 2026, 17:31 UTC

Moka Kamishiraishi

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to gather ideas for its improvement and eventually put it up for GA nomination.

Thanks, PetéWarrior (talk) 14:40, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Believe (Staind song)

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 31 August 2026, 17:59 UTC

Last edit: 10 September 2026, 18:03 UTC

Tomorrow's Pioneers

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 23 August 2026, 14:48 UTC

Last edit: 17 September 2026, 00:54 UTC

Make It Shine

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to take it to FA one day. Biggest things I would like to work on are the reception and seeing what sources classify as high-quality.

Thanks, Carnival of Lights (talk) 23:27, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Jenna Ortega

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to get it to FA-status and want to ensure it's up to scratch before (or if) I nominate it.

Thanks, Pamzeis (talk) 06:16, 15 August 2026 (UTC)

Traveler (Genshin Impact)

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 14 August 2026, 16:39 UTC

Last edit: 16 September 2026, 20:22 UTC

Jones's van (Dad's Army)

I've listed this article for peer review because I believe it may be eligible for good article status. However, I am unsure whether anything else needs to be added to the article. Any comments would be appreciated.

Thanks, Mr Sitcom (talk) 09:26, 29 July 2026 (UTC)

Comments from Z1720

The article is looking a little scarce. I would search for additional sources in WP:LIBRARY, Google Scholar, archive.org, or databases available in your local library system. Sources used in Dad's Army, especially books, might also give additional information about the topic. Z1720 (talk) 21:57, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for the suggestions, I will take a closer look at the sources you've mentioned soon. Mr Sitcom (talk) 08:10, 17 August 2026 (UTC)

I've taken a look, but did not find anything substantial. However, I have added additional information to the article using other sources. Mr Sitcom (talk) 12:13, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

Jelly (YouTuber)

I've listed this article for peer review because I am just looking for general feedback on what could be changed, added or removed. I would also like an entire review of the article.

Thanks, ReelCosmix (talk) 16:13, 16 July 2026 (UTC)

Petewarrior

I took a quick look and did some minor copyedits (which you reverted, for some reason). The most glaring flaw is of course the birthday, which needs a reliable source. Other than that, I think minimizing the use of WP:PROSELINE would be a great start. PetéWarrior (talk) 05:29, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Everyday life

The Giant Spider Invasion

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I think it has what it takes to be a Featured Article but I want to see if there is anything else that could be done before sending it off for review. GamerPro64 04:04, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Jetpac Refuelled

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to nominate this to FAC. Jaguar successfully nominated this to GAN in 2015, and I think the article is close to being ready for an FA promotion.

Thanks, Z1720 (talk) 02:48, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Engineering and technology

Leaky integrator

I've listed this article for peer review because I am proposing a substantial extending of the existing article. The proposed version is currently at User:DDadyka/Leaky integrator. I would particularly appreciate comments on the mathematical correctness, article structure, and whether the userspace draft would be an improvement over the current article. Thanks, DDadyka (talk) 19:09, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Otvet

I've listed this article for peer review because I have substantially revamped it, and I would like to have input and assistance from others to ensure that it meets the standards that are expected for Military History articles.

Thanks, NotRealShady7 7 7 (customer service) 19:52, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Knowledge cutoff

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 27 August 2026, 14:02 UTC

Last edit: 19 September 2026, 03:15 UTC

Workstation

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 2 August 2026, 12:14 UTC

Last edit: 11 September 2026, 00:53 UTC

SS D. M. Clemson (1903)

I'm putting this article up for peer review with the goal of gaining additional insight into potential improvements to it, in preparation for a FA review within the year. I have probably devoted more time to improving this article's quality than to any other piece I've ever worked on, and would love to see it reach the accredited pinnacle of quality. The references were re-formatted per the guidance I received on an earlier PR. Specifically, I would like to receive feedback on the grammar and any possible improvements to it, as well as spot checks of the references.

Thanks. Akaza ^[talk] 17:05, 28 July 2026 (UTC)

RoySmith

I'm not sure if I'll do a full review, but one thing that jumped out at me is that she used a quadruple-expansion engine. Triples were common, but this is the first I've ever heard of a quad. It's worth mentioning in the lead.

I've dug into this a bit. Unfortunately, having read just the first section (Background), I have to say the writing needs a lot of work. It is written in a choppy style: a series of short declarative sentence which don't connect to each other in a coherent way, i.e. it lacks flow. If you google for "choppy writing" you will find many places that talk about this with suggestions on how to improve it. It might be worth submitting this to WP:GOCE to see what they can do.

To give you a better idea of what I'm talking about, here's a couple of examples from the article which do it better.

... The development of the pneumatic rivet gun and the advancement of gantry cranes enabled shipyard employees to work at an increased speed, with greater efficiency.[12] This, combined with the rapidly decreasing steel prices, contributed to the rapid increase in the size of lake freighters in the late 19th and early 20th centuries.[13]

the first part of this paragraph (elided here) is boring to read because of the disconnected sentences. But these two final sentences are much more interesting to read. The "This, combined with ..." construct ties this sentence back to the previous one with a cause-and-effect relationship. Here's another one:

... He was appointed general manager of the newly assembled fleet of vessels belonging to the United States Steel Corporation's subsidiary, the Pittsburgh Steamship Company, in 1901.[18] Shortly thereafter, Wolvin founded the Provident Steamship Company in Duluth, commissioning four large vessels for his new venture ...

Here, you use "Shortly thereafter" to connect the action described in this sentence (the founding of the company) to the action from the previous one (being appointed general manager). This relates the two sentences chronologically, carrying the reader along as the story evolves. Unfortunately, the stodgy, choppy examples are far more common.

On an unrelated topic, I'd take things like "56.95% of the 16,036,043 long tons (16,293,372 t) of the iron ore" and simplify it to "57% of the 16 million long tons. It's not quite as precise, but this article is about the D. M. Clemson, not a deep dive into shipping statistics, so spare the reader the unnecessary detail. Sorry I couldn't be more encouraging, but hopefully this will give you some ideas of how to get this up to FA quality. RoySmith (talk) 17:06, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

@Akaza Have you seen the comments I left above? RoySmith (talk) 13:01, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

@RoySmith I haven't, no. I've been recovering from surgery recently, and haven't been too active. I'll take a better look tomorrow. Akaza ^[talk] 00:27, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

• Quads were quite common on the Great Lakes during the late 19th/early 20th century, with many famous vessels (e. g. the Augustus B. Wolvin, Milwaukee Clipper, and most of the Great Lakes Transit Corporation's package freighters) being equipped with them. I'm not sure it's worth a mention on in the lede.
• I do have some ideas to improve the textual flow of the article. I am slightly puzzled, as this was not noted during the GA review, and wasn't addressed during the previous run at GOCE, where it was given a thorough going over.
• I don't have any qualms about simplifying the statistics in the background section.

Akaza ^[talk] 20:15, 12 September 2026 (UTC)

Stance detection

Hello! I recently created a Stance detection article and wanted a general peer review. It has largely been developed in a sandbox up until now. I am still working on sections regarding applications, as well as multimodal and multilingual models, so I am mostly interested in how the existing content or sourcing can be improved. I know it uses a few pre-prints, but I tried to keep those relatively limited to where they were relevant and with generally established authors. I look forward to any critiques and feedback! Jacob Rampino (talk) 18:02, 29 June 2026 (UTC)

Hey! Noob editor here, just trying to be helpful. I like this article! Just a few reactions.

• I really like intros that start with a barebones definition then expand. Focus on how it's an NLP task; I think you could take out the reference to computational linguistics, and move essential techniques (content analysis and text mining) to later in the paragraph.
• That survey paper (ALDayel) is a really strong reference. I appreciated the history bit.
• The header Supervised classification could probably be replaced with something nodding to the fact that the section is about traditional ML models. The task at hand could be called a supervised classification task, so this isn't super clear to me reading the subtitle what the following content will be.
• For the Deep Learning section it feels like we're really focused on the history of the task. I think that's fine for ordering, but within paragraphs, since it's a technical article, it might be better to start with the what. When skimming, people like to start a paragraph to see if they want to read the rest, so a what/why/how structure can be better than the why/what/how structure the paragraphs use right now. A little more nitpicky, I think talking about BERT you could frame how the papers specifically take advantage of the model structure structure and fine tuning techniques to do the task; right now a lot of the detail about BERT and fine-tuning feel like definitions I could get, more or less, by clicking the article names. I think the level of detail is fine, it just needs to feel justified.
• "generative models often cannot be archived for replication" is more of a researcher complaint than a fundamental flaw from a user perspective, so it might belong in a separate sentence.
• I do like that the article is framed as an NLP task, but with the nods to real-world use-case drawbacks in the LLM section, I would be interested if you can find sources in on actual real-world use. If so, that would be really interesting info!
• The Espinosa source is a decent experiment, but you kind of make it sound like a survey result. Not sure it really backs up something as strong as "no single model has been found to consistently dominate across tasks." It might be fine.

Hamolton (talk) 01:38, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Thank you for this feedback! This is all incredibly actionable and I agree. I will make these changes. Jacob Rampino (talk) 02:17, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

Yay glad to be helpful! Hamolton (talk) 19:28, 5 August 2026 (UTC)

GuineaPigC77

This article looks well researched. Two things I noticed...

• Some of the sources look like preprints, which are considered unreliable Wikipedia:Reliable_sources/Perennial_sources#Preprints
• Per Wikipedia:Manual_of_Style/Lead_section#Citations I think the lead should only summarize what is alread cited later in the article.

I hope you find these short comments helpful! GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 02:17, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi! I will definitely incorporate your comments for the lead. However, preprints are simply treated like SPS, and can be used reliably if the authors are subject-matter experts! Jacob Rampino (talk) 03:52, 14 August 2026 (UTC)

Sodium-cooled fast reactor

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 8 June 2026, 05:17 UTC

Last edit: 16 September 2026, 21:20 UTC

General

English whisky

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get feedback on how to improve the article to reach B and then GA Class

Thanks, ChefBear01 (talk) 14:09, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

I don’t know why the link to select a topic leads to an archive page ChefBear01 (talk) 14:11, 7 August 2026 (UTC)

Are there any tasks I can do to assist in getting to the goals above.ChefBear01 (talk) 19:16, 11 August 2026 (UTC)

@Neils51:,@Bruce1ee: do you have any suggestions?.ChefBear01 (talk) ChefBear01 (talk) 22:15, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

The production stages section needs completing.ChefBear01 (talk) 22:23, 19 August 2026 (UTC)

Perhaps the list of distilleries would be improved by being in a table? Neils51 (talk) 23:27, 20 August 2026 (UTC)

I think that editors are trying to keep it in prose.ChefBear01 (talk) 16:07, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

@Davemck: is there a way to find fill the article with academic/book/journal cites more easily to strengthen the primary cites with the others as secondary supporting cites.ChefBear01 (talk) 19:55, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Tomodachi Life (video game)

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 7 August 2026, 17:14 UTC

Last edit: 15 September 2026, 20:23 UTC

FC Dynamo Moscow's 1945 tour of the United Kingdom

I've listed this article for peer review because I'm considering nominating it for WP:FA, and having never done one before, I wanted feedback here before I actually nominated it.

Thanks, ShadowBallX (talk) 05:41, 25 August 2026 (UTC)

2026 EFL Championship play-off final

I've listed this article for peer review because I think it has a reasonable chance of getting to FA status after heavily expanding on it in August.

Thanks, Alpha Beta Delta Lambda (talk) 14:26, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Latch Wales

I'd love to get this article to good article status, but considering the currently available sources I have found, I am at loss in regards to how to expand it and improve it. A newer editor, so appreciate the help of more experienced editors. Thanks Edlectro28 (talk) 23:30, 4 September 2026 (UTC)

Prezbo

As you say it's a good article but it's spare. If the sources aren't there then they aren't there...have you tried Wikipedia:The Wikipedia Library or newspapers.com? Prezbo (talk) 01:11, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Yes I have tried Wiki Library, I'll maybe have another poke around though. I did feel I had squeezed most of the information I could get out of this article without it being excessive. Shame, but I'm glad that someone else agrees Edlectro28 (talk) 12:28, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

I was going to say also maybe look at Ronald McDonald House or Fisher House Foundation for ideas, but those articles are pretty sparse too. Prezbo (talk) 12:45, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

In fact, I did use Teenage Cancer Trust as a very basic structural reference, and even though that's quite a well known charity in the UK (I believe, I am Canadian) its not particularly detailed Edlectro28 (talk) 15:32, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Aperture Tag

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 6 September 2026, 13:42 UTC

Last edit: 17 September 2026, 12:38 UTC

Digital Dance Mix Vol. 1 Namie Amuro

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to bring it to FA status. I am the main author of this article and successfully brought it to GA in February this year. I believe it is nearly ready for FAC. This will be my first FA nomination, so I appreciate any comments and assistance. Thank you! MidnightMayhem (talk) 02:38, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Geography and places

Indonesia

Previous peer review

I've listed this article for peer review because I'd like to take the article to FAC. It's just passed GA a few days back (I hope this isn't too soon). Any feedback is welcome. I want to make sure the article is in top-notch condition quality-wise before the FAC nomination is submitted.

Thank you, AdaCiccone (talk) 12:11, 11 September 2026 (UTC)

Wikipedian12512

(General note: if someone wants to go there, I want one more comment on the peer review on Malta, which is similar to this guy.)

I may do more, but I’ll start with an image review and etymology, mostly because I’m lazy :).

Don’t think you need to say who George Earl is; readers can click on him if they want to know.

Etymology might be a good place to talk about the islands a bit. Can you name the big ones there?

Should you translate the name of Bastian’s book? Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 19:56, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Pictures:

I’d request a clear satellite image of the islands

Maybe the infrastructure should have some pictures of older buildings or roads? Cheers, _{In solidarity} Wikipedian12512 (Talking is fine | contribs) 20:01, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

Malta

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 8 August 2026, 22:40 UTC

Last edit: 6 September 2026, 18:52 UTC

South-East District (Botswana)

This article is a mess and it's extremely vital to Botswana. I don't even know where to start and I would really like a second opinion, because I had plans for this article until I wikibonked and even had to check the Grokipedia page. (I swear on my life this will never happen again)

Thanks, splains (💬/📝) 02:09, 28 June 2026 (UTC)

History

Assassination of Patrice Lumumba

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 2 September 2026, 06:48 UTC

Last edit: 11 September 2026, 10:31 UTC

Byrhtnoth

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 31 August 2026, 01:27 UTC

Last edit: 15 September 2026, 13:36 UTC

Russell Maroon Shoatz

At this point I'm tinkering around the edges of this article and I'm curious what others think. I'm aware that I could add page numbers where I'm citing his memoir (I was working from a pdf, the physical book is in the mail). I could also do a more exhaustive search of newspaper articles on newspapers.com and corroborate some more information that way. [Edit-have now done these things for the most part]. But at this point I think I've done enough work that it would be helpful to get an outside perspective before going further. Thanks for your consideration.Prezbo (talk) 11:51, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

1998 Northern Territory referendum

I've listed this article for peer review because I have significantly reworked it and it's my first time making big structural edits to an article like this.

Thanks, Packrat3860 (talk) 02:03, 26 August 2026 (UTC)

Prezbo

Being American I didn't know this topic from a hole in the head. I think you did a good job of laying out the course of events. You could include some quotes from the opposing sides, that would add some color. You could say more about what pushed this issue to the top of the political agenda at this particular point in time. You could also say more about what was at stake—was this an issue of prestige or symbolic equality, or would statehood have changed people's daily lives?Prezbo (talk) 21:42, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

296cherry

This article, as it stands, is quite well structured and covers most of the bases. Something I would add is more representation of the aboriginal position. I very much appreciate that their position is stated in the lead, but I believe there should be somewhat more content in the body of the article to justify this. At least another paragraph. Also, if there were other “NO” parties, explain their positions as well. Still, this article is pretty good as it stands, and I am rating it as c-class instead of the current start-class. 296cherry (talk) 19:12, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Byzantium in the Crusading movement

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 14 August 2026, 08:22 UTC

Last edit: 12 September 2026, 06:55 UTC

Natural sciences and mathematics

Micronesian myzomela

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 17 September 2026, 02:21 UTC

Last edit: 19 September 2026, 00:15 UTC

Commognition

I've listed this article for peer review because the article fills a real gap within the encyclopedia yet because of the current large backlog, it is still not reviwed.

Thanks, RetiredResearchKing123 (talk) 13:29, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

Low-mass X-ray binary

Recently created this article and I'm pretty proud of it so far. I was hoping to take it to GA status, and wanted advice on what to improve before nominating it there. In particular, I would like advice on what parts of the article to make less WP:TECHNICAL (GA criterion 1a). I would also like some advice on which scientific terms to explain further and which can suffice with just a wikilink.

Thanks, Shocksingularity (talk) 01:44, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Rosa (sea otter)

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 19 August 2026, 00:45 UTC

Last edit: 18 September 2026, 07:47 UTC

Braitenberg vehicle

I've listed this article for peer review to get input on the images and the final section, as well as any other suggestions for improvement.

Thanks, GuineaPig_C77 (𒅗𒌤) ☕ 07:44, 13 August 2026 (UTC)

List of mammals of Missouri

I want to get this article to FL, but I am largely unfamilial with the FL process and need feedback on what tweaks that need to be made before I nominate it.

Thanks, ZKevinTheCat (talk) 12:34, 6 August 2026 (UTC)

Urtica ferox

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 17 July 2026, 05:45 UTC

Last edit: 15 September 2026, 05:45 UTC

Language and literature

Quingnam language

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to get it to FA status soon and want any issues to getting it there, particularly prose and referencing format, ironed out before my real nomination.

Thanks, 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 18:29, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

RoySmith

I've only just glanced at this, but a few things jump out.

• The maps in the infobox are hard to understand. There's no scale for the top one and it's zoomed in so far there's no geographic context. The bottom one has a scale, but it's barely readable, and still no geographic context. The folks as Wikipedia:Graphics Lab/Map workshop can help you produce something better. Also, you probably want to move these down to be in the "Geographical distribution" section so they're near the text that talks about them per MOS:SECTIONLOC.

• WP:FACR 2b requires "a substantial but not overwhelming system of hierarchical section headings". I think you will find resistance to your use of very short (one or two sentence) sections.

• We don't have a lot of FAs about ancient languages, but I see Tabancale language at WP:FAC right now and Ancient Cappadocian language was promoted just a few weeks ago. I suggest pinging the nominators of those to see if they can give you some good reviews. See also WP:REVIEWME.
  • Oh, duh. Tabancale is one of yours :-)

• The name would thus mean 'to spin, for spinning' Which meaning of "spin" did you have in mind? Spinning (textiles)? Spin (propaganda)? Or maybe something else?

• It is mentioned that a grammar, dictionary and other documents ... Who mentioned this?

• but most of them were collected in Moche by Eduardo Calderón Palomino This is es:Eduardo Calderón Palomino, yes? If so, he deserves a {{Interlanguage link}}. More generally, you should do a comprehensive search in eswiki of all the people and places you mention that are not already linked to enwiki articles. It's likely many of these have Spanish articles that should be linked to.

• This article claims that Quingnam is unrelated to Mochica, but es:Idioma quingnam claims they are related. How to resolve this difference? I also see a few sources in the eswiki article that are not used here. Have you checked to see if there's anything you missed?

@RoySmith: the eswiki article contains a lot of bullshit about Quingnam. They are definitely unrelated if you look at the numerals for both Quingnam and Mochica. I do have the capability to make maps myself so I might be able to whip up something to replace these maps. Sources on eswiki don't seem to fill any lacunæ in the article. I've condensed some sections as I see fit now. Thanks for spotting the eswiki link; I've now found everything I can link. I frankly don't know what Urban was trying to say for the 'spin' gloss, though my guess is the movement. I certainly get the idea of moving the maps down but from what I've seen it seems to be standard practice for language articles to leave a map in the infobox. I may be able to contact other reviewers as well. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 23:24, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

P.S. I've fixed the "it is mentioned" issue too. 🪐Kepler-1229b | talk | contribs🪐 23:27, 15 September 2026 (UTC)

Warriors (novel series)

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 1 September 2026, 18:04 UTC

Last edit: 7 September 2026, 19:25 UTC

F

I've listed this article for peer review because...I want to improve it and nominate it to GA

Thanks, Furbchess (talk) 18:25, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments by Shocksingularity

• Its name in English is ef, and the plural is efs. This confuses me. I've never heard of a letter having a "name" besides just the letter. I'd go into that more or explain it elsewhere.
• The origin of ⟨F⟩ is the Semitic letter waw, which represented the sound /w/. and ḥ(dj)) Use the IPAc template for pronunciations.
• Is there any way you can get the hieroglyph to be on the same line as the rest of the text?
• The Etruscan digraph may have been inspired by the rare use of ⟨ϜΗ⟩ in archaic Greek inscriptions for a dialectal sound like [ʍ], e.g. in the reflexive pronoun ϜΗΕ, which corresponds to Classical ἕ hé (see Ancient Greek phonology § Semivowels). This is very difficult to understand as an uniformed reader.
• F : Fluorine, a chemical element uses the symbol F Minor error but it's ...that uses the symbol F
• Other section (at the very end): Explain what the diagram and each of the symbols mean.
• Other uses section is good.

Shocksingularity (talk) 02:00, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Ok, thanks for the tips! Furbchess (talk) 17:13, 1 September 2026 (UTC)

Philosophy and religion

Transparency of experience

I've listed this article for peer review because I am planning to take it to FAC and want feedback on how it can be improved to meet the FA criteria. I'm also interested to improve the accessibility of the article, it is a difficult topic so any feedback on what parts others find the most confusing/least accessible would be really helpful!

Thanks, Shapeyness (talk) 16:17, 13 September 2026 (UTC)

Truth

I've listed this article for peer review to prepare it for a featured article candidacy. I would be interested to learn what changes are required to fulfill the featured article criteria, but I'm also open to more casual improvement ideas.

Thanks, Phlsph7 (talk) 16:48, 28 August 2026 (UTC)

Comments by Shocksingularity

• The explanations of the theories in the second paragraph of the lead could for the most part be a little simpler/written in a more understandable style. Some of the language is a bit technical.
• The images of David Malet Armstrong and Alfred Tarski are not really that helpful to the encyclopedic content of the article, so I'd remove them.

Overall, I think it looks good and could probably pass FA as-is, as long as you take into account any feedback from FA reviewers. Shocksingularity (talk) 02:10, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Hi Shocksingularity and thanks for the comments! I rewrote the 2nd lead paragraph. It's a technical subject so it could be still somewhat challenging but I hope it's better now. I moved Armstrong's image to the history section, where he is discussed. I kept Tarski's image in the subsection "Semantic" since Tarski is explicitly mentioned there as the founder of the semantic theory and because the history section already has too many images to fit in Tarski's image as well. Phlsph7 (talk) 09:57, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

The second lead paragraph looks a lot better now! Shocksingularity (talk) 18:32, 30 August 2026 (UTC)

Pacifism in France

I've listed this article for peer review because I feel it could get to GA with some help, and I would appreciate the help and if I am delusional about the qaulity of article, for someone to tell me.

Thanks, Equivalent-Text2598 (talk) 23:50, 22 August 2026 (UTC)

296cherry

Ok, so I didn’t review the article super thoroughly, but from a first glance I’m already seeing a lot of original research. I believe that the immediate priority should be to remove any source that does not explicitly mention pacifism in France. For example, the UN peacekeeping contributing site, the Bible passage, and so on. It is distracting and violates WP:Due weight. Focusing solely on relevant sources would make this article much better, because as it stands I would rate it closer to c-class rather than its current b-class.

A few other issues:

The history section starts very late. I would at the very least cover the Peace and Truce of God and the ”Perfecti” sect of the Cathars.

It is also unclear what is meant by “pacifism”. The article, for the most part, describes it as a political and social movement. But in the last paragraph of the lead and the 21st century section, the article simply talks about the rate of violence in France. The former is the correct option, so I believe references to France’s current rate of violent crime are irrelevant.

I realize this is quite a bit of criticism, but I do appreciate that you brought this for peer review. I will try and help out by editing the article when I can, no promises though. 296cherry (talk) 19:37, 17 September 2026 (UTC)

Religious art and culture of the Shang dynasty

This is an article split from Religion of the Shang dynasty, expanding that page's Arts and culture section. Most of the sources are taken from the original section, although this article features more in-text attribution. Listed this article for peer review as I aim for higher ratings (definitely GA if I can); anyone willing to give this a look is welcomed.

Thanks, Strongman13072007 (talk) 14:32, 21 August 2026 (UTC)

Prezbo

First sentence--you're not required to restate the title of the article in the first sentence like this. When the title is long you can often write a better opening sentence if you don't restate it. Prezbo (talk) 01:29, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

• "Participation in the ancestral cult itself was apparently restricted to close lineage members, royal consorts, sons and affines" -- "affines" is quite a technical term, I would explain what that means or use something else.
• "The Xuanhe bogu tu read the ancient ornament allegorically, explaining the taotie as a warning against gluttony" -- what's the Xuanhe bogu tu?
• In general I appreciate the massive amount of work (probably a lot of your work) that went into this article, but I found it a challenging read as a layperson. It's well-organized but not the most accessible. Maybe a bit more of a thousand foot view of the social world of the Shang dynasty, or the methods scholars have used to study it? Maybe a bit more historiography? On the other hand, it's verging on "too long" at 8,878 words, so you need to be cautious about that. And I'm not sure what you can cut because I can't really get a grasp on the material. I found the section on labor interesting. And the effort of trying to understand such a different culture and scholarly world is an interesting experience. But this wasn't an easy read for me. I hope someone else can give you more actionable advice.

Prezbo (talk) 12:42, 5 September 2026 (UTC)

Social sciences and society

Monika (Doki Doki Literature Club!)

I've listed this article for peer review because I want to improve it and nominate it to GA

Thanks, Furbchess (talk) 10:53, 7 September 2026 (UTC)

Z. Patterson

I have some points to address.

• All statements need to have citations no later than at the end of the paragraph. Part of the second paragraph in the Concept and creation section has an uncited statement.
• Any out-of-universe actions need to be in past tense. For example, I see Writer Christopher Patterson describes her as a yandere.
• I do not think placing years in parentheses in the Appearances section is necessary.
• Can you try to find news articles or other reliable sources to replace the X posts?
• Is the character's birth date important? That could come across as WP:FANCRUFT.
• Please be mindful about words to watch, such as "while". See MOS:WTW.
• Citations should be placed in numerical order whenever multiple citations are used for a statement.
• Avoid starting sentences with "However".
• Per WP:VALNET, Game Rant is not a high quality source. I would try to replace or remove Game Rant.
• I checked the article history, and the article appears stable. There are no recent or ongoing edit wars, and it meets WP:GACR6 criterion 5.

Other than what I stated above, I believe the article can have a GAN. Z. Patterson (talk) 02:30, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Thanks for the tips!Furbchess (talk) 08:52, 10 September 2026 (UTC)

Arbel Yehoud

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to know how I can improve the article so that it would meet FA status. I've never written an FA before (and Arbel Yehoud is my first GA), so I'd like a more experienced Wikipedian in this area to take a look at it.

Thanks, EaglesFan37 (talk) 20:28, 26 July 2026 (UTC)

FAC PR sidebar

@EaglesFan37: I have added this article to the Template:FAC peer review sidebar. Please consider reviewing other articles listed there. Z1720 (talk) 17:02, 2 August 2026 (UTC)

• @EaglesFan37: This has been open for over a month without comment. Are you still interested in receiving feedback? Z1720 (talk) 01:52, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

  @Z1720 Yes, I am. EaglesFan37 (talk) 08:10, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

• @EaglesFan37: Since you are working towards your first successful FAC, I recommend getting a mentor who can comment in this PR and help with the FAC process. I also recommend reviewing other WP:FAC articles now, as it will help with understanding the FA criteria and build goodwill amongst FAC reviewers. Z1720 (talk) 17:42, 27 August 2026 (UTC)

  @Z1720 Sorry for the late response. Thanks for the feedback. I'll try to pick a mentor in the next few days. EaglesFan37 (talk) 12:59, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

  Independent of my review below, I encourage you to follow Z's advice about jumping into FAC reviews. RoySmith (talk) 16:42, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

RoySmith

I've only glanced at this briefly, but what immediately jumped out at me was the sourcing. You have a bunch of mainstream US and European news sources, which is good. And you also have a bunch of Israeli/Jewish sources, which isn't itself a problem, but you don't have any sources that I can identify as Palestinian, Arab, or Islamic. Reviewers at WP:FAC will quickly pick up on that and want to know how this can meet WP:FACR 1d ("neutral: it presents views fairly and without bias"). It did not take me long to find coverage of Yehoud in Al Jazeera, El Ahram, Asian News International, Middle East Eye, and Dawn (newspaper). This asymmetry of sourcing in an article on a highly controversial topic will engender quick opposition at FAC. To be honest, I'm surprised this wasn't mentioned @Wisenerd: at the GA review or @Beta Beta Beta, AirshipJungleman29, and Dclemens1971: at DYK. RoySmith (talk) 15:29, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

RoySmith, is the sourcing you found from Al Jazeera/El Ahram etc. materially different in view and tone from the ones cited in the article, such that the current selection may be considered asymmetrical? ~~ AirshipJungleman29 (talk) 16:26, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

To be honest, I didn't dig that deeply. This was kind of an elephant in the room situation, but even if those sources were similar in tone, it's important to hear the story from a wider variety of voices. RoySmith (talk) 16:36, 9 September 2026 (UTC)

@AirshipJungleman29@RoySmith I don't know why I didn't automatically get a notification, but I've subscribed now.

When I wrote the article, I primarily relied on the news tab in google for results, or coverage of interviews/activities of Arbel Yehoud since her release (which is primarily in Israeli/Jewish media).

Taking a look now, the Al Jazeera article I can find about Yehoud , doesn't say anything different than what's currently in the article. Looking at Dawn sources , , , it's mainly just press releases repeating information (maybe one thing new to add).

El Ahram isn't loading on my computer so I can't really evaluate those sources.

I can try to integrate those sources in later today. EaglesFan37 (talk) 16:13, 16 September 2026 (UTC)

Abdul El-Sayed

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

This review is too large to display here. Please go to the review directly.

Date added: 24 July 2026, 22:21 UTC

Last edit: 27 July 2026, 21:41 UTC

Harvey Brownstone

I've listed this article for peer review because I have been in the process of cleaning up this page. The main editor seems to have a conflict of interest, as they use promotional rather than neutral language. A lot of the information is poorly cited, uses non-Wikipedia-approved sources, or is not cited at all. I am also unsure how to cite YouTube videos for a living person's biography correctly. I want to see if my edits are adequate and how to further improve the page. Thanks, Sea2Sky

Lists

Joy Division discography

I've listed this article for peer review because I want this article for LI some day. I would also like an entire review of this article. Thanks, VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 00:41, 23 August 2026 (UTC)

Anyone here? VitorFriboquen :] (Talk) 19:44, 14 September 2026 (UTC)

Prezbo

Minor note, in the intro you say "they later recruited Morris's girlfriend Gillian Gilbert as keyboardist and second guitarist," without explaining who Morris is. Personally I could do without the lists of countries where the albums charted, but maybe that's interesting to others. I think it's well-organized but I don't know what separates a good discography list from a great one, sorry. Prezbo (talk) 01:27, 18 September 2026 (UTC)

WikiProject peer reviews

• WikiProject Military history: Byrhtnoth • Byzantium in the Crusading movement • Gopal Mukund Huddar • Misneach • Otvet • Pacifism in France