Wikipedia:Peer review/European Union/archive1

European Union

This is a former FA which a number of editors have worked hard to get back up to FA, currently at GA. We would appreciate comments on how to get up to FA status and general improvements. Many editors available for rapid response.

Range of ideas welcome but please take note that the topic is a source of controversy, even between editors of similar political views, and many aspects of the article reflect this - but all comments will be heeded.

Thanks, - J Logan ^t: 20:42, 21 October 2007 (UTC)

• Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Thanks, APR _t 02:29, 23 October 2007 (UTC)

User:BirgitteSB

• LeadNeeds slight expansion. Some parts of article aren't summarized
• History The only thing not summarized from the daughter artcile was the issues under Former Yoguslovia.
• Geography The intro doesn't introduce the "Environment" sub-section. The long list of member states is hard to read. Maybe it would better to name them in the various groups they joined in for some sentence structure. The last sentence under "Member states" is hidden by the image caption on my screen.
  • Is it Macedonia or Former Yugoslavia Republic of Macedonia? Make sure images and text are consistent throughout.
  • You show Main article: European Commissioner for the Environment That is not a main article for this section if you read it. Remove the hatnote and simply link to article in the text by mentioning the office.
• GovernanceAgain the intro does not introduce the subsections very well and is a little repetitive with the "Politics" section. No mention of European Central Bank.
• Foreign relations This is not a very good summary of Foreign relations of the European Union. Doesn't introduce sub-sections and is overall weakly organized.
• 'Justice, freedom and security This is a strong section and might deserve higher billing.
• Economy Could better summarize Economy of the European Union. Missing information on Unemployment and Tourism in particular.
• Demographics This is only missing information on Migration/Immigration. I would have this directly follow the "Geography" section.
• CultureThis is a reads well on its own, but there is some theoretical overlap with Demographics. Is language culture or demographics? It is a strange in terms of overall organization. I wonder if would better be re-worked in a different way.
• Misc. Overuse of Main article hatnote. You can link within the text or use a different hatnote if it not a true daughter article.--BirgitteSB 18:31, 25 October 2007 (UTC)

Sorry for slow reply, we are working on it. Thanks for your comments! To reply to the reference to the daughter articles on history and foreign relations: well those are rubbish articles and are being brought upto scratch, hence we wouldn't want to summerise those in their present state. - J Logan ^t: 08:26, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

Oh and the Central Bank isn't an institution, hence why it is not listed with the others but instead under Economy, which is a tad more relevant? - J Logan ^t: 08:43, 30 October 2007 (UTC)

If it is not an institution that is fine. --BirgitteSB 13:23, 30 October 2007 (UTC)