Wikipedia:Peer review/Jonathan Blow/archive2

Jonathan Blow[edit]

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

This peer review discussion is closed.

I'd like to bring this article to GAN this year, which will be my first GAN. The article underwent PR in January of this year; it was recommended that it undergoing copy editing. The WP:GUILD copyedited the article last month. I have since added another section. Comments regarding GAN standards / criteria (or otherwise) are greatly appreciated! Neuroxic (talk) 15:21, 24 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Comments from Z1720[edit]

Comments from a quick skim:

Everything seems to be cited correctly with inline citations. I think it might be close to, or ready for, a GAN.
Ref 47: Per WP:FORBESCON, Forbes contributors are not considered reliable sources on Wikipedia and this should be removed.

Done Neuroxic (talk) 04:01, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Per MOS:ALLCAPS, titles in references should be in sentence case and not use all caps (eg: refs 55, 57)

Done Neuroxic (talk) 04:10, 14 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

I hope this helps. Z1720 (talk) 14:49, 5 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks! I didn't know about the distinction between Forbes editors and contributors. I'll see if I can discover whether the Forbes article did manage to find its way into the print edition, but in the meantime I'll try rewriting the sentences which cite it.Neuroxic (talk) 22:46, 13 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]

As this is an answered review that has been inactive for a week, I'm closing the review. Neuroxic (talk) 21:45, 20 June 2023 (UTC)[reply]