This article is within the scope of WikiProject Sussex, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Sussex on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.SussexWikipedia:WikiProject SussexTemplate:WikiProject SussexSussex-related articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject Christianity, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of
Christianity on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ChristianityWikipedia:WikiProject ChristianityTemplate:WikiProject ChristianityChristianity articles
This article is within the scope of WikiProject European history, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the
history of Europe on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join
the discussion and see a list of open tasks.European historyWikipedia:WikiProject European historyTemplate:WikiProject European historyEuropean history articles
I check pages listed in
Category:Pages with incorrect ref formatting to try to fix reference errors. One of the things I do is look for content for
orphaned references in wikilinked articles. I have found content for some of
History of Christianity in Sussex's orphans, the problem is that I found more than one version. I can't determine which (if any) is correct for this article, so I am asking for a sentient editor to look it over and copy the correct ref content into this article.
I apologize if any of the above are effectively identical; I am just a simple computer program, so I can't determine whether minor differences are significant or not.
AnomieBOT⚡08:36, 7 June 2017 (UTC)reply
Semi-automatic peer review
The following suggestions were generated by a semi-automatic
javascript program, and might not be applicable for the article in question.
Please expand the lead to conform with guidelines at
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Lead section. The article should have an appropriate number of paragraphs as is shown on
WP:LEAD, and should adequately summarize the article.[?]
If there is not a
free use image in the top right corner of the article, please try to find and include one.[?]
You may wish to consider adding an appropriate
infobox for this article, if one exists relating to the topic of the article. [?] (Note that there might not be an applicable infobox; remember that these suggestions are not generated manually)
Per
Wikipedia:Manual of Style/Dates and numbers#Units of measurement, there should be a non-breaking space - between a number and the unit of measurement. For example, instead of 20 pounds, use 20 pounds, which when you are editing the page, should look like: 20 pounds.[?]
Per
Wikipedia:Manual of Style#Section headings, headings generally do not start with articles ('the', 'a(n)'). For example, if there was a section called ==The Biography==, it should be changed to ==Biography==.[?]
This article may need to undergo
summary style, where a series of appropriate subpages are used. For example, if the article is
United States, then an appropriate subpage would be
History of the United States, such that a summary of the subpage exists on the mother article, while the subpage goes into more detail.[?]
Watch for
redundancies that make the article too wordy instead of being crisp and concise. (You may wish to try Tony1's
redundancy exercises.)
Vague terms of size often are unnecessary and redundant - “some”, “a variety/number/majority of”, “several”, “a few”, “many”, “any”, and “all”. For example, “All pigs are pink, so we thought of a number of ways to turn them green.”
You may wish to browse through
User:AndyZ/Suggestions for further ideas. (Note that I've manually added: this appears to be a pretty good article, so I'm putting this here if there's any editors want to improve/expand the article, they can refer to this to see things that could be done.) Thanks,
Seagull123 Φ 22:25, 28 October 2020 (UTC)reply