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

This peer review discussion has been closed.

I've listed this article for peer review because I would like to get this article to FA. However, I have not made any FA articles. Could anyone give comments/help/guide me? Thanks, Dat Guy ^Talk _Contribs 10:26, 31 October 2016 (UTC) reply

Hello, I checked your article and found some things that might bother reviewers:

• There are too many images. Even if they are free the clash a lot with each others as well as the text.
• The lead has some citations. See WP:Lead; unless you are citing controversial info, I recommend you removing them since they are mentioned in the body.
• Avoid short paragraphs like the ones from Expansion to other platforms.
• You could also combine or expand some sections from Functionality like Design which is really small.
  • Same with Technology and updating.
• In Regions and languages, I would suggest removing the flags. They are quite redundant as we already see country right next to them. Also, they could be WP:Undue weight
• Lastly, some citations are lacking accessdate.

I hope my comments helped you. I also put a peer review here so I would appreciate you could give me feedback. Regards. Tintor2 ( talk) 22:08, 3 November 2016 (UTC) reply

Thanks Tintor2. Sorry for not being able to peer review yours. Only just noticed it, and I'm not the best content creator. Dat Guy ^Talk _Contribs 16:09, 27 November 2016 (UTC) reply