Wikipedia:Peer review/Condoleezza Rice/archive1

Condoleezza Rice[edit]

This article has been a GA for a month and a half. What improvements need to be made before it can be put up for FAC? In particular, thoughts on the "Criticisms and Responses" section would be appreciated. Thank you. -Fsotrain⁰⁹ 18:28, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

How about placing North Korea in Regional issues a bit higher due to recent nuclear tests? --Brand спойт 19:52, 15 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

You really should consider trimming the article down, especially in the pre-politics area and the stance on political issues. A seperate page with further details would be better than having an extremely long section. Germany has/had the same problem, last I checked. The citations are excellent, except that last "blAck news" thing. What was that? You should look into it as a reliable source. You have some vandalism problems- I suggest a low-level lock (anons and new users) would be appropriate. Still, you have an amazing piece of work as an article. NPOV is in order, as far as I am concerned. Please though, you have many unsourced statements in the Criticisms section. Citing an urban legends site for this is simply inappropriate. I suggest finding a better source for this, or simply remove that. Hope this helps. --Evan^{(Salad dressing is the milk of the infidel!)} 00:50, 16 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
There is too much text which doesn't have inline citations, and the article is chock full of external jumps, which should all be eliminated. External websites belong in external links. Sandy (Talk) 20:13, 19 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
Please see automated peer review suggestions here. Ruhrfisch 03:42, 21 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]
I don't know that this article can ever become an FA, because it describes a current politician and is subject to change (and therefore unstable). -- Ci e lomobile ^{talk / contribs} 04:34, 30 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]