Talk:Psychodrama/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: TonyTheTiger (talk · contribs) 15:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC) I will review. My initinalt thoughts:

1. There are entire paragraphs without inline citations. Make sure the article is organized properly so that paragraphs contain distinct ideas and that each fact in the article is cited inline. Once you have done this there will be no paragraphs without inline citations.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
2. Make sure that you are linking the first use of each term. E.g., protagonist is not linked until the third time it is used.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:57, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
3. Also, fix the broken dablink to the right.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 15:59, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

WP:LEAD

• The LEAD is devoid of bluelinks to a lot of key terms like group therapy, protagonist. Many of these links appear later, but they should appear here.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
• There should be no space between punctuation and the citation.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:00, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Methods

• It seems like the first paragraph in this section is introductory. If it is going to introduce the various techniques, it should introduce the various session stages.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
• "The session is broken. . ." should begin a new paragraph.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:25, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Psychological Applications

• I don't know what clinical means so we need links for clinical and non-clinical.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
• link to the proper type of Trauma.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:37, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

Literary uses

• Expand or merge this section.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 22:58, 10 December 2011 (UTC)

• I am placing this on hold. The issues should be fairly easy to address. I will reconsider the issues raised within a week to evaluate progress.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:01, 10 December 2011 (UTC)
  • Thanks for addressing all the concerns above. I seem to have overlooked the references on my first review. You should add a bibliography section that includes isbn and publisher for texts that you use repeatedly. Then in the footnotes just put last name, p. ##. or pp.##–##.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 21:28, 12 December 2011 (UTC)
    • I have been waiting patiently for the final concerns to be addressed. There has been no response here for 2 weeks. If there is no response here by the end of the year, I will fail consider failing this.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 23:58, 27 December 2011 (UTC)
      • I apologize. The concerns were largely addressed without any indication here.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)

A few things from another editor

• Hey this page is looking pretty good and there is just one thing that I have noticed that doesn't look like it has been addressed yet and that is that you have multiple repeated references. References are able to be named once and used in text multiple times. Feel free to ask me any questions if you want help. Fredodin (talk) 03:35, 13 December 2011 (UTC)

I am satisfied with this article and am PASSING it now.--TonyTheTiger (T/C/BIO/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 00:01, 28 December 2011 (UTC)