Talk:Structuration theory/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Meclee (talk · contribs) 16:19, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Place on hold. Supplied initial copy edit. However, several direct quotations appear in the article, which are in need of page numbers added to the citation. Meclee (talk) 16:19, 22 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Support: Removing hold as article has been revised to address issues. Will wait another 7 days for any additional comments before assigning 'GA' status. Changed WikiProject Sociology assessment to GA-class. Meclee (talk) 23:48, 5 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Ok, there is something weird here. Where is the review? And Meclee, are you the nominator? If so, you cannot be the reviewer. --_{Piotr Konieczny aka Prokonsul Piotrus| talk to me} 18:45, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

No, I am not the nominator; the article was nominated by User:Mjscheer, as instructed for a student project. I should have made it more clear that, with the exception of the page numbers for quotes as noted above, I found the article passes Wikipedia:Good_article_criteria. The page number issue having been addressed by User:Mjscheer, I added my support for GA status. Meclee (talk) 19:08, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]

This article is filled concepts that are unfamiliar to the general reader and are not explained . The lede is not understandable to the general reader and is filled with jargon and technical concepts.
The section: Criticisms and additions to Giddens's structuration theory degenerates into a series of list
The article is confusing. It needs to be simplified and rendered into language the general reader can understand, with adequate explanations of jargon and links to explanatory terms. Wikipedia is not for academic papers. MathewTownsend (talk) 22:59, 8 April 2012 (UTC)[reply]