Wikipedia:Peer review/Greeks/archive3

Greeks

Previous peer review

This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it has seen substantial work and would like to improve it further. Looking forward to general hints and tips as well as comments on more serious errors I might have missed.

Thanks, Anothroskon (talk) 12:10, 6 December 2009 (UTC)

Brianboulton: A few comments, not a full review, unfortunately:-

• A disambiguation link needs fixing (click on link in box top-right of this page for details)
• Dead links, refs [2] and [9]
• Some of your foreign language sources do not indicate the language used.
• Infobox confusion:-
  • "Total population" might be construed as population of Greece rather than of Greeks, so I think I'd change this to something like "World population of Greeks". But the question then arises: are the same rules as to who are "Greeks" being applied in all countries in the following list? For example, if 3 million in the US claim Greek descent, on what basis is the population figure of 1,350,000 arrived at?
  • "Regions with significant populations": first, you should specify significant Greek populations; second, what you have listed are countries, not regions; third, I don't know how you are defining "significant", but surely Turkey's Greek population of 2,500 can't be considered as a "significant" number (about one sixtieth of one percent of the world Greek population)? Same is true, I think, for all the countries in the list after Argentina.
  • Language: Greek – surely this applies to Greece rather than Greeks as a whole? Most of those outside Greece will speak the language of their countries of adoption?
  • Religion: "Greek Orthodox" is not a religion, it is a subset of Christianity. But I would question whether it is right, in any event, to assume that all Greeks, anywhere in the world, adhere to the Orthodox Church, even nominally. Most French people are Roman Coatholics, but some aren't.
  • Footnote confusion: in the infobox you are using a, b, c etc for footnotes. In the main text your first footnote is "1", but for your second you use "a", which means there are two footnotes marked "a" in the article.
  • Finally, is this the right infobox for the lead? It seems to me that the box in the Identity section, (together with the four photos) should be the lead infobox, with the population statistics incorporated somewhere else. Think about it.

Sorry I don't at present have time for more comments, but I hope these remarks are helpful. Brianboulton (talk) 12:19, 11 December 2009 (UTC)

Brian, thank you very much for taking the time to read through the article and make the above comments. I will begin implementing them presently. Again thanks.--Anothroskon (talk) 14:43, 11 December 2009 (UTC)