Wikipedia:Peer review/English whisky/archive2

English whisky

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

I've listed this article for peer review because I am trying to get this article to a B rating and need both to know what improvements are needed, and assistance with the implementation.ChefBear01 (talk) 22:04, 9 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

The article peer review should still be open.ChefBear01 (talk) 10:10, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rodw:,@TheWhiskyBuff:, @StefenTower:,@Ehrenkater: please could you assist with the above.ChefBear01 (talk) 21:21, 11 June 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I'm not sure why this peer review is on an archive page, but here's my two general concerns about the article:

Too many lists - there needs to be effort to rewrite as much as possible as prose.
Much of the formatting gives the article a brochure appearance. Note we aren't here to promote subjects but to describe them. We need less flair. Bolding is typically reserved for headings and lead terms.

Also it may help to look at other whisky articles for guidance on appearance and subject coverage. Check out bourbon whiskey. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 20:35, 29 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@StefenTower:, Thank you for your review please could you move the peer review to the correct place if possible.ChefBear01 (talk) 18:53, 30 July 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@StefenTower, please could you review the changes I have made. I have removed all of the list and changed the structure slightly.ChefBear01 (talk) 14:32, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I didn't say all the lists should be removed. Now the article has a lot of short sections with single sentences or sentence fragments. My point was that lists were overwhelming compared to prose, and this is solved by converting some lists to prose (as in paragraphs, not single sentences), and adding more pertinent content as prose. This article has been going a long time with a lot of edits and not significantly advancing in quality. Maybe it would be constructive to step aside for a while and give other editors the space to work on it. The article is zigging and zagging too much with not enough care for guidelines, which other experienced editors would generally bring. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 19:19, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

I may have misunderstood how peer review pages are titled as this part of Wikipedia is not one of my usual haunts. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 19:27, 1 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@StefenTower please could you assist in finding more information about the general production of English whisky, I have added information I have fond on fermentation but that is only one of five stages of production. ChefBear01 (talk)

Probably best to ask at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Spirits. I as one editor have limited understanding and resources, and this isn't a subject I know well enough to be of significant help. There will likely be folks with far greater expertise on the subject at that WikiProject. Stefen 𝕋ower_{s among the rest!} ^{Gab • Gruntwerk} 20:01, 2 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

@Rollinginhisgrave: please see the above discussion and other discussions on the talk page for suggestions made by other editors.ChefBear01 (talk) 18:33, 3 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]

Hi ChefBear, unfortunately I have very little interest in this topic at this time, and am at capacity for new Wikipedia projects. Some brief comments that will hopefully help:

If you're looking for sources, you should more actively mine the further reading list. Check The Wikipedia Library which you should have access to, use interlibrary loans, contact authors, use the Wikipedia resource request service, the resource support pilot... so on. To find other sources, look at the bibliographies of the sources you have to see older sources. To see newer works, go into Google Scholar, find the text, and click on "Cited by ___".
If you want the article to be B class, resolve the issues that have been identified for a start. Rewrite lists in prose (the guidance is at MOS:EMBED). Resolve the outstanding missing information tag. Consolidate headings to eliminate WP:OVERLINKING.
As Stefen says above, I would quite strongly recommend you drop this article for a time. Work on an article about a song, or about a book, or a typhoon. Anything with a well-defined structure you can follow, which will allow you to build some intuition of how Wikipedia articles are written as a whole. Follow WP:BESTSOURCES, only using trade magazines etc for basic information to fill in gaps. If the resulting article is short, so be it, it can be sweet. Take it to good article status. Once you have some confidence, return to this article.

Rollinginhisgrave (talk | contributions) 01:08, 4 August 2025 (UTC)[reply]