Wikipedia:Peer review/BASIC programming language/archive1: Difference between revisions
Content deleted Content added
→[[BASIC programming language]]: **I too wish to know how you check an article's page views. |
→[[BASIC programming language]]: review |
||
Line 8:
**I too wish to know how you check an article's page views. --[[User:Bodnotbod|bodnotbod]] 15:39, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
:Very well written, but I suspect it could do with being read through by someone who knows nothing about programming to check how accessible it is. Here are a few things I spotted.
:*The intro needs to be much longer to get FA status - at least two paragraphs, preferably three.
:*Early years: would be better if it said what Fortran 77 and Algol 60 are. The footnotes at the end of the paragraph should really go in a notes section at the end of the article in accordance with [[WP:CITE]]: see [[WP:FN]] for a way of doing this.
:*Maturity: "Though it is somewhat difficult to consider this language to be BASIC" - say why.
:*Procedures and flow control: The term 'procedure' needs to be explained. I'd suggest wikifying the word, but the article [[procedure]] is a little surreal at the moment. A sentence would be plenty, just something to tell a non-programmer what it means.
:*BASIC dialects: "There are more dialects of BASIC than there are of any other programming language." - could do with a source being cited.
:[[Image:Yemen flag large.png|24px]] [[User:Cantthinkofagoodname|CTOAGN]] ([[User talk:Cantthinkofagoodname|talk]]) 01:31, 11 November 2005 (UTC)
| |||