Again, the "articles" subforum was initially
set up to discuss,
in-depth, problems with article content. This is more or less what I'm
referring to:
http://wikipediareview.com/index.php?s=&showtopic=1286&view=findpos…t&p=3482,
and even that doesn't really go *that* in-depth. But evaluations of that
nature can be constructive to Wikipedia, and are one of the few
occasions where a link to WR /might/ make sense on an article talkpage.