Talk:Brooke Street Pier/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Curly Turkey (talk · contribs) 21:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

I'll review this. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 21:44, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Feel free to revert any of my copyedits or to disagree with any of my comments.

Prose

• Australia's largest floating building and the architect has described it as a "tourism transport hub": normally the lead should summarize what's in the body. Neither of these are in the body. When you put the "largest building" bit in the body, you can remove the inline cites from there (but the quotation will still require a cite).
  • It might be a good idea to put in an "as of" for the "largest building" bit, or reword it to something like "it was Australia's largest floating building upon completion", which would be future-proof.
    • Good idea, I'll fix this. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
      •  Done -- Chuq (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
• One of the larger companies providing these services is Navigators: is Navigators worth a redlink? And if they are only "One of the larger companies", why single them out?
  • I had a plan to create the article at some point, since one of their ships, MV Cartela, has historical significance (and has had an article since 2005) They have been a tenant of all former piers in the area, as well as a partner of the Brooke Street Pier Development Corporation (two questions below) -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    •  Done Redlink (for now) added. -- Chuq (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
• One ferry operator: which?
  • The reference names him as Peter Shield, he is an employee of one of the operators, so thought it may be putting undue focus on him to use his name in the article. I can do if it is deemed appropriate, though? -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
• A development application was lodged with the Hobart City Council in April 2012.: by whom? Hunter?
  • Brooke Street Pier Development Corporation - will update to include this (+ ref) -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
• and will include services such as: as of? This will date quickly.
  • Will fix. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    •  Done -- Chuq (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
      • Well, you've reworded it, but does it reflect what the source says? The source is from 2014. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 10:37, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
        • Thinking about it a bit more, I guess it includes these things whether they came into oeration or not. I suppose it's okay. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)
• including PW1, Elizabeth Street Pier and the Mac02 Cruise Terminal: any of these worth redlinks?
  • They are potential articles (the first two at least) but didn't want to add an excess of redlinks. All are mentioned in Sullivans Cove ~ I will link this in the meantime. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    •  Done -- Chuq (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
• a working freight port: is there a difference between "a working freight port" and "a freight port"?
  • The phrase has been used in local media to differentiate between the time when the port was primarily for shipping goods, and the present day (social/leisure area). I'll remove it if it isn't familiar terminology to others. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)
    •  Done -- Chuq (talk) 03:06, 26 April 2015 (UTC)
• run by Islington Hotel's David Meredith, and featuring Ikuei Arakane as head chef: again, this will date—and I think it's superfluous and probably should be cut.
  • Arakane's involvement was mentioned in a nationwide newspaper, I expect I made an assumption of notability based on this... I can take it out. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Thanks for this list User:Curly Turkey - I'm at work at the moment but will go through these issue tonight in detail (approx 12 hours from this edit). -- Chuq (talk) 00:20, 8 April 2015 (UTC)

Remind me never to promise a specific time! Apologies - hopefully tomorrow night. -- Chuq (talk) 14:24, 9 April 2015 (UTC)

Finally got to it! Notes made above. Will make the mentioned changes now. -- Chuq (talk) 11:28, 12 April 2015 (UTC)

Images

• The images all look appropriate and properly licenced.

Sources

• Ref#19: I wouldn't use the official website as a source, espcially when you're already using third-party sources.
• There don't appear to be any plagiarism or close paraphrasing issues in the sources.

Overall

• Aside from the minor comments I have above, my only concern is that the article may date quickly—it's only just been finished and the text itself still talks about things that will happen in the near future ("will include services such as"). Is there some reason the article should be nominated now, rather than after things have settled into business as usual? Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 22:32, 4 April 2015 (UTC)

Comment

The most recent edit to this page and substantive edit to the article were both on April 26, over five weeks ago. Is there any reason why this review can't be concluded now? Curly Turkey, what remains to be done by Chuq? BlueMoonset (talk) 15:54, 3 June 2015 (UTC)

• Well, I don't know what happened to User:Chuq—he ceased editing after 26 April, but then made two edits on 2 June. The one outstanding issue, I realized really wasn't an issue (just the way I read it), so I'm promoting this to GA. Curly Turkey ¡gobble! 05:59, 5 June 2015 (UTC)