Talk:Clifton Suspension Bridge/GA1
Latest comment: 11 years ago by Bruce1ee in topic GA Review
GA Review edit
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Bruce1ee (talk · contribs) 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
I'll be reviewing this nomination – I'll follow up here with my findings over the next couple of days. —Bruce1eetalk 14:19, 7 March 2013 (UTC)
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
- Is it reasonably well written?
- Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- B. Citation to reliable sources where necessary:
- See comments below ...
- C. No original research:
- A. Has an appropriate reference section:
- Is it broad in its coverage?
- A. Major aspects:
- B. Focused:
- A. Major aspects:
- Is it neutral?
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- Is it stable?
- No edit wars, etc:
- No edit wars, etc:
- Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- B. Images are provided if possible and are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions:
- See comments below ...
- A. Images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content:
- Overall:
- Pass or Fail:
- Pass or Fail:
- Comments
- 1A.
- Lead section: I think the opening sentence should include the year the bridge was completed/opened (1864).
- "Plans" section: I think it needs to be said who Thomas Telford was, eg. "Scottish civil engineer Thomas Telford".
- "Operation" section, "although now thousands of electric light bulbs are attached to the bridge instead of flares": is "now" correct, it says later that LEDs were used?
- "Operation" section, "A toll of £0.50 is levied": when was this toll (of £0.50) first introduced?
- "Operation" section, "The tolls are used to pay for the upkeep of the bridge including the strengthening of the chain anchor points in 1925 and 1939": suggest changing to something like "The tolls are used to pay for the upkeep of the bridge, including the strengthening of the chain anchor points, which were done in 1925 and 1939".
- "Operations" section, "On 4 April 2009, the bridge was shut overnight due to a crack in one of the support hangers.": was the crack repaired?
- "Dimensions" section: "Traffic" is not a dimension – there is "Daily traffic" in the infobox, is "Traffic" in this section necessary?
- "Dimensions" section: either use "feet" or "ft", but not both.
- "Incidents" section, "In 1885, a 22-year-old woman named Sarah Ann Henley survived a fall from the bridge": the source says she "threw herself from the Bridge","fall" suggests an accident – thoughts?
- No Close paraphrasing/copyright violations found.
- "Plans" section: thanks for expanding this section, but I have a query about Telford: "Entries were received from 22 designers ... Telford submitted four entries ... They then called in Scottish civil engineer Thomas Telford to make a final selection ... Telford rejected all the remaining designs ... Telford was then asked to produce a design, which he did" – (1) Telford should be introduced at the first appearance of his name; (2) is there a sequencing problem here? If Telford had already submitted four entries, why was he asked to produce a design? —Bruce1eetalk 06:00, 11 March 2013 (UTC)
- 1B.
- Lead section: Is there a reason the grade I listing and the B3129 road facts are not mentioned in the body of the article? I know WP:LEAD allows for trivial facts not listed in the article, but are these trivial facts?
- Lead section: plans for a "cast iron structure" is not mentioned in the body of the article.
- Is this not covered in Engineering?— Rod talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see it in Engineering. Cast iron is not the same as wrought iron. As I understand it, plans for a cast iron structure were abandoned, or have I got it wrong? —Bruce1eetalk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- I've gone back to the books - but still having a problem explaining/sourcing this.— Rod talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- I've looked in Andrews, McIlwain & Vaughan. The only one that has anything relevant is Andrews p14 which says (discussing 1793) "Although Bristol had several iron works and trading links with Coalbrookdale, on the River Severn in Shropshire, the power house of the early Industrial Revolution, Bridges did not appear to consider using cast iron." I am not inclined to change this until I've asked on the talk page if anyone has other sources saying anything different, or done a more comprehensive web search - which I may not be able to do until tomorrow.— Rod talk 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- All the sources I can find say the change was from stone to wrought iron (without any serious consideration of cast iron), so I think the lead was wrong. I have changed this & hopefully now matches the rest of the article.— Rod talk 11:25, 10 March 2013 (UTC)
- I've looked in Andrews, McIlwain & Vaughan. The only one that has anything relevant is Andrews p14 which says (discussing 1793) "Although Bristol had several iron works and trading links with Coalbrookdale, on the River Severn in Shropshire, the power house of the early Industrial Revolution, Bridges did not appear to consider using cast iron." I am not inclined to change this until I've asked on the talk page if anyone has other sources saying anything different, or done a more comprehensive web search - which I may not be able to do until tomorrow.— Rod talk 18:08, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- I've gone back to the books - but still having a problem explaining/sourcing this.— Rod talk 12:53, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- I don't see it in Engineering. Cast iron is not the same as wrought iron. As I understand it, plans for a cast iron structure were abandoned, or have I got it wrong? —Bruce1eetalk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- Is this not covered in Engineering?— Rod talk 16:12, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- Lead section, "It now has plaques that advertise the telephone number of The Samaritans": see WP:DATED about the use of the word "now".
- "Operation" section, "The bridge is now managed by a charitable trust": see WP:DATED about the use of the word "now".
- The "Operation" section is not summarized in the lead.
- 2B.
- There are several offline sources used, for which I've assumed good faith.
- Infobox: "Total length" is not repeated in the body of the article and is not referenced here – perhaps it could be added to the "Dimensions" section and referenced there.
- Lead section: "forms part of the B3129 road" is not referenced (not included in the body of the article).
- "Construction" section: the first half of the last paragraph (starting with "Brunel died in 1859") is not referenced; do the references towards the end of the paragraph cover the first half (I can't check the offline sources)?
- "Operation" section, "It was a symbolic moment which commemorated Bristol's feats in engineering.": this statement is not sourced; was there a commemoration of the event?
- "Dimensions" section: not all the figures are referenced.
- "Popular culture" section: the BBC medical drama Casualty is referenced to a YouTube video – is there not a more reliable source to support this statement?
- "External links" section, Time-lapse video: YouTube videos are generally not accepted in the "External links" section, unless its inclusion can be justified (see WP:YOUTUBE).
- Removed— Rod talk 17:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- My removal of this has been reverted by another editor as a "good link" - what do you think?— Rod talk 18:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- I removed it, citing WP:YOUTUBE, but I see it's been added again with a comment "not a commercial video, no copyright soundtrack, shows the bridge and the river in an interesting context. very relevant to the article". So I guess it's ok then. —Bruce1eetalk 10:19, 9 March 2013 (UTC)
- My removal of this has been reverted by another editor as a "good link" - what do you think?— Rod talk 18:58, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- Removed— Rod talk 17:36, 8 March 2013 (UTC)
- The West Country Tonight Backdrop (currently ref.55) is a dead link (and a blog).
- 6B.
- The two images in the "Dimensions" and "Incidents" sections are bunched up; I'd suggest moving the second image (File:Avon gorge and cave arp.jpg) down to the "Popular culture" section.
Overall it's a nicely written article with a good coverage of the subject, but please have a look at the above issues I've raised. —Bruce1eetalk 12:04, 8 March 2013 (UTC)