Talk:Kingston upon Hull/GA2

Latest comment: 14 years ago by Pyrotec in topic GA Review

GA Review edit

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

Starting review.Pyrotec (talk) 20:00, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

Initial thoughts edit

The article looks reasonable except for that short subsection, Hull Tramways. Its only two sentences on tramways, so its far too short, not even a proper paragraph. It then mentions trolley bus 1936-45 (full stop); but there is nothing about trolley buses. Neither tramways nor trolley buses are mentioned in Transport and infrastructure - which appears to be entirely concerned with present day matters. Either the Hull Tramways sub section / two sentences should go; or do the job properly, discuss trolley buses and what came after. Pyrotec (talk) 21:34, 21 May 2009 (UTC)Reply

main review edit

GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria


A comprehensive, wide-ranging article

  1. Is it reasonably well written?
    A. Prose quality:  
    B. MoS compliance:  
  2. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?
    A. References to sources:  
    Well referenced.
    B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:  
    A fair number of the in-line citations, particularly Ref 5, do not provide book page numbers. This needs to be addressed.
    C. No original research:  
  3. Is it broad in its coverage?
    A. Major aspects:  
    B. Focused:  
  4. Is it neutral?
    Fair representation without bias:  
  5. Is it stable?
    No edit wars, etc:  
  6. Does it contain images to illustrate the topic?
    A. Images are copyright tagged, and non-free images have fair use rationales:  
    B. Images are provided where possible and appropriate, with suitable captions:  
  7. Overall:
    Pass or Fail:  

Congratulations on the quality of the article, I'm awarding GA-status.Pyrotec (talk) 10:01, 24 May 2009 (UTC)Reply