Stella Power Station edit
- A script has been used to generate a semi-automated review of the article for issues relating to grammar and house style; it can be found on the automated peer review page for November 2008.
This peer review discussion has been closed.
I've listed this article for peer review because it passed the GAR a couple of months ago and I've done more work on it since then. I'd just like to get another party's account on how it's doing and what needs improving. I'd also like to know what kind of improvements would be required to get the article up to featured standard.
Thanks, Fintan264 (talk) 23:19, 2 November 2008 (UTC)
Ruhrfisch comments: Interesting article, very briefly, here are some suggestions for improvement. These are made with an eye to getting ready for FAC.
- The caption on the lead image is not a full sentence, so it should not end with a full stop (period) per the MOS
- Avoid words like "now" and "currently", for example the first sentence of the lead could be something like Stella Power Station were a pair of coal-fired power stations, built from 1951 to 1954, decommissioned in 1991, and demolished from 1992 to 1997. Located in the North East of England, the station stood as a landmark in the Tyne valley for over 40 years. OR The two sites are currently undergoing redevelopment... could be something like As of 2008, the two sites are undergoing redevelopment...
- There is a fair amount of needless repetition in the article, for example just from the lead: Stella South Power Station, the larger of the two
stations, stood on the south side of the river, near Blaydon in Gateshead.[, while the smaller] Stella North Power Station, the smaller of the two stations,stood on the north sideof the river, near Lemington in Newcastle upon Tyne. - Convert the bullet point list in the History section to text please
- Article needs more references in some places, for example The stations were operated at first by the Central Electricity Authority, which became the Central Electricity Generating Board two years later in 1957.needs a ref. My rule of thumb is that every quote, every statistic, every extraordinary claim and every paragraph needs a ref.
- Refs need more complete information in spome places - newspaper refs need date of original publication and author, but current ref 50 (as one example) does not - just 500 new riverside homes on the site of old power station". The Journal. Retrieved on 2008-06-09. {{cite web}} may help. See WP:CITE and WP:V
- I know image galleries are now allowed in FAs, but it seems to me the article has too many images in places - the interested reader can look at the gallery / category on Commons.
Hope this helps. If my comments are useful, please consider peer reviewing an article, especially one at Wikipedia:Peer review/backlog (which is how I found this article). Yours, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:33, 15 November 2008 (UTC)
More thoughts, looks better, these popped out on a second look,
- I added fact tags where it seemed to me they were needed
- There are several short (one ortwo sentence) paragraphs that should be combined with others or expanded, if possible to improve the flow of the article
- The Central Electricity Authority justified the use of such a large lighting arrangement by claiming: "It is economical, safe and much more efficient than lighting the stations at street level."[19] does not follow WP:MOSQUOTE (do not use block quote if less than four lines of text, do not italicize quotes)
- Article still seems to me to need tightening on the prose - hardest FA requirement for most articles is 1A (professional English).
Hope this helps, Ruhrfisch ><>°° 05:33, 16 November 2008 (UTC)
I think the films could be referenced as themselves - see {{cite video}}. Would a map or atlas work as a ref for the visibility over a long stretch of the river statement? Ruhrfisch ><>°° 02:13, 17 November 2008 (UTC)