GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec ( talk) 08:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I've now done a fairly quick read of the article. It appears to be quite comprehensive and well referenced and well illustrated. In these respects it appears to be be a strong GA-candidate.
On the negative side: It suffers from WP:Overlinking, a comment made in the first review (../GA1), which is quite annoying to the reader and I've removed some of this Overlinking as I read through the article. Surprisingly, Ordnance Survey (as in "maps") is consistently wrongly spelt throughout the article as Ordinance Survey and in some case it is not specified/"made-clear" what the map scale is.
Whilst it is not a mandatory GA required as a UK geography type article, I would have expected this article to the WP UK Geography guide Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements - which is appears to do so. There is no mention of climate, being part of a larger conurbation of Newcastle/Tyne and Wear I might have expect a link or comment to the climate of the conurbation.
I'm, not going to go through the article in a bit more depth section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last, and just note any "problems" that need addressing before GA-status can be awarded. This may take a day or so. Pyrotec ( talk) 08:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
... stopping for now. Pyrotec ( talk) 08:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Whilst it is not a mandatory GA required as a UK geography type article, I would have expected this article to the WP UK Geography guide Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements - which is appears to do so. There is no mention of climate, being part of a larger conurbation of Newcastle/Tyne and Wear I might have expect a link or comment to the climate of the conurbation.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A comprehensive, well-reference, well-illustrated article.
I've assessed this article against the requirements of WP:WIAGA and, in the light of improvements carried out, I'm awarding GA-status.
I suspect that this article could in due course make WP:FAC, but I've not assessed it against the criteria of FAC (that is not the purpose of WP:GAN) and it suspect that the "ride might be rough", but it could make it on a first or second attempt (possibly the latter). I can see "faults" that are likely to surface during a FAC review and suggest that the next logical step is WP:PR. Having voiced these concerns as a possible FAC, I'd iterate that the article is a strong GA.
Congratulations on bringing the article up to this standard. Pyrotec ( talk) 12:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)
GA toolbox |
---|
Reviewing |
Article (
|
visual edit |
history) ·
Article talk (
|
history) ·
Watch
Reviewer: Pyrotec ( talk) 08:59, 4 May 2011 (UTC)
I've now done a fairly quick read of the article. It appears to be quite comprehensive and well referenced and well illustrated. In these respects it appears to be be a strong GA-candidate.
On the negative side: It suffers from WP:Overlinking, a comment made in the first review (../GA1), which is quite annoying to the reader and I've removed some of this Overlinking as I read through the article. Surprisingly, Ordnance Survey (as in "maps") is consistently wrongly spelt throughout the article as Ordinance Survey and in some case it is not specified/"made-clear" what the map scale is.
Whilst it is not a mandatory GA required as a UK geography type article, I would have expected this article to the WP UK Geography guide Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements - which is appears to do so. There is no mention of climate, being part of a larger conurbation of Newcastle/Tyne and Wear I might have expect a link or comment to the climate of the conurbation.
I'm, not going to go through the article in a bit more depth section by section, but leaving the WP:Lead until last, and just note any "problems" that need addressing before GA-status can be awarded. This may take a day or so. Pyrotec ( talk) 08:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
... stopping for now. Pyrotec ( talk) 08:12, 5 May 2011 (UTC)
Whilst it is not a mandatory GA required as a UK geography type article, I would have expected this article to the WP UK Geography guide Wikipedia:WikiProject UK geography/How to write about settlements - which is appears to do so. There is no mention of climate, being part of a larger conurbation of Newcastle/Tyne and Wear I might have expect a link or comment to the climate of the conurbation.
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria
A comprehensive, well-reference, well-illustrated article.
I've assessed this article against the requirements of WP:WIAGA and, in the light of improvements carried out, I'm awarding GA-status.
I suspect that this article could in due course make WP:FAC, but I've not assessed it against the criteria of FAC (that is not the purpose of WP:GAN) and it suspect that the "ride might be rough", but it could make it on a first or second attempt (possibly the latter). I can see "faults" that are likely to surface during a FAC review and suggest that the next logical step is WP:PR. Having voiced these concerns as a possible FAC, I'd iterate that the article is a strong GA.
Congratulations on bringing the article up to this standard. Pyrotec ( talk) 12:34, 10 May 2011 (UTC)