The article was once delisted, but I have not been able to find out why or when. The points raised when it was delisted need to be addressed before the article can be classed by me as a GA.
The article 'Maszt radiowy w Konstantynowie' in the Polish Wikipedia (
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maszt_radiowy_w_Konstantynowie) has information about the site since the collapse of the mast that would consider adding to the English article. There is also a link to an article about Polak which I would consider including in your article.
Wrong Polak, my mistake. AM
Links to remove (see
MOS:OL): Poland, United Arab Emirates.
The image in the infobox is of a rather poor quality (and is only 20kB).
Amend voltage potential to ‘voltage’ (which should be linked).
Copy editing issues - Warsaw Radio Mast or Warsaw radio mast?; (Polish: Maszt radiowy w Konstantynowie) but then (Centrum Radiowo-Telewizyjne). You need to be consistent.
N not yet sorted. AM
There are multiple instances of text in the lead section not being included in the main article (see
MOS:LEAD for guidance): It is the second tallest structure ever built; construction started in July 1970; completed on 18 May 1974; its transmitter entered regular service on 22 July. There may be other examples.
N not yet sorted. AM
Consider linking Centrum Radiowo-Telewizyjne (Komitet do spraw Radia i Telewizji „Polskie Radio i Telewizja” from the Polish Wikipedia).
N not yet sorted. AM
1 Construction
The first paragraph has three citations at the end, but there is no indication that the rest is referenced. You need to verify the text within the paragraph, not just at the end.
The second paragraph has no references.
Why is watts always written in full, but other units are not?
the vertices of the mast - amend to 'the structure of the mast'.
Most of this small section consists of unnecessary detail and can be deleted. I would retain The mast had a total of 30 engineers and technicians. It also had 15 administrative staff. and The facility also had a compliment of guards, putting it elsewhere in the article and then deleting this section.
4 Collapse
The image is not of high enough quality.
The second paragraph is uncited.
Convert 640 metres.
5 Replacement
of the radio mast at Konstantynów due to an incident with the guy wire replacement should be deleted (it has already been explained).
6 Current state (1991-present)
The gallery of images are imo unnecessary and can be deleted.
I would remove the link for Orange Polska (duplicated link).
What is a "quasi-tourist attraction"?
7 In Popular Culture
'Guinness', not Guiness
Title – 'popular', not Popular.
has been featured in multiple stamps – the prose needs to be improved here.
This section is not the right place for the first sentence.
8 See also
Some of the links are already included in the main text – they don’t belong in the ‘See also’ section’.
9 References
The formatting of this section needs attention, as the citations do not follow a consistent style (see
WP:CITESTYLE and
WP:CITEVAR). In particular:
all-numerical dates should be avoided;
there are dead links which need to be either repaired or replaced (Refs 10/20/36);
there are other links that lead to the wrong place (Refs 19/27(?)/29).
Most of the citations are from web pages, see
WP:CITEWEB for what information should if possible be included, and how to format the citations, as this has not yet been done.
10 External links
Check your external links (see
WP:EL for guidance), as some of them do not contain “information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail”.
On hold for a week
Hi BasedMises, there is a lot of work to be done before the article can be promoted. I'm putting it on hold for a week until 1 June, to allow time for the issues listed in this review to be addressed.
Amitchell125 (
talk)
16:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the suggestions! I would like to mention that the Warsaw Radio Mast has very few photos associated with it, and that it is likely impossible to get to a high standard for that. I will attempt to improve the article. Thank you for the suggestions!
BasedMisesMont Pelerin16:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Please ignore the comment I made about wanting to know why the article was delisted. AM
Hi, I looked online to try and find better images, and (your are right) there's little out there of any good. The current images will be fine, I'm sure (Wikipedia's advice is to prefer poor images to no images if nothing better can be found).
Amitchell125 (
talk)
14:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)reply
@Amitchell125 I have resolved the issues. I looked through every source to find a date, name of some sort, publishing company, as well as denoting whether or not said page is in Polish or not. I have fixed the issues described. I also revised the lead section a tiny bit.
BasedMisesMont Pelerin23:30, 30 May 2021 (UTC)reply
@
BasedMises: there are clearly still issues yet to be resolved, and I'm afraid the article will be failed within a day or two if they are not. I'll check through the article some more once you have contacted me to say it is ready for me to continue.
Amitchell125 (
talk)
16:25, 31 May 2021 (UTC)reply
The article was once delisted, but I have not been able to find out why or when. The points raised when it was delisted need to be addressed before the article can be classed by me as a GA.
The article 'Maszt radiowy w Konstantynowie' in the Polish Wikipedia (
https://pl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maszt_radiowy_w_Konstantynowie) has information about the site since the collapse of the mast that would consider adding to the English article. There is also a link to an article about Polak which I would consider including in your article.
Wrong Polak, my mistake. AM
Links to remove (see
MOS:OL): Poland, United Arab Emirates.
The image in the infobox is of a rather poor quality (and is only 20kB).
Amend voltage potential to ‘voltage’ (which should be linked).
Copy editing issues - Warsaw Radio Mast or Warsaw radio mast?; (Polish: Maszt radiowy w Konstantynowie) but then (Centrum Radiowo-Telewizyjne). You need to be consistent.
N not yet sorted. AM
There are multiple instances of text in the lead section not being included in the main article (see
MOS:LEAD for guidance): It is the second tallest structure ever built; construction started in July 1970; completed on 18 May 1974; its transmitter entered regular service on 22 July. There may be other examples.
N not yet sorted. AM
Consider linking Centrum Radiowo-Telewizyjne (Komitet do spraw Radia i Telewizji „Polskie Radio i Telewizja” from the Polish Wikipedia).
N not yet sorted. AM
1 Construction
The first paragraph has three citations at the end, but there is no indication that the rest is referenced. You need to verify the text within the paragraph, not just at the end.
The second paragraph has no references.
Why is watts always written in full, but other units are not?
the vertices of the mast - amend to 'the structure of the mast'.
Most of this small section consists of unnecessary detail and can be deleted. I would retain The mast had a total of 30 engineers and technicians. It also had 15 administrative staff. and The facility also had a compliment of guards, putting it elsewhere in the article and then deleting this section.
4 Collapse
The image is not of high enough quality.
The second paragraph is uncited.
Convert 640 metres.
5 Replacement
of the radio mast at Konstantynów due to an incident with the guy wire replacement should be deleted (it has already been explained).
6 Current state (1991-present)
The gallery of images are imo unnecessary and can be deleted.
I would remove the link for Orange Polska (duplicated link).
What is a "quasi-tourist attraction"?
7 In Popular Culture
'Guinness', not Guiness
Title – 'popular', not Popular.
has been featured in multiple stamps – the prose needs to be improved here.
This section is not the right place for the first sentence.
8 See also
Some of the links are already included in the main text – they don’t belong in the ‘See also’ section’.
9 References
The formatting of this section needs attention, as the citations do not follow a consistent style (see
WP:CITESTYLE and
WP:CITEVAR). In particular:
all-numerical dates should be avoided;
there are dead links which need to be either repaired or replaced (Refs 10/20/36);
there are other links that lead to the wrong place (Refs 19/27(?)/29).
Most of the citations are from web pages, see
WP:CITEWEB for what information should if possible be included, and how to format the citations, as this has not yet been done.
10 External links
Check your external links (see
WP:EL for guidance), as some of them do not contain “information that could not be added to the article for reasons such as copyright or amount of detail”.
On hold for a week
Hi BasedMises, there is a lot of work to be done before the article can be promoted. I'm putting it on hold for a week until 1 June, to allow time for the issues listed in this review to be addressed.
Amitchell125 (
talk)
16:17, 24 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Thanks for the suggestions! I would like to mention that the Warsaw Radio Mast has very few photos associated with it, and that it is likely impossible to get to a high standard for that. I will attempt to improve the article. Thank you for the suggestions!
BasedMisesMont Pelerin16:25, 24 May 2021 (UTC)reply
Please ignore the comment I made about wanting to know why the article was delisted. AM
Hi, I looked online to try and find better images, and (your are right) there's little out there of any good. The current images will be fine, I'm sure (Wikipedia's advice is to prefer poor images to no images if nothing better can be found).
Amitchell125 (
talk)
14:33, 26 May 2021 (UTC)reply
@Amitchell125 I have resolved the issues. I looked through every source to find a date, name of some sort, publishing company, as well as denoting whether or not said page is in Polish or not. I have fixed the issues described. I also revised the lead section a tiny bit.
BasedMisesMont Pelerin23:30, 30 May 2021 (UTC)reply
@
BasedMises: there are clearly still issues yet to be resolved, and I'm afraid the article will be failed within a day or two if they are not. I'll check through the article some more once you have contacted me to say it is ready for me to continue.
Amitchell125 (
talk)
16:25, 31 May 2021 (UTC)reply