Talk:Barryville–Shohola Bridge/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
GA review – see WP:WIAGA for criteria

1. Is it reasonably well written?

   A. Prose quality:

• Introduction: "That year, they rebuilt the bridge, and it collapsed on New Year's Day of 1865." - Who is they?
• Early history: "The most original crossings of the Delaware River" - I think this would read better as "The earliest crossings" or something similar.
• Early history: "When the Delaware and Hudson Canal was constructed in 1827 along the Barryville bank of the Delaware, along with the construction of the Erie Railroad in 1849, there was a great increase in the area, which raised the need for a bridge in the area, and made it essential.[1]" - A great increase of what? This sentence is a little long and complicated, try breaking it up or using parentheses to make it easier to read.
• The first two spans: "After the need for a bridge from Shohola to Barryville was growing" - This doesn't sound right to me. Try something like "increased traffic in the area prompted the construction of a bridge" or something like that.
• The first two spans: "A respected historian, John Willard Johnston, who knew Chauncey Thomas personally, visited the bridge and told the owner at the time, Thomas, that he was very inexperienced in bridge construction, like Robeling was with the two-deck span in Niagara, which ended up only lasting forty years." - This sentence is way too complicated, needs to be broken up to improve readability. It is also unclear as to who was "very inexperienced in bridge contruction".
• The first two spans: "Thomas was able to complete the bridge, and ended up raising a $4,000 (1859 USD) total cost. The treasurer of the Shohola and Barryville Bridge Company had not paid this money off and ended up being unable to do such." - I'm confused, did Thomas raise $4,000 or did the bridge cost $4,000? What had the Bridge Company been "unable to do such"?

1. B. MoS compliance:

• The introduction could be expanded somewhat. Try adding some anecdotes about the previous incarnation's collapse and other problems.

1. Is it factually accurate and verifiable?

   A. References to sources:

• I am aware of a concern regarding the reliance upon one source for most of the article's info. However, considering the obscure subject of the article I think you were lucky to find what you did. I think sometimes reasonable concessions need to be made when the situation calls for it.

1. B. Citation of reliable sources where necessary:

   C. No original research:

2. Is it broad in its coverage?

   A. Major aspects:

   B. Focused:

3. Is it neutral?

   Fair representation without bias:

4. Is it stable?

   No edit wars, etc:

5. 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:

6. Overall:

   Pass or Fail:

All done, thanks for the review.Mitchazenia :  Chat  Trained for the pen

All concerns have been addressed, article passed. --ErgoSum88 (talk) 15:58, 19 April 2009 (UTC)