Talk:Bayview Park ferry wharf

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 3 external links on Bayview Park ferry wharf. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.ipart.nsw.gov.au/files/Submission
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150418044619/http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hanstrans.nsf/V3ByKey/LA20061018/$File/532la022.pdf to http://www.parliament.nsw.gov.au/prod/parlment/hanstrans.nsf/V3ByKey/LA20061018/$File/532la022.pdf
• Corrected formatting/usage for http://www.131500.com.au/upload/docs/sydney-ferry/Network

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 05:30, 29 October 2016 (UTC)

Notes for GA reviewer

I'd like to state my preference for any potential GA reviewer for this article to use {{xt}}, {{!xt}}, or any colour or formatting templates extensively when jotting down their points in the review. This way, my replies to those points, and replies to my replies, can be clearly distinguished between the main point and other main points of the review. I would also like to request that each point be numbered from start to finish in order, with the numbering scheme continuing contiguously through all the sections of the review. This way, I can cite in my edit summaries, in the revision history of the article, which edits pertain to which points of the review. Thanks for your understanding! :)

GA Review

This review is transcluded from Talk:Bayview Park ferry wharf/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: The Rambling Man (talk · contribs) 08:54, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Comments in very good condition, so some minor quibbles:

• Image captions which are sentence fragments should not have a full stop.
• It seems unclear to me whether "Patriote" should be capitalised or not, our own article (to which you link) has it decapitalised in the title. And wouldn't it be "patriote exiles" in any case (singular patriote)?
• Any reason to not link places such as Darling Harbour?
• "Sydney Ferries would continue to service" why not just "Sydney Ferries serviced"
• I don't think we need to link a term as common as coffee.
• Plenty of overlinking in the Services section.
• Refs 22 and 23 could use an accessdate.
• And they're not archived, unlike the rest of the references, any reason?

That's it, this is a good article and once we've just swung by the above, it'll be a Good Article, so on hold for now. The Rambling Man (talk) 09:06, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: Thanks for the review! I've incorporated points 1, 2, 4, and 5 without a hitch. Regarding point 3, most of the phrases "Darling Harbour" appears in would be the name of Matilda Cruises routes that would otherwise be links to Matilda Cruises if they had to be wikilinked. Matilda Cruises has already been wikilinked, so it's unnecessary to link it again. As for "Darling Harbour Pier 26", I've made it a wikilink to the "Network" section of Captain Cook Cruises, Australia, since Captain Cook Cruises own and operate that wharf. I'm not sure which wikilinks in the "Services" section you'd want removed, and references 22 and 23 were added by another editor using {{Cite New South Wales transport timetables}}, a template which I personally don't like but has been endorsed by most Transport for New South Wales enthusiasts in the Wikipedia community. I've made some changes to the entire "Interchanges" section overall to address your concerns, which include the removal of this template. Hopefully it'll be a lot more satisfactory. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 10:27, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Regarding overlinking, things like "Matilda Cruises" are linked in both the lead and the preceding section, so it's not necessary to link it again. Similar applies to Cabarita, Parammatta River (which you also sometimes include "route" in the pipe, sometimes not). The Rambling Man (talk) 11:00, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: I think it'd be reasonable to have a link per section purely for convenience. It's annoying as a reader to find something and have to look into a preceding unrelated section to find the wikilink for it. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 11:39, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Okay, I had wondered, but MOS:REPEATLINK doesn't advocate that approach. It's not a huge issue but we should all be doing our best to adhere to MOS, even at GAN. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:28, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

@The Rambling Man: If it's gonna be that much of an issue, I'll go ahead and remove some wikilinks from the "Services" section, then. – PhilipTerryGraham (talk · articles · reviews) 19:29, 28 October 2018 (UTC)

Happy with this now, so passing to GA, good work. The Rambling Man (talk) 12:26, 29 October 2018 (UTC)