Talk:Caroline Street (Key West)/GA1

GA Review

Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch

Reviewer: Ealdgyth (talk · contribs) 16:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

I'll be reviewing this article shortly. Ealdgyth - Talk 16:42, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

GA review (see here for what the criteria are, and here for what they are not)

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):

   Just a few spots of awkward prose

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

   a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

   A couple of spots where it needs a bit of NPOVing.

5. It is stable.

   No edit wars, etc.:

6. It is illustrated by images, where possible and appropriate.

   a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):

7. Overall:

   Pass/Fail:

• See alsos - do any of these really tell us much about the street? I suggest nuking them all or if they are really relevant, integrating them into the article.
• Lead: "Caroline Street was named for a sibling of Whitehead, whose brother, John, became interested in the island after a shipwreck left him stranded in 1819." convoluted - can we rephrase or break into two sentences for clarity?
• Route: "This point on Whitehead is two blocks away from the southern terminus of U.S. Route 1." suggest rewording to "Caroline Street's terminus at Whitehead is two blocks away from the southern terminus of U.S. Route 1."
• Route: "The road reaches its first major junction at Duval Street, yielding a largely commercialized zone..." something's missing here .. think you mean "The road reaches its first major junction at Duval Street, residential areas yielding to a largely commercialized zone..."

  I've always thought "yielding an x" is fairly standard wording, especially in discussions about scenery changes (where "yielding" means "to produce"). Juliancolton (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  I"ve never heard of it used that way, and I'm fairly widely read. Suggest rewording....Ealdgyth - Talk 01:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

  I hate to be "that person", but I really think it's acceptable wording. The phrase "yielding a largely" itself has over 300 hits on google. It's the same syntax as "The seeds yield a rich oil"... just replace seeds with residential area and rich oil with a commercial zone. Juliancolton (talk) 02:24, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

• Route: "that incorporates elements of several more prominent styles." what other styles?
• Route: "...leaving several favorably secluded." suggest cutting "favorably" here as it sounds POV.

  The allure of almost hidden homes is what the street is largely known for, and I think quite a few sources note or imply that. It is a more colorful word, but since it offers an image that couldn't be described in purely dry terms, I think it's acceptable. Willing to nuke it if you think it detracts from the article, though. Juliancolton (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  Let's go with something that brings out the famous bit then ... make it explicit instead of implied as it is currently. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

• Route: "...with little fanfare." Not NPOV - suggest cutting.

  In this case, I think "fanfare" is relatively neutral. I've always taken it to simply mean there's not much going on, which is true by anyone's standards. Juliancolton (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

• Route: "...to a much less iconic degree than Duval." Iconic? I think you mean "much less commerical" ... I'm struggling to understand how an intersection can be "less iconic"...
• Route: "..side of the island and the masts of several ships at port." What if there are only cruise ships in port? Suggest "...side of the island and the port."

  Viable option, but given the location, it's a pretty active marina all year round, and it's somewhat difficult to fit a cruise ship into a 30x15 slot. :) I have every reason to believe you can always see masts from the road, but I'm not attached to the wording if you still think it's worth tightening. Juliancolton (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  Take it out... it's starting to read like some travel writer's bad newspaper article with this phrase (grins). Ealdgyth - Talk 01:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

• Route: "Here, the road's "homely marine practicality" becomes evident." Who says this?

  I have the source immediately affixed to this statement, and since the author isn't anyone particularly notable, I didn't think it would make much sense to cite the individual in-text. Is it a requirement? Juliancolton (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

  NOt a requirement per se but very good practice. Even if it's just "a local historian" or "local travel writers" or something... it gives the reader a better idea of why you chose to include a quote. Ealdgyth - Talk 01:51, 14 May 2012 (UTC)

• History: Need a cite for "Eventually, the street was excluded from the lot of the Truman Annex, and disconnected from the water at its northeastern terminus by the construction of the former City Electric Power Plant on new land."

I've put the article on hold for seven days to allow folks to address the issues I've brought up. Feel free to contact me on my talk page, or here with any concerns, and let me know one of those places when the issues have been addressed. If I may suggest that you strike out, check mark, or otherwise mark the items I've detailed, that will make it possible for me to see what's been addressed, and you can keep track of what's been done and what still needs to be worked on.

Thanks very much for the review and suggestions. I've left some responses above to things I'm unsure about; everything else I believe I've changed. Juliancolton (talk) 22:46, 13 May 2012 (UTC)

Last changes look good ... passing now. Ealdgyth - Talk 12:04, 14 May 2012 (UTC)