Talk:South Forty-Foot Drain/GA1
Latest comment: 15 years ago by Arsenikk in topic GA Review
GA Review
editArticle (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS): 
- I cannot understand why the article is not full-capitalized (i.e. "South Forty-Foot Drain". The name of the drain is a proper noun, therefore it should be capitalized, per WP:CAPS. There is also inconsistent capitalization through the article. A note about the rounding in the infobox (since it is automatic, I won't question it as part of the GA review, but maybe someone could look into it: 1 ft should not be rounded off to 0.305 meters, but to 0.3 (keeping the number of significant figures to one). Perhaps some of the authors could look into the infobox and fix it up? Otherwise exitingly and very well written.
- The infobox is explicitly set to 3 significant digits for some reason. Keith D (talk) 12:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have changed the capitalization to South Forty-Foot Drain. Does the page also need to be renamed correspondingly? Bob1960evens (talk) 21:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- If there is consensus that "South Forty-Foot Drain" is the correct spelling, then the article should be moved. Arsenikk (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have moved the page, and fixed all the links, although The Haven and River Witham are still listed as being linked to the old page. I cannot find where, as I have changed all the links on those pages. Bob1960evens (talk) 22:58, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- If there is consensus that "South Forty-Foot Drain" is the correct spelling, then the article should be moved. Arsenikk (talk) 22:00, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have changed the capitalization to South Forty-Foot Drain. Does the page also need to be renamed correspondingly? Bob1960evens (talk) 21:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- The infobox is explicitly set to 3 significant digits for some reason. Keith D (talk) 12:57, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- I cannot understand why the article is not full-capitalized (i.e. "South Forty-Foot Drain". The name of the drain is a proper noun, therefore it should be capitalized, per WP:CAPS. There is also inconsistent capitalization through the article. A note about the rounding in the infobox (since it is automatic, I won't question it as part of the GA review, but maybe someone could look into it: 1 ft should not be rounded off to 0.305 meters, but to 0.3 (keeping the number of significant figures to one). Perhaps some of the authors could look into the infobox and fix it up? Otherwise exitingly and very well written.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR):
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects): b (focused):
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- No edit wars etc.:
- No edit wars etc.:
- 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):
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- I have put the article on hold. It is nearly there, just a few small issues and it will pass. If you have any questions or comments, do not hesitate to state them. Good work so far, Arsenikk (talk) 09:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- All has been seen to, so the article is passed. Congratulations! Arsenikk (talk) 08:22, 19 December 2008 (UTC)
- I have put the article on hold. It is nearly there, just a few small issues and it will pass. If you have any questions or comments, do not hesitate to state them. Good work so far, Arsenikk (talk) 09:03, 18 December 2008 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
