Talk:Southgate, West Sussex/GA1

GA Review

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

Reviewer: Jhbuk (talk) 11:55, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

GA review (see here for criteria)

---

Very good - I can't really find any significant problems, but I'm not entirely sure about its completeness:

1. It is reasonably well written.

   a (prose): b (MoS):

2. It is factually accurate and verifiable.

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

   Excellent referencing

3. It is broad in its coverage.

   a (major aspects): b (focused):

   While Southgate is only a fairly small area, I do think the article seems to gloss over some aspects: the local economy, for instance, is squashed into "History", and only describes buildings. What are the biggest employers, for example? I'd also like a short summary of the area's governance as part of Crawley. Maybe something about local sports as well?

4. It follows the neutral point of view policy.

   Fair representation without bias:

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):

   Do we really need a photo of a street sign?

7. Overall:

   Pass:

• One dead link: [1]

Reply: Many thanks for your review and comments. This diff summarises changes I have made in response. Governance details have been added. With regard to the local economy—unfortunately there isn't really much to say, as Southgate is principally a residential area. I have added some information about early farms, the two building firms and the hotel, which is about all there is. Similarly with sport: there are no sports clubs or similar institutions in the boundaries of the neighbourhood (other than the miniature golf course at Goffs Park, mentioned under History). The deadlink has been changed: the hotel seems to have reorganised its website recently. Finally, while the street sign photo is not very interesting, I feel it's important to convey the impression that Southgate is not just a suburb but one of several self-contained residential areas with its own (colour-based) identity. Thanks again, and please let me know if any other changes are needed. Hassocks5489 (tickets please!) 19:50, 2 April 2010 (UTC)

Good; I'm happy with the article. Jhbuk (talk) 20:35, 2 April 2010 (UTC)