Wikipedia:Peer review/Bristol/archive2
(Redirected from Wikipedia:Peer review/Bristol)
This page had a peer review a year ago and has since been improved by members of WikiProject Bristol. We are hoping that it is ready for submission as a candidate for featured Article but would appreciate any comments about what is needed to get it ready for this stage.— Rod talk 16:05, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Some initial suggestions, let me know if any need clarifying:
Lead
Is the fact that the location is "between the cities of Bath, Gloucester and Newport" a significant enough item of info for the first sentence of the lead?In the lead, shouldn't the population figures be quoted as "approx", "at least" etc, rather than exact?Didn't the Industrial Revolution last a lot longer than just the 1780s?"unitary districts" should be wikilinkedthe coastline is on the Severn Estuary; the Bristol Channel starts at Weston-super-Mare (however it would be a shame to lose a mention of the Bristol Channel from the lead, so can we retain it in some other form)The Lead shouldn't really contain any referenced statements - instead it should contain summary info of referenced statements elsewhere
History
wikilink first occurrences of Norman, and any centurieswhere was the 1257 bridge and does it still exist?- can we give an idea of the extent of the city at each stage of its development e.g. when in the 14th Century it expanded to include some suburbs, which present-days areas are these?
- might this benefit from some subheadings?
shouldn't plague have an initial capital?what form of "suffering" did the Royalist occupation result in?- Can we source the comment that few slaves were brought to Britain, and how few?
scandal - POVWhat were the riots about?- penultimate paragraph - why "despite", and which museum?
General
- Removal of redlinks by stub creation would be desirable
- Can we reference any unreferenced stuff
- There are a few places where the canonical when-to-wikilink approach hasn't been adopted
More to follow later. SP-KP 17:47, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Economy
- "reliant on" a bad choice of words in that it requires a higher degree of evidence than simply saying that these areas are significant current contributors to the city's economy.
- what's the relevance of combined Bristol/B&NES/S Glos/N Som GDP figure?
- the city is "more affluent than" the UK as a whole ... I think we mean that the city's average inhabitant is more affluent than one chosen at random from the UK as a whole, don't we?
- how has unemployment rate changed over the years - is 2005 a representative point in time?
- what does "since the port was leased" mean?
- important - one of those "to be avoided at wikipedia" words
- Is HP in Bristol or S Glos? Not sure where the boundary is. Likewise BAE at Filton
- luxury - pov?
- "will include" - crystal ball - see WP:NOT
- Aerospace stuff could do with its own subsection
And more later. SP-KP 18:16, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Re: hiistory being subdivided: I personally don't think it should be: this is in summary style, so the subarticle is there for expansion. There are nine paragraphs in the history section, and since it's in summary style, I can't see it being expanded. I am not a fan of excessive subdivision, and don't think nine paragraphs is enough to need them. Other people might like them though?
- Re: HP and BAE: they're both in SG, but as is made clear in the article, we're talking about Bristol in all is definitions, not just the officially sanctioned boundaries. Since they're in the contiguous built up area, and employ many people from the city, they are relevant. Similarly, UWE's main campus is not in the administrative boundaries, but is clearly considered to be Bristolian.
- Re: aerospace section: as per the first point, I'm not sure a subsection is neccesary. Joe D (t) 18:33, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
- Response Thanks for the comments. I've had a go at fixing some of the identified problems in the lead and history sections, but don't have the expertise for the economy section.— Rod talk 19:39, 3 May 2007 (UTC)
Culture
Again, quite a long section - can we split up using subsections?Prestigous - POV"thriving" music scene - POV- can we wikilink the musical styles
- what is a "cultist" band?
- what does "This music is part of the wider Bristol urban culture scene ... and still thrives" mean?
"will become" - crystal ball- is @bristol worth a specific mention?
- "fame" - a non-to-ve-used-at-wikipedia word
Animal Magic - "cult"?what was the "18th century Gothic revival"?- what is "mature verse"?
- what was the "Romantic movement"?
what was Robert Southey noted for? Likewise Coleridge- what was significant about the marriage of Southey & Coleridge to "the Fricker sisters"
- Did Wordsworth spend more time in Bristol than anywhere else?
- all listed comedians are contemporary - is that due to the choice of examples or is this a recent phenomenon?
"world famous" - POVare inline external links OK per MoS? I thought we didn't do that in FAs, but I may be wrong- unusualness of Brizzle & whether visitors will hear it ... I don't know about this - if they arrive via the Bus station, they'd have to have earplugs in not to hear it!
Politics & government
- what does "elected in thirdws" mean?
rogue s on the end of Parliament
Demographics
No comments on this section
Physical geography
- "forms to" typo
- Does Exmoor really shelter Bristol?
Education
- "major" institutions - POV
- the mention of the Create centre - seems a bit incongruous, if not spammy
- what is a "city learning centre"?
- "important" again
- Festival of Nature - not really an organisation, more a recurring event
- Not quite clear about the Humphrey Davy thing - was the gas discovered in Hotwells? What was his work there and was it connected with the discovery?
Given that this section veers off into science rather than education is it titled correctly?
General
- The article is very light on ecological info given Bristol's ecological uniqueness. I'd suggest this topic has it's own major section. I should volunteer to write this, I suppose!
- Section ordering - maybe needs some more thought? Major basic topics like demographics & physical geography are late on in the article, while specialist topics like culture & economics are early.
One more push and I should complete the remaining sections SP-KP 11:36, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
- Education: could be either "Education and academia" or "Education, science and technology"? Regarding the Create Centre, the city council seem to consider it a big deal, but I don't know how notable or influential it really is. Comparative visitor numbers for these things would help establish their notability, I'll try and find some. Anyway, how's this for phrasing?
Culture: the section could be subsectioned (though, again, it falls within my personal limits of acceptable section length), but I'm not sure how to go about it without having an absurd number of them, with each paragraph getting its own header (which IMO would be far more harm than help). If it's subsectioned, I'd go for 4 headers along the lines of: "Arts", "Leisure"/"Sport & leisure"/"Sports & events", "Media" and "Dialect".- Ecology: is it worth turning the Physical geography section into a "Physical geography and ecology" section? The Phys Geo section is currently quite short, and by combining them one can relate some of the ecology to the geology and location.
- Joe D (t) 12:48, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Transport
"Recently" i.r.t. the airport should be a specific date rangeFirst were should be First was
and finally
- Can we work some of the "See also" links into the text? I'm thinking of Maltese Cross (under Culture?), Wills (under Economy?). A See also list should only really contain things we can't fit in elsewhere. SP-KP 17:47, 6 May 2007 (UTC)
Update I've been working my way through the problems identified (thanks for all of them) & sorting the referencing format & doing stubs for red links. In politics I'm not sure of a better way to word the bit about how the councilors are elected in rotation. I would agree with the suggestion that history should be sub divided - what headings would you suggest? It would be good to combine physical geog with ecology (Bristol's ecological uniqueness ? POV is it more unique than anywhere else?) and possibly rearrange sections - but not sure of the best way to do this. Any further suggestions/improvements welcome.— Rod talk 08:44, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- Just to respond on the ecological uniqueness point, what I'm talking about here is really uniqueness by association with the Avon Gorge. As a city (without the gorge) Bristol's not unique at all, but with the inclusion of the gorge, we have (in roughly descending order of importance) two or three tree species unknown elsewhere in the world, a dozen or more (?) nationally rare plant species, some of which are found nowhere else in Britain; and some (not sure how many) insect species which are recorded here and nowhere else or at few other sites in Britain. No other "normal-sized" British city comes close to this (London is a bit of a special case because it's so big). SP-KP 12:03, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I'm not convinced History should be subdivided, but if it must, how about something like "Pre-Norman", "Mediaeval"/"Pre-industrial revolution" and "Modern"? Unfortunately, the pre-Norman section would be disproportionately small unless expanded a little... Joe D (t) 12:52, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
OK so basically ecology needs to be summarised from Avon Gorge?. I will have another go at the history section & possibly sub section, but I have a few other questions:
History
- I'm having problems finding much evidence of a Roman settlement at what is now Inns Court (apartfrom a dig in 1997 which found "Wall foundations, timber slots, pits and postholes" - can I delete this & leave it covered by "There were also isolated Roman villas and small Roman settlements throughout the area" - further info as identified & added to History of Bristol.
Politics and government
- Can I delete the sentence saying who the leader, deputy & leaders of political parties are - ? notability, ? having to be updated each time there is an election etc
The bit on race relations (although referenced) contains a couple of red links ? can I remove Paul Stephenson ? notability
External links
- Do we need all those templates? particularly the A38 ones? also Bristol isn't actually on the Severn so I don't understand that one.
Could someone do a stub for Stokes Croft as it mentioned in other articles (eg Grade II* listed buildings in Bristol ) but still a red link.— Rod talk 13:19, 7 May 2007 (UTC)
- I've added a stub on Stokes Croft, but I don't think it's mentioned anywhere in the Bristol article now. Chris Jefferies 08:46, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
- Thanks - it was a redlink on the template "Settlements on the A38 road" which is now hidden - but useful for other articles anyway. — Rod talk 09:37, 10 May 2007 (UTC)
To help editors see which of the above suggestions are left outstanding, can I make one more suggestion - using this technique to strike through those which have been actioned?