Talk:Architecture of Fremantle Prison

Architecture of Fremantle Prison has been listed as one of the Art and architecture good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Review: February 9, 2016. (Reviewed version).

Text and/or other creative content from this version of Fremantle Prison was copied or moved into Architecture of Fremantle Prison with this edit on 25 November 2014. The former page's history now serves to provide attribution for that content in the latter page, and it must not be deleted as long as the latter page exists.

Australia: Western Australia / Perth / Crime Low‑importance

	Australia portal Architecture of Fremantle Prison is within the scope of WikiProject Australia, which aims to improve Wikipedia's coverage of Australia and Australia-related topics. If you would like to participate, visit the project page.AustraliaWikipedia:WikiProject AustraliaTemplate:WikiProject AustraliaAustralia articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject Western Australia (assessed as Mid-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Perth (assessed as Low-importance).
	This article is supported by WikiProject Australian crime (assessed as Low-importance).
	Need help improving this article? Ask a Librarian^{What's this?} at the National Library of Australia, or the State Library of Western Australia.
	The Wikimedia Australia chapter can be contacted via email to helpwikimedia.org.au for non-editorial assistance.

Architecture Mid‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Architecture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Architecture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ArchitectureWikipedia:WikiProject ArchitectureTemplate:WikiProject ArchitectureArchitecture articles
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.

Freopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiTown Freopedia.FreopediaWikipedia:FreopediaTemplate:FreopediaFreopedia articles

Historic sites Low‑importance

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Historic sites, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of historic sites on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Historic sitesWikipedia:WikiProject Historic sitesTemplate:WikiProject Historic sitesHistoric sites articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Correction and Detention Facilities (defunct)

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Correction and Detention Facilities, a project which is currently considered to be defunct.Correction and Detention FacilitiesWikipedia:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesTemplate:WikiProject Correction and Detention FacilitiesCorrection and Detention Facilities articles

This subarticle is kept separate from the main article, Fremantle Prison, due to size or style considerations.

Content of at least one revision of the associated article was derived in whole or part from non-free copyrighted material on the website Australian Heritage Database – Fremantle Prison (former), 1 The Terrace, Fremantle, WA, Australia. This material was (prior to placement or subsequently) freely licensed in a manner compatible for Wikipedia's use by the posting of one or more compatible copyright licenses on the external website. Though the release notice for the material, which is irrevocable, may have been later removed from view, or the URL may have changed or gone dead, an archive of that webpage, including the copyright release notice, is available at http://www.webcitation.org/6TWju00IC (the page's linked copyright statement is archived at http://www.webcitation.org/6TWkFgNQ4 ).

GA Review[edit]

This review is transcluded from Talk:Architecture of Fremantle Prison/GA1. The edit link for this section can be used to add comments to the review.

Reviewer: Waggers (talk · contribs) 12:15, 5 February 2016 (UTC)[reply]

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

This is a very interesting article on a fascinating subject. I can tell that contributors have researched it carefully. The writing is of a high standard and the prose flows well all the way through the article, which I find to be pleasantly and coherently structured. Very well done on the work done to date.

It is reasonably well written.
a (prose, spelling, and grammar): b (MoS for lead, layout, word choice, fiction, and lists):
Regarding word choice, there are a few adjectives sprinkled through the article that struck me as somewhat subjective, and possibly not in keeping with an encylopaedic tone. Examples include "imposing entrance" in the lead, "exceptional heritage significance" in the Description and Walls and gatehouse sections; the walls forming a "vital part of the precinct" and a "handsome lantern range" in the New Division section. (Although if "exceptional heritage significance" is an official/technical term please forgive its inclusion here - I'm not familiar with Australia's heritage classifications/designations).

There was one tiny glitch in the Tunnels section regarding the oil leak - I've taken the liberty of correcting that myself.

It is factually accurate and verifiable.
a (reference section): b (citations to reliable sources): c (OR): d (copyvio and plagiarism):
There are no inline citations in the lead, which I found a little off-putting when I first opened the article. That said, all the facts mentioned in the lead are repeated later in the article (complete with proper references) and since this is not a controversial subject, it does still fully comply with WP:LEADCITE so no action needs to be taken on that point.

Some of the words and phrases used in the article are of course direct copies from the Australian Heritage Database, as indicated in the Attribution section. I was worried for a moment when I noticed the similarity of turn of phrase, but again, there's actually no problem. I notice that some of the word choice issues I mention above actually stem from the AHD text.

It is broad in its coverage.
a (major aspects): b (focused):
The article is perfectly balanced, covering everything it should and staying focussed on the subject throughout.
It follows the neutral point of view policy.
Fair representation without bias:
It is stable.
No edit wars, etc.:
It is illustrated by images and other media, where possible and appropriate.
a (images are tagged and non-free content have fair use rationales): b (appropriate use with suitable captions):
Considering the wealth of images available I'm impressed at the restraint of editors here to pick sufficient a sufficient number to illustrate the article without overburdening it. I think I tend to be too liberal with adding images to articles, so well done!
Overall:
Pass/Fail:
I've only been able to find one minor fault, and even that is debatable (is anyone seriously going to suggest the entrance isn't imposing, the walls aren't a vital part, the lantern range isn't handsome or the heritage significance isn't exceptional?). While I'd like to see that addressed I don't think it's important enough to delay or decline the nomination process any further. This is a Good Article.

External links modified[edit]

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 16 external links on Architecture of Fremantle Prison. 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:

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

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: 18 January 2022).

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) 22:07, 30 September 2017 (UTC)[reply]

GA toolbox
Reviewing
Templates Criteria Instructions