Talk:New York City ethnic enclaves/GA1

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

GA Review[edit]

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

Staring review. SilkTork *YES! 15:40, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    2. (a) the prose is clear, concise, and understandable to an appropriately broad audience; spelling and grammar are correct; and
    (b) it complies with the Manual of Style guidelines for lead sections, layout, words to watch, fiction, and list incorporation.[1]
  2. Verifiable with no original research:
    3. (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;
    (b) reliable sources are cited inline. All content that could reasonably be challenged, except for plot summaries and that which summarizes cited content elsewhere in the article, must be cited no later than the end of the paragraph (or line if the content is not in prose);[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    4. (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic;[3] and
    (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style).
  4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without editorial bias, giving due weight to each.
  5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day to day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute.
    6. [4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by media such as images, video, or audio:
    7. [5]
    (a) media are tagged with their copyright statuses, and valid non-free use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) media are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]
  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ Either parenthetical references or footnotes can be used for in-line citations, but not both in the same article. Science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines.
  3. ^ This requirement is significantly weaker than the "comprehensiveness" required of featured articles; it allows short articles, articles that do not cover every major fact or detail, and overviews of large topics.
  4. ^ Vandalism reversions, proposals to split or merge content, good faith improvements to the page (such as copy editing), and changes based on reviewers' suggestions do not apply. Nominations for articles that are unstable because of constructive editing should be placed on hold.
  5. ^ Other media, such as video and sound clips, are also covered by this criterion.
  6. ^ The presence of images is not, in itself, a requirement. However, if images (including other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Presentation - layout and image sizing - could be tidied up to give a more attractive appearance.

Lead could be longer for the size of the article.

Looks like an impressive set of cites (not yet checked)!

Lead sentence could be tighter - and the assertion that New York "has been a major destination for immigrants of many nationalities" is not supported by the end sentence cite.

A history section is needed to give an overall background to the individual enclaves.

Prose is choppy, and the reason for the choice of information is not always clear. The Jamaican section is an example. I'm not clear what this has to do with New York: "In 1655, Jamaica was captured by the British, who brought African slaves in large numbers to work on plantations.[30] In 1838, the slaves were emancipated and owners starting paying wages to workers.[30] Many Jamaicans immigrated in the years following 1944, when the United States economy was rebuilding from World War II, seeing opportunity.[30] After 1965, when immigration quotas were lifted, Jamaican immigration skyrocketed again.[31]"

The initial impression is not promising. I feel there may be a considerable amount of work needed to structure this article. I'll take a closer look later. SilkTork *YES! 19:19, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I wanted to give a history of each ethnic group, rather than just starting with each ethnic group's history in New York. I will improve the choppiness of the prose, and please give an example of a structuring mistake. Thanks, mynameinc 21:16, 15 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
The structure is the selection and ordering of sections. As this is about ethnic enclaves in New York City I'd like to see a general overview of the history of those enclaves within the history of New York City before detailing individual enclaves. Then there is the decision to look into how to organise the detailed sections - would this be by area/enclave, or by ethnicity? I feel there is some work to do on this article to get that basic structure right first before it can be examined to see if it fits the criteria for GA. I'll put this on hold for 14 days to allow work to be done on the structure. I will pay close attention to the article, and if needed I will help out. SilkTork *YES! 13:56, 16 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]
I will give this the full 14 days, however I feel there is currently too much work to be done for this to pass as a Good Article. It is quite a deep and complex topic with many aspects to it, and I'm not convinced that the current structure is the best way forward for presenting the information in a manner that would be most helpful to readers. Some topics are easier to bring to GA because they have clear boundaries, there are plenty of sources, there is an agreed and accepted structure, and there is a definite start and finish point. The articles on Formula One races are an example. Other topics are so huge it takes a long while to hammer them into shape.
In addition to problems with structure, there is scant information in some sections, and the prose inclines toward a mere list of available facts. Sometimes the use of language is inappropriate: "the Chinese American population skyrocketed", "cellars, attics, and alleys all became home for some Irish immigrants", "the Dominican flag flies proudly from windows".
I think this is an interesting and important topic, and the amount of research and work done so far has to be commended. I have talked about the possibility of this becoming a List - though I think there is also possibility for this to become a very useful article. It may be that both an article and a list are present in this, and that consideration could be given to splitting it into two: List of New York City ethnic enclaves - in which the areas and ethnic groups are listed. And something like Immigration to the United States which concentrates on New York: Immigration to New York. SilkTork *YES! 09:16, 22 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Failing[edit]

The article doesn't meet GA Criteria. It has multiple issues, and advise is that the article is split and rewritten from the ground up along the lines proposed above. SilkTork *YES! 09:04, 30 May 2009 (UTC) I would like to add that this article entirely omits the historical contributions of Africans who came to New York City as slaves circa early to mid 1600s. The Africans who came here as slaves contributed to every aspect of development of New York except the development of laws which they were victimized by. A good resource to use for inclusion of this information is Then I'll Be Free To Travel Home-the Legacy of the New York African Burial Ground by ERIC V. TAIT, JR. who is a respected documentarian. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.192.157.157 (talk) 17:58, 5 August 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Retrieved from "https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Talk:New_York_City_ethnic_enclaves/GA1&oldid=1091479862"