Talk:Notting Hill

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
          This article is of interest to the following WikiProjects:
WikiProject UK geography (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article falls within the scope of WikiProject UK geography, a user-group dedicated to building a comprehensive and quality guide to places in the United Kingdom on Wikipedia. If you wish to participate, share ideas or merely get tips you can join us at the project page where there are resources, to do lists and guidelines on how to write about settlements.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
 
WikiProject London / Districts  (Rated B-class, Mid-importance)
WikiProject icon This article is within the scope of WikiProject London, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of London 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.
B-Class article B  This article has been rated as B-Class on the project's quality scale.
 Mid  This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale.
Taskforce icon
This article is supported by London districts task force.
 

Collaboration on turning this into a Good article[edit]

I would be interested in working this article up to GA status. I place the criteria for GA here, and people can work towards each criteria and then tick them off. SilkTork *YES! 17:55, 7 June 2009 (UTC)

What is a good article?[edit]

A good article is—

  1. Well-written:
    (a) the prose is clear and concise, it respects copyright laws, and the 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:
    (a) it contains a list of all references (sources of information), presented in accordance with the layout style guideline;[2]
    (b) it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons—science-based articles should follow the scientific citation guidelines;[2] and
    (c) it contains no original research.
  3. Broad in its coverage:
    (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 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.[4]
  6. Illustrated, if possible, by images:[5]
    (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; and
    (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions.[6]

Notes[edit]

  1. ^ Compliance with other aspects of the Manual of Style is not required for good articles.
  2. ^ a b In-line citations, if provided, should follow either the Harvard references or the cite.php footnotes method, 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 by WP:FAC; it allows shorter articles, articles that do not necessarily outline every part of the topic, and broad 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 for Good articles. However, if images (including other media) with acceptable copyright status are appropriate and readily available, then some such images should be provided.

Comments[edit]

1. Well written: (a) the prose is clear and the spelling and grammar are correct; Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg and (b) it complies with the manual of style guidelines for lead sections, layout, jargon, words to avoid, fiction, and list incorporation.Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg

2. Factually accurate and verifiable: (a) it provides references to all sources of information, and at minimum contains a section dedicated to the attribution of those sources in accordance with the guide to layout;Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg (b) at minimum, it provides in-line citations from reliable sources for direct quotations, statistics, published opinion, counter-intuitive or controversial statements that are challenged or likely to be challenged, and contentious material relating to living persons; Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg and (c) it contains no original research. Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg

3. Broad in its coverage: (a) it addresses the main aspects of the topic; Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg and (b) it stays focused on the topic without going into unnecessary detail (see summary style). Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg

4. Neutral: it represents viewpoints fairly and without bias. Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg

5. Stable: it does not change significantly from day-to-day because of an ongoing edit war or content dispute. Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg

6. Illustrated, if possible, by images: (a) images are tagged with their copyright status, and valid fair use rationales are provided for non-free content; Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg and (b) images are relevant to the topic, and have suitable captions. Symbol confirmed.svg Symbol question.svg Symbol delete vote.svg

Notting Hill name[edit]

I once saw a very old ordinance survey map where Notting Hill was called "Noding Hill"

Pauline Jackson 30 July 2011 — Preceding unsigned comment added by 92.19.195.143 (talk) 10:28, 30 July 2011 (UTC)

"Caribbean immigrants were drawn to the area in the 1950s, partly because of the dubious practices followed by the landlord Peter Rachman,"[edit]

Clarification required on this sentence. What 'dubious practises' is the author referring to? What precisely was the connection between Rachman's activities and Carribean immigrants? 195.112.55.34 (talk) 12:09, 8 January 2012 (UTC)

'New Crossrail Station'[edit]

This section reads like campaigning material; I question whether it's really appropriate for the page. Ref WP:SOAP and WP:BALL ---- 86.1.64.115 (talk) 00:55, 29 September 2012 (UTC)