Talk:Cranham/GA1
Appearance
GA Review
[edit]Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: WTF? (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
Here is how the article in its present state matches up to the six good article criteria.
- It is reasonably well written.
- a (prose):
b (MoS):
- The prose is very good and easy to read. The article is in compliance with Wikipedia]s manual of style as well as the guidelines for UK cities. I am a bit concerned about the placement of the table to the right of text in the demography section; users with small monitors might have some awkwardly placed text. It might be better to place this at the bottom of the section, after the text.
- a (prose):
- It is factually accurate and verifiable.
- a (references):
b (citations to reliable sources):
c (OR):
- The article is adequately cited, and all citations appear to be reliable.
- a (references):
- It is broad in its coverage.
- a (major aspects):
b (focused):
- The article is mostly complete and contains everything that I would expect an article about a small, suburban bedroom community to contain. The last three sections are very short, however. While I can't think of too much more to be written about transportation, the economy and culture sections are mostly just listing a couple of things in the community. Seems like this could be expanded. Can someone take a photo of some of the shops in the town? Are there any annual cultural events that take place?
- a (major aspects):
- It follows the neutral point of view policy.
- Fair representation without bias:
- The article adheres to Wikipedia's WP:NPOV guidelines.
- Fair representation without bias:
- It is stable.
- 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):
- All images that are currently used in the article are tagged with copyright tags and captioned appropriately. An image of the primary business district/shops could help the article a lot, though (see above).
- a (images are tagged and non-free images have fair use rationales):
- Overall:
- Pass/Fail:
- The article is very close to GA at the moment and can be promoted pending a few minor adjustments. I will leave this on hold at WP:GAN until 3/8/2010 so that these issues can be dealt with. Cheers! WTF? (talk) 17:11, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Pass/Fail:
- Thanks for taking the time to review. I will deal with these points now. MRSC (talk) 17:13, 22 February 2010 (UTC)
- Culture:
I've expanded this to detail the activities of the two community associations, one of which appears to be very active.
- Economy:
I've included hospitality. Very hard to expand as this is too small a neighbourhood to have data produced for it alone, most sources conflate it with neighbouring Upminster.
- Photo: I was hoping to get a suitably licensed image from geograph or flickr, but unfortunately it is all churches and Underground trains. I'm sure this is because the shop parades are late 50s/early 60s and not very photogenic. It might be some time until a suitably sunny day coincides with my ability to visit this part of the world. I've since added two photos of landmarks.
photo of shops now added. MRSC (talk) 09:17, 23 February 2010 (UTC)
- The reviewer appears to have disappeared. Since you've fixed everything and I don't see any other issues, I am passing this article as a GA. Wizardman Operation Big Bear 05:13, 15 March 2010 (UTC)