Talk:Emirates Stadium/GA2
GA Review
[edit]| GA toolbox |
|---|
| Reviewing |
Article (edit | visual edit | history) · Article talk (edit | history) · Watch
Reviewer: Arsenikk (talk · contribs) 14:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
I will review the article. Arsenikk (talk) 14:19, 1 March 2012 (UTC)
- Comments
- "Arsenal as early as in 1997" should be more accurate and less fluffy, e.g. "Arsenal started in 1997..." The issue here is to remove "as early as" (fixed)
- In general, the prose uses too few commas, leaving the reader gasping for breath at the end of the sentence. (fixed)
- A similar issue is with the endashes; if a fragment is isolated with an endash, it needs one on each side. (fixed) (fixed)
- "...that 70% of poll of Islington residents..." sounds awkward. (fixed)
- There are quite a number of hyphens lacking when numbers are used as adjectives (e.g. "7.1-year bond"). Half the time this is done correctly, though. (fixed)
- Abbreviating to the "£260m" format is frowned upon in the MOS: just spell out a million. (fixed)
- Incorporate a link to naming rights somewhere appropriate in the naming paragraph. (fixed)
- "Construction consultants Arcadis and engineering firm Buro Happold were also involved in the process." is not referenced.
Done – Lemonade51 (talk) 16:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- Linking 'bridge' and 'railway' is a bit over the top when not directly relevant for the article. (fixed)
- Include a suitable link to club seating in the section about seating. (fixed, attached link to Club Level)
- There just isn't room for four images in the "Structure and facilities" section. Either remove or relocate one of them.
- Done – Lemonade51 (talk) 16:23, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- The Brazil matches need proper referencing, not just a link to a report.(fixed, not sure what was meant here but I've put BBC sources to show that they were held at the stadium.)
- "to date" is not an acceptable formulation, as it is impossible for the reader to know when "date" is. Remember, some Wikipedia articles are used outside our site or may be published in print form and thus not updated. Instead, write "as of 2012" or similar, or just leave the phrase out.(fixed)
- The driving advice is not referenced, similarly with part of the ticketing information. Also, it seems a bit odd that ticket sales information is included under transport. (fixed,
but reflinks required) - As there are ample images of the stadium both in the article and on Commons, providing an external link to Flickr unnecessary. (fixed)
- The Spurling ref lacks page numbers.
- Done – Lemonade51 (talk) 16:55, 4 March 2012 (UTC)
- There is lots of juicy information in the Design-Build external link which would be appropriate to include, particularly about the design and architecture.
Is it really nessecary to include this in order to make it a GA? Surely since most of the issues have been ironed out, then it should be promoted to GA. This can be added later but to me, doesn't seem integral to the page becoming a Good Article. The C of E. God Save The Queen! (talk) 11:53, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have no problem including bits from the website, it just means it can't be used as a 'external link' because the article has been referenced. – Lemonade51 (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
- The link contains much information which I expect in the article. If such information is available and not included, it violates 3a. Also, links such as this are much preferred as references rather than external links (generally speaking, it is a goal to minimize external links). Given the existence of such links, a much longer "Structure and facilities" section could be written. Arsenikk (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- Righto, have removed the external link, incorporated it as a reference and beefed up the structure section. Lemme know what you think. – Lemonade51 (talk) 20:59, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- The link contains much information which I expect in the article. If such information is available and not included, it violates 3a. Also, links such as this are much preferred as references rather than external links (generally speaking, it is a goal to minimize external links). Given the existence of such links, a much longer "Structure and facilities" section could be written. Arsenikk (talk) 19:55, 10 March 2012 (UTC)
- I have no problem including bits from the website, it just means it can't be used as a 'external link' because the article has been referenced. – Lemonade51 (talk) 12:59, 6 March 2012 (UTC)
Overall, well-written (save the underpunctuation) and most interesting, but there are a few comments which need to be seen to. Placing on hold. Arsenikk (talk) 06:19, 3 March 2012 (UTC)
- Congratulations with a good article (and my apologies for the late replies). Arsenikk (talk) 13:00, 12 March 2012 (UTC)