|This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Nittany Furnace article.
This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.
|Nittany Furnace has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society 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.|
|A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on December 27, 2007.|
|WikiProject Pennsylvania||(Rated GA-class, Low-importance)|
GA Review: On Hold
I have reviewed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria and have placed the article on hold until the following issues are addressed. As you address each issue, either strike through the statement/place a check mark next to the issue and state how you addressed it. If you disagree with a particular issue, state your rationale for doing so after the issue in question so a compromise can be reached.
- "The preliminaries to its construction..." Be specific and state "to the furnace's construction" when starting this section as it will flow better. Done (added "the furnace's") GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:15, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- "...also on Logan Branch, as well..." Inline citations should go directly after the punctuation. Fix inline citation #6 in the same paragraph also. Done (move citations) GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:17, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- All of the bold-font words in the article should have it removed except for the article's title and alternate name in the intro. Done (bolding removed) GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:18, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- "70 foot (21 m) stack and three hot-blast stoves, with a capacity of 30,000 tons (27,200 tonnes)" Since tonnes is spelled out, meters should also be written in the same way. Done (spelled out meters) GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- "In 1905, the furnace began to receive lime..." Add a wikilink for lime (make sure it goes to the correct article). Done (wikilink added) GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:13, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- "troubled 23 year history" Add a hyphen: "23-year history" Done (hyphen added) GaryColemanFan (talk) 06:14, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- If possible, see if you can add one or two more free images to include in the article.
- Are there any available related external links you can add to direct readers to more information about the topic?
Altogether, this brief article was informative on the topic and is well-written. I have left the article on hold for seven days for the issues to be addressed. These issues should be easy to fix and not take too long. If they are fixed in this time, I will pass the article. If not, the article may be failed and can be renominated at WP:GAN. If necessary to address the above issues, and progress is being made, an extension may be allowed. If you have any questions or when you are done, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 05:04, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
- First, my profound thanks to GaryColemanFan for fixing a number of style issues. With regards to images, the one presently included is the only published image of Nittany Furnace that I know of. It would be very difficult to find others. I will look for relevant external links. Choess (talk) 14:23, 12 January 2008 (UTC)
Good job with addressing the above issues and adding the new external links. Also, great job on adding the new image, I was just going to recommend adding a picture of steel or charcoal. Anyway, I have passed this article according to the requirements of the GA criteria. I made a few minor corrections concerning spacing/inline citations and noted them above. Continue to improve the article, making sure that all new information is properly sourced and neutral.
Also, to anyone that is reading this review, please consider reviewing an article or two at WP:GAN to help with the very large backlog. Instructions can be found here. Each new reviewer that helps to review articles will help to reduce the time that articles wait to be reviewed. If you are new to reviewing and want to familiar yourself with the process, study the GA criteria, look at other editors' reviews, and leave any questions you have at Wikipedia talk:Good article nominations if you need feedback while performing a review.
Keep up the good work, and I hope that you continue to bring articles up to Good Article status. If anyone disagrees with this review, an alternate opinion can be sought at Good article reassessment. If you have any further questions about this review, let me know on my talk page and I'll get back to you as soon as I can. I have updated the article history to reflect this review. Happy editing! --Nehrams2020 (talk) 23:56, 15 January 2008 (UTC)