Jump to content

Talk:Pierson, Iowa/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

Reviewer: SounderBruce (talk · contribs) 19:35, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


Will review sometime this week. SounderBruce 19:35, 13 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Failed "good article" nomination[edit]

This article has failed its Good article nomination. This is how the article, as of September 24, 2021, compares against the six good article criteria:

1. Well written?: See below.
2. Verifiable?: See below.
3. Broad in coverage?: Quite a few missing sections: transportation or general infrastructure, local government, culture/events, notable people, healthcare. While some of these are covered, they need to be given separate sections or subsections.
A transportation section, a healthcare section, and a notable people section are not possible. An events section would be too short. The government section would be one sentence about having a city council. SL93 (talk) 23:00, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
4. Neutral point of view?: Some sections are a bit too promotional to be truly neutral.
I take offense to the insinuation that I would try to bring a promotional article to GA. SL93 (talk) 23:01, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
5. Stable?: Pass Pass
6. Images?: Images would be appreciated. Even an aerial view from a USGS service would suffice until someone can drive to the city.
Images are not required. SL93 (talk) 23:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]


When these issues are addressed, the article can be renominated. If you feel that this review is in error, feel free to have it reassessed. Thank you for your work so far.— SounderBruce 01:02, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]

General comments
  • Education and business should be separate sections
  • Some of the sentences are choppy and should be combined to finish thoughts instead of cutting them off midway
Lead
  • The state abbreviations are not necessary
  • The last sentence is a bit promotional
  • Summarizing the history here would be helpful
History
  • Any mention of indigenous peoples in the area?
  • Missing events from 1936 to 2000
  • Where was Pierson from? Also, mentioning the relation between the two Piersons would help.
  • "new streets", as in new roads laid down over greenfield sites or repaved streets?
  • "with churches having services, a live band playing, food being served, and children decorating the streets with chalk" could be made cut down to "with church services, live music, food, and sidewalk chalk for children"
  • The snowmobile accident and its memorial are not notable
  • Done. It was huge news for a town of very few people. Enough so that a memorial still stands. Again, not every topic within an article needs to be independently notable. SL93 (talk) 02:25, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
  • The World War I memorial probably does not need an entire paragraph's worth of coverage here.
Geography
  • This section needs serious development. The coordinates should be removed in favor of human-readable information on the general location of the city in relation to its state and county.
  • Local topography, geology, and climate should all be mentioned here.
  • The city's exact boundaries should be described as well.
Demographics
  • Table citation should use the existing ref format instead of being awkwardly placed in the table
  • A paragraph describing the demographic history of the city is needed.
  • Citations are needed for each paragraph, even if this a template.
  • Any notable groups to mention here?
Education and business
  • The post office and cemetery should not be mentioned here.
  • Elaborate a bit on the school district and its history
  • The library paragraph is a bit too large and could be cut down.
  • Churches do not fall into either education or business (one would hope)
  • Why is the restaurant worth noting in the article? The paragraph seems promotional in nature.
  • Organization listings should have descriptions and better sources
Recreation
  • "contains an area that has plants and flowers that are native to the area": how is this notable?
  • The "purpose" sentence should be removed
  • Combine the shelter and amenities sentences
  • Conversion needed for the yards
  • Combine the first two sentences of the second paragraph
  • Battern Memorial Park should be moved to the first paragraph, as it doesn't seem to belong with the memorials
  • "the arts" can go without "the"
  • "summer of 2017" should be replaced with the month per MOS:SEASON
  • Are there more details available about the festival? Number of acts and associated events should all be mentioned.
  • Combine the last two sentences of this paragraph
References
  • Date formats needs to be consistent
  • Census citations need to use consistent formatting
    • Ref 2 needs to capitalize "States"
    • Refs 2 and 13 should not use "Census.gov" as a publisher
    • Ref 12 seems to be redundant to Ref 11
    • Refs 14 and 15 need to have better titles, because they seem to be redundant
  • Ref 3 seems to be an advertisement and is missing the page number
    • Ref 17 also has the same problem
    • I am also concerned with the paraphrasing from this one source (which is also 17 years old). Try to change up the wording a bit more, especially when listing organizations and churches.
  • Ref 4 needs a publisher
  • Ref 8 needs a publisher
  • Ref 16 does not seem to be a reliable source
  • Ref 18 should not use all caps and should use {{cite map}}
  • Ref 20 needs a page number
  • Ref 21 (Mapquest) is not a reliable source
  • Refs 22 and 23 are not reliable sources
  • Done. I removed the golf course sentence and replaced the cemetery link with a 23 page book reference. I can't add any relevant information other than that the cemetery exists due to only having access to the first page. SL93 (talk) 22:36, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]
I can fix these issues. I don't understand the insta-fail also. What do you mean by healthcare? There are 337 people there as of the 2020 census so there are no hospitals or any such things. Transportation? There is no public transit, Lyft, Uber, train, or anything like that. SL93 (talk) 01:58, 24 September 2021 (UTC)[reply]